You're just listing (D) talking points about (R) positions without taking a critical eye. In the spirit of HN, how about a steelmanning exercise?
> They seem to deny that a government can do anything
Counterpoint: government share of the economy should be as small as practicable, and decisions should be left to as low a level of government as practicable. Much fewer things should be decided at the federal level and it's better to let the private sector handle things.
> deny that racism is still a problem affecting millions of americans every day
Counterpoint: one can acknowledge the racist history of the country while rejecting the race essentialism that modern-day liberals see as the right way forward.
> deny that healthcare should be a basic human right
Counterpoint: basic human rights should be negative rights only (the right to prevent the government from doing something to you) and not positive rights (the right to have the government do something for you). The latter always infringes upon the former, but the reverse is not true. There's no way around the fact that healthcare is a resource that requires people to work to produce; you can't just legislate "more healthcare" without having people perform that work one way or another.
> deny that free markets inevitably centralize power structures and create monopolies
Counterpoint: most every monopoly you find will have the power of the state behind it. There's no evidence to suggest that a monopoly in any industry would remain so indefinitely, even if government did not break it up.
> deny that average americans are broadly underpaid
Counterpoint: in order to claim that someone is underpaid you must equally claim to know what the real value of that person's labor is. How do you know that someone is underpaid?
> deny that authority figures they like should face justice
Counterpoint: historical evidence makes it clear that politicizing justice is detrimental to the smooth transition of power, because each successive party in power, wary of recriminations from the other side, will be progressively more incentivized to hold on to it. This is why Ford pardoned Nixon. And since I'm sure you're referring to Donald Trump: he has had more legal scrutiny than any other individual on the planet in the past few years, and I'm sure many (R) voters would come around to seeing him face justice if anything substantial backed by evidence comes up, which hasn't happened yet.
> They seem to deny that a government can do anything
Counterpoint: government share of the economy should be as small as practicable, and decisions should be left to as low a level of government as practicable. Much fewer things should be decided at the federal level and it's better to let the private sector handle things.
> deny that racism is still a problem affecting millions of americans every day
Counterpoint: one can acknowledge the racist history of the country while rejecting the race essentialism that modern-day liberals see as the right way forward.
> deny that healthcare should be a basic human right
Counterpoint: basic human rights should be negative rights only (the right to prevent the government from doing something to you) and not positive rights (the right to have the government do something for you). The latter always infringes upon the former, but the reverse is not true. There's no way around the fact that healthcare is a resource that requires people to work to produce; you can't just legislate "more healthcare" without having people perform that work one way or another.
> deny that free markets inevitably centralize power structures and create monopolies
Counterpoint: most every monopoly you find will have the power of the state behind it. There's no evidence to suggest that a monopoly in any industry would remain so indefinitely, even if government did not break it up.
> deny that average americans are broadly underpaid
Counterpoint: in order to claim that someone is underpaid you must equally claim to know what the real value of that person's labor is. How do you know that someone is underpaid?
> deny that authority figures they like should face justice
Counterpoint: historical evidence makes it clear that politicizing justice is detrimental to the smooth transition of power, because each successive party in power, wary of recriminations from the other side, will be progressively more incentivized to hold on to it. This is why Ford pardoned Nixon. And since I'm sure you're referring to Donald Trump: he has had more legal scrutiny than any other individual on the planet in the past few years, and I'm sure many (R) voters would come around to seeing him face justice if anything substantial backed by evidence comes up, which hasn't happened yet.