Mr. Liddick seems able to ignore any and all inconvienent facts that don't agree with his political viewpoint.
For instance, he starts off by describing the Democrats as the "radical left" when they are not proposing "radical" solutions at all. Universal health care is the norm in the industrial world and includes every industrial country in the world but the US.
Under any definition of "radical" that most people would propose, the radical position would be to deny universal coverage. Further, our current system is clearly going to bankrupt the country if we don't change it. Doing nothing except cancelling coverage for millions of Americans (as proposed by President Donald Trump) seems like a "radical" approach if you ask me.
I don't think any of the Democrats running for president are in any way trying to appeal to the "white supremacy" voters, they are happy to leave them to the racist currently occupying the White House. Trump seems to have solidified his base of misogynistic and xenophobic voters, plus the top 1% of the wealthy he serves so well.
On the other hand, he is bankrupting (in record numbers) the farmers who supported him last time, running the truckers who supported him into the ground with his tariffs (with no discernible benefit to date), choosing to walk away from the US leadership position on many fronts (EPA, influence in the Pacific, climate change, etc.), ruining our relationships with our allies on a variety of fronts (causing a dispute with Denmark over buying Greenland?, please).
Trump's entire "strategy" to "make America great" is to exploit the every avenue to improve today at the expense of tomorrow. Cut taxes when the economy is already well into recovery (especially for the top 1% and the corporations) — don't worry about the debt we leave out kids. Pump the oil as fast as possible — forget the environment we leave our offspring. Get rid of the environmental regulations — I won't be alive to suffer the consequences. Let's not worry about killing the kids we put in cages because we can't afford flu shots — they are not real people anyway; and by the way lets get rid of old inconvenient settled law that restrict how long we can keep the kids in cages. It is bad enough that we are being forced to let them have a toothbrush and a bed...
Further arguing that any reasonable change to the gun laws would be would be unthinkable, and assuming only the most unreasonable proposals are likely to pass, is to suggest you are comfortable with the current state of affairs where we suffer more than one mass shooting per day in this country. If you believe not changing anything is the right solution, you have an entirely different set of values than I do. Further, arguing that red flag laws would target climate change deniers is disingenuous at best, besides which there can't be many deniers left after all the current evidence (despite the "leadership" of the white house).
Finally, I would suggest that your comments on the democratic contenders are inspired by your leader — let's not let the facts interfere with our critique of their positions. If Trump can tell over 12,000 lies in less than 1,000 days, anyone should be able to say anything if it's in your interest to spread lies (nobody is suggesting taking 70% of anyone's money, as I am sure he knows).
If you can hold your nose, ignore the lies, racism, xenophobia, mistreatment of kids at the border, the obstruction of justice, truckling to the NRA and the white supremacists, and ruining of the environment because you think your short term interests are served by a tax cut that disappears for all but the top 1% and corporations, please feel free to vote for the thin-skinned bully currently occupying 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
The way I read the polls suggest that 35-38% of the voters are with you, and 54% of the voters would vote for any democratic candidate rather than the current occupant. Maybe you can play the electorial college to win another minority vote to a second term, but I doubt it.