I have just discovered that there is a word for the characteristic rhetorical move of our time, that is, assuming that your opponent is wrong and proceeding to ask why he advocates such an obviously wrong opinion. E.g., Donald Trump is obviously a clown, so anyone who supports him must be a racist fool. Gay marriage is obviously a great idea, so anyone who opposes it is a homophobe. Regulating Wall Street is obviously necessary, so politicians who disagree must be on the take. Or, perhaps, the deal with Iran is so obviously a good thing that people who oppose it must be belligerent idiots.
C.S. Lewis called this Bulverism.