Deliberate use of fallacy

[Mudhammam]

Is it right to deliberately use fallacy in rhetoric if one thinks it will get a point accepted?

For example, if I know Republicans won't "get" logical arguments-- statistics on gun deaths, for example-- is it right to use appeals to emotion, appeals to authority, and argumentum ad populum? Or does this introduce a kind of Achilles heel-- you'll plow through the masses, and then end up getting embarrassed when you eventually come across a decent debater? Or, on the other hand, will you end up so wrapped up in the web of bullshit that you are spinning, that you will ending degrading your own intellect?

It occurs to me that the Fox News people, for example, may actually be highly intelligent. They may know their crowd, and may be manipulating that crowd in a measured and deliberate way.

First, I don't think the success that Fox News has in manipulating the conversation should inspire much enthusiasm for any debating tactic, since their approach to what can only be called overt propaganda is to minimize legitimate debate. Second, I don't really think, as a rule of thumb, the goal of any debate should simply be to win an argument, or even to persuade the opponent. In my view, of equal importance, is not only the triumph of truth but the actual process of how one arrived there. I don't want people to agree with me just for the sake of agreement or common cause, I want people to understand how to assess their own positions in the context of logic and evidence.