Since we can't ask the guy, I believe he's using anecdotal evidence; an "if I had to guess ..." type of thing. You're free to guess he's a democrat, of course. Maybe we'll know for certain, on day.
I have no clue whether this guy is a Democrat or a Republican. More likely he his neither. Meth heads who sell children for their drug habits are rarely interested in politics. It is disturbing that posters regularly label crimes as "xyzTard" in this forum while having no evidence of political involvement in the committed crimes. We should separate individual crimes (that don't involve politics) away from political discussion -- otherwise we will simply have people pushing 1000 non-political crimes each day as being political in nature with no evidence whatsover of the political leanings of the criminal -- but simply making assumptions due to skin color, location, etc. If a crime is related to actions at a Trump rally, BLM march, ANTIFA riot, alt-right gathering, etc. then it would be fair to discuss the crime in a political context --- but trying to claim that child trafficking for drug money is political is absurd.
In my mind, the OP wasn't suggesting that MAGAtards are interested in politics; I understand that anyone that is pro Trump, is a MAGAtard, whether or not they've ever voted. You raise a fair point, but in fairness to the OP, I don't think he claims that the crime is political; rather, as I understand it, he claims the non-political crime was likely committed by a supporter of Trump.
Which is absurd when you have no evidence if the criminal supports Trump or not. The poster is simply making an assumption based on race and location.
It would be absurd for a LEO to pull a gun, or not, based on such an assumption. It would be absurd for an employee to make decisions regarding a customer based on such assumptions. It would be absurd for a landlord to make decisions regarding a potential tenant based on such assumptions. It's just real-life when people make these assumptions in their heads; and discuss them with their spouses, or family, or co-workers, or over the internet. But doing this brings no real harm to the subject. You should, however, be mad at people making decisions that really affect others, based on these assumptions. I've always held that everyone profiles; but real world decisions should not be made (as I've illustrated above) on such assumptions. Are you saying that you've never made assumptions about someone due to their race, looks, dress, speech, and/or location? The OP is not the prosecutor deciding whether or not to enhance the charges to a hate crime based on assumptions, nor is that what he suggested. He's a guy in a chat room.
So you’re telling me that my mother, who worked two jobs most of life and would fall asleep while cooking from exhaustion, was playing a victim? You’re full of shit. You don’t know Jack shit about people living in poverty. You’re just some idiot with a fat mouth that thinks he’s smart when he’s actually dumb.
Yer falling for trollbait. He's using a rhetorical scenario to try to mirror his own experiences, and pass that off half-cocked onto why blacks are not doing it. All he is really saying is that he hates lazy black people sucking the teat of the government dole tit.