That's a "yes." Okay, let's go through this step-by-step. The first post about Republican voters is from Omegon, but it's a response to this one from Berkserker:
You do realize that attitude is pretty self-defeating, right? It's like racism and sexism charges. Opposing Obama was racist no matter why you opposed him, opposing Hillary was sexist no matter why you opposed her. There's a lot of people who just don't care anymore.
Berkserker is nominally responding to some other stuff here, but his post is a total non-sequitir so I won't bother quoting any of it. So far as I can tell, Berkserker has confused a conversation about Republican
policymakers to be about Republican
voters, which is probably why Omegon then begins talking about Republican voters:
Supporting Trump is racist sexist, homophobic, transphobic, and anti-everyone-not-the-1% no matter why you supported him. His entire platform was nothing but bigotry and robbing the poor to give to the rich.
Every person who voted Trump said in so doing that they would rather their leader be a serial rapist who actively despises every woman and every foreigner and will gleefully see every homosexual and every not-cisgender person tortured to death for his own benefit than the most qualified candidate in history standing on a platform of making America a truly better place. They might not have admitted to doing so but it is what their actions caused. When someone tells you they will cut off their own nose to spite you, generally you believe them.
So, Berkserker opens with "saying there's no moderate Republican voters is just as failed a platform as saying all Republican voters are racist, sexist, etc. etc." Omegon responds that everyone who voted for Trump actually
is racist, sexist, etc. etc. Note that Berkserker's exact words here are that the attitude is "self-defeating" so we are definitely talking about pragmatics. Which is why I respond with this conditional statement:
If your plan is to actually persuade people to vote for your candidate next time, "you and everyone like you will never, ever be welcome in the society we hope to build" is a pretty shitty opening gambit.
If there was any doubt that the conversation is about winning elections and not just ambiguous moral judgements, now would've been the time for someone to say so, since that would've made my statement irrelevant. That is not what Omegon does. Instead Omegon posts this:
It is literally the strategy that Trump used.
There are already way more than enough people that a sufficiently exciting candidate would've caused a Dem landslide. We need to reach more of them. We don't need to reach for votes from any demographic defined by their hatred of other identities.
Now with the magic of something called "context" we can see here that Omegon is suggesting that everyone who voted Trump did so primarily out of prejudice and are a lost cause to the Democratic Party. It's technically true that if you wanted to be a reductionist asshole you could say that technically no specific sentence explicitly states that, and it is also true that you, specifically, totally do want to be a reductionist asshole, but the actual reality is that in the context of a discussion about how to go about getting people to vote for Democratic candidates, Omegon used "every Trump voter is racist" as part of a platform whose ultimate conclusion was "the Democratic Party shouldn't even bother trying to convert anyone who voted for Trump."
My original response to Omegon (and angelfromanotherpin) claiming that the Republicans had won with this strategy was to point out that no, actually, they won with other stuff and in spite of rhetoric that is actively hostile to growing their base. Berkserker then says this:
QFT. You're not going to get anywhere calling the undereducated whites racist, sexist hicks who should kneel for their betters. You'll get somewhere with them by promising to look out for their interests. Guess who spoke to them when nobody else would. As opposed to, y'know, casually joking about shutting down the industries they work in through regulation.
If we're going to talk historical trends, the Democrats used to be the party of the blue-collar worker.
This led to a conversation between you and Berkserker in which you point out that this is completely dumb, and wrong, and stupid, and you were right about that, and since Berkserker was nominally agreeing with me when he said that, I then made a post that begins with this:
People who voted for Donald Trump because they read and understood his platform are a lost cause.
That post was pretty long and this one is too, so I'm not going to quote the whole thing, but its point is that the people who Berkserker claim can be converted to voting for Democrats probably can't, however there are
other people who voted for Trump who probably
can be persuaded to defect or return to the Democratic banner. Because Omegon
absolutely did say that the Democratic Party doesn't need them in the same breath as he said that he thinks all of them are sexist and racist (they're not, by the way, being complicit in the election of a sexist, racist president is wrong, but not the same thing as personally believing in the inferiority of certain races or sexes) and it is not hard for anyone who's been paying attention to put those two together and figure out that Omegon thinks we totally should yell at Trump voters because they're not a vital part of a winning coalition going forward.