There's important food for thought here.

In order for things to truly change, everyone must first be willing to entertain the possibility that some of our most fervent beliefs are either wrong or have become irrelevant. That goes for both sides of a debate. Sometimes that's very difficult. Especially if beliefs are grounded in fundamental ideological thinking.

Having worked in left-wing administrations in the past my experience is that they have just as much potential for groupthink and elitism as right-wing administrations do. Perhaps even more.

Democracy was built on the principle that the truth emerges from a respectful honest debate between people with differing opinions. Something that's impossible to do when we first create a caricature of the "other side".

The more marginalized people feel the more likely they are to mount a revolution. We need only look at the genesis of our own country to see that.

You don't have to understand someone's point of view in order to respect it. The psyche of a wealthy liberal elite is very different from that of a conservative out-of-work coal miner. But so is the life from which their psyches emerge. The real problem is not that one is "successful" or "educated" while the other isn't. It's the overwhelming difference in the amount of power each has. But, as long as we live in a Democracy, the votes count the same on election day.

We forget that at our own peril.