I think I'd like to move to ban the cliche "strawman argument" from discussion. It's being completely overused and it's starting to chaffe me whenever I see it just like "you hit the nail on the head."
I agree with you that the term is becoming a cliche, but not faster than the use of Straw Man techiques in the rhetoric of the far right. The Right seems to have only a handful of argument techniques (most of them dishonest) of which Straw Man is the one used most often.
Perhaps the term is misused by critics who don't understand its meaning. But it sure is necessary when debating someone like a science denier. In fact, the most famous Straw Man argument is the one where Creationists complain that the diversity of life on the planet "could not have evolved by chance." This Straw Man is essential to the definition of the Theory of Intelligent Design.
You can see how ingenious the technique is because everyone instinctively feels that it must be true. A good Straw Man argument is one that contains an element of truth, however, it leaves out one or more essential elements so as to be diversionary.