From a rhetorical point of view, yeah it may have a better chance to change their mind. Start out the idiot, assume they're right, but then ask sincerely why. After they've explained why then go back to trying to understand how their solution does that.

Many people have been conditioned to gain energy and meaning from confrontation. But when you let them explain their views they suddenly become a lot more open to being wrong about some but not all of the details.

Slowly slowly this leads to minds being changed.

I think a lot of technical debates can also be solved this way. Ask people to help you understand what they’re saying, repeat back what they said so they know you got it, and then ask about how it world work in x, y, z scenarios. Talking like this has the best chance of success.