>>You can dodge the question all you want by claiming you don't understand it - but I do not think is the case -- you're just trying to not admit you were wrong about something and would rather act an idiot..

Here's my answer again:

>So Yes, I think these GOP policies did more for the poor that any recent Congress or POTUS I can think of. Sheesh, previous POTUS even said you'd need a magic wand to get those jobs back. Which version do you think is better for the poor?

Note there's also a question there for you, that you didn't answer. Perhaps I should post all your own rhetoric back at you...

Meanwhile I still say the Democrats are the party of the rich, to which I'll add that recent history proves that Dem policy apparently affecting the rich only works if the rich are able to shunt their obligations elsewhere. They'll self-congratulate for high state taxes as long as they can quietly offset those taxes elsewhere. But actually pay the full tax themselves?! The thunder of departing hooves, and the deficits are back.

>>Since I did not specify any specific policies, then it is overall, in general, the republicans polices benefit the rich more than the poor. Shall I just say look no further than trickle-down economics?

Do you mean right now, or in general? If in general, presumably not back to Democrat institutions like slavery and the KKK, but Bill already gave some more recent Dem examples that allowed bumper short-term profits for the 1% at the cost of decades of lost jobs for blue collar workers- which jobs Bad Orange Man is now bringing back.

To be clear: availability of work seems a better policy than a magic wand for those who lost jobs under Clinton, definitely.