That speech was "and then everyone clapped" but for real; today, if you present a solid argument against someone like Ben Shaprio, he'll just worm out some ridiculous argument just to avoid the point. At the very least here, at the very absolute least here, this lib shut his mouth and left. You tell that to people today and they'll just try and argue with you no matter what, and sadly I've seen enough of it to imagine exactly what they'd say:

"Doesn't matter, slavery's illegal now"

"No, I'd try and flee because murder is against the law; slavery wasn't"

"So let's say, hypothetically speaking, let's say that you've treated me well, and I have a roof over my head, food to eat; you don't think life could be worse out there? You don't think maybe actually it's not the worst thing in the world?"

"There are place today where slavery does exist, you're not a slave!"

Unfortunately I can't tell when I hear these people whether I'm hearing libs or people who have no idea they're just reactionaries. There was a guy having a debate with Hasan, who when Hasan pointed out that there was a Republican candidate for congress who was a member of America's Nazi party (maybe even the head of that party) asked "but did he say he was a Nazi?", and he insisted on that point, until several minutes later when he had to admit that okay he can't hold to that point. These people aren't looking for an honest discussion or debate, they're looking to argue. It doesn't matter what rhetoricians you can find, the strategy today from libs and reactionaries is just argue, argue, argue. It's like that metaphor about playing chess with a pigeon: it'll just crap on the board and then strut around as though it had won.