Is the Democratic Party an anti-white hate group?

[RINO Tom]

The Democratic Party is a hate group of whomever is voting solidly GOP, especially voters they think *should* vote for them.  Blacks in the 1800s, rich suburban families in the '50s, poor White Southerners today ... all were at one point in time considered the scum of the Earth to the DNC, all likely will be again at some point.

[RINO Tom]

No, ridiculous claim. The Democratic Party is the party of the common man and stands of equal opportunity for all and not special interests.

..........

[RINO Tom]

>sigh<

The Democratic Party is a hate group of whomever is voting solidly GOP, especially voters they think *should* vote for them.  Blacks in the 1800s, rich suburban families in the '50s, poor White Southerners today ... all were at one point in time considered the scum of the Earth to the DNC, all likely will be again at some point.

Come now, Tom, you're usually more reasonable than this. Being condescending towards white working class voters is not the same as being a hate group. Otherwise, the same stigma would fall upon the Republican Party - have we already forgotten Mitt Romney?

I'm just making the point that parties tend to demonize those who vote solidly against them, especially when those voters are disliked/looked down upon by the party's most loyal groups.  These groups change, and so do to whom the parties belittle and mock.

The difference is, I think, that Republicans have usually historically chastised Democrats as being morally compromised or lazy and looking for a handout.  That's not admirable, but I honestly believe it comes across as less nasty as what Democrats have historically done, and that's chastise Republicans as not *getting it* ("it" being the liberal point of view of the time), aka being fundamentally dumber than Democrats.  Go back and watch campaign videos of FDR or even campaign leaflets from the 1800s (I had the great pleasure of viewing many in a Civil War/Reconstruction class I took in college).  Democrats have quite literally always portrayed the GOP as rich businessmen tricking a bunch of useful idiots into voting against their interests, be those idiots zealoty Northern Protestant puritans in the 1800s, farmers in the 1950s or poor White Southerners today.  After a while, in a liberal's mind (no offense, just contrasting how I believe liberals and conservatives view the world), the only logical explanation for why people would vote for this party you view as stupid, racist or greedy is that those voters are stupid, racist or greedy themselves.  Once it's been concluded a group is any of those things, what is the incentive to not let 'em have it??

[RINO Tom]

Why do think my wife made me register as a Democrat?

'Cause 🎵(great grand)daddy was a veteran, a Southern Democrat, and they oughtta get a rich man to vote like that 🎵??

[RINO Tom]

Wow, I had no idea the Atlas Forum was so aligned with West Virginia on this subject. No wonder why you guys hate when I bash it (though, oddly enough, many of the people who get most angry at me probably voted "no.")

I voted yes, while obviously believing no, because this was a stupid topic deserving of a nice troll.

[RINO Tom]

Of course not. They just do a better job of reaching out to groups who are outside the "mainstream" of America (minorities, non-Christians, LGBT, immigrants, etc.)

Keep in mind all of the above groups will essentially be the "mainstream" in 15-20 years.

Minorities are the only above group that have any hope of being "the mainstream" in 20 years, dude.

[RINO Tom]

Of course not. They just do a better job of reaching out to groups who are outside the "mainstream" of America (minorities, non-Christians, LGBT, immigrants, etc.)

Keep in mind all of the above groups will essentially be the "mainstream" in 15-20 years.

Minorities are the only above group that have any hope of being "the mainstream" in 20 years, dude.

Depends on what you mean by "mainstream".  For example, LGBT acceptance is increasing rapidly, and I doubt in 20 years that being gay or bisexual will be very controversial at all.

Acceptance, sure; I thought he was speaking regarding statistical share of the population.