Anony Mous, when I said Jews and Hindus (in terms of the percentage of their members) in the USA are highly educated, I wasn't singling out those who are conservative. However I wouldn't be surprised if conservatives, in addition to liberals, of Jews and Hindus are highly educated.
That which I read of wokism on this site is puzzling to me because I don't know what it is; it is alien to me. I hadn't come across that concept until about a couple of weeks ago, and I've only encountered it on this site. I am familiar with the concept of people metaphorically "waking up", such as in the sense of realizing that some beliefs they have are false and that it is time for them to abandon them. But it is not clear to me that wokism refers to such. I am familiar with the ancient Gnostic Christian spiritual concept of waking up, namely in their belief that one has an immortal spirit/soul which is trapped in the fleshly body and that there is a way it can escape the body and ascend to the heavenly realm and return to the supreme true God (one who is not Yahweh of the Hebrew Scriptures) and that according to the Gnostics there is a way that people learn such is true. But I doubt that wokism refers to such, but perhaps I am wrong about that. Furthermore, I don't see "waking up" (other than the above mentioned Gnostic concept) or wokism being promoted as a religion. I am thus extremely puzzled that you claim Democrats are trying to make wokism a state religion. I guess I will have to research wokism on the internet with the aid of my favorite internet search engine.
I read news articles saying that local governments in the USA (mostly ones with Republican majorities) are trying to impose some aspect of Christianity (or religion in general) on people on government properties, and in other cases to "...foster discrimination or create special privileges for religious people and organizations". The organization called American Atheists sends me action alert emails in regards to this, saying American Atheists requests my help to stop the politicians from doing such things. [See https://www.atheists.org/activism/ , https://www.atheists.org/activism/state-legislation/ , and https://www.atheists.org/news/ .] American Atheists engages in letter writing campaigns to such politicians and in lawsuits if necessary, and in many cases they have succeeded in getting the politicians to back down from their crossing the line of separation of "church and state". I am thus very puzzled that you say"... at least Republicans know they cannot make a state religion ...".
I am also very puzzled by you thinking that the Democrats are racists (to me they as a group are not) and that they want to keep black people from making progress and that they want to keep them on what you said is the "Democratic Plantation". I plan to ask you questions about that topic later in order to understand how you came to your views on that matter, since maybe you know something about that matter that I don't and since thus you might be right on that matter. However your use of the expression "Democratic Plantation" seem to be an intention to 'push some people's buttons', but perhaps I am mistaken on this. Personally, I have to excise great restraint from getting very riled up when reading the expression "Democratic Plantation" - an expression which is very inflammatory to me.
There are some liberal/progressive Democratic party policies that I am uncomfortable with, even though I am a liberal/progressive Democrat. I do think that some of former President Trump's policies were good, but I was intensely disturbed by much of his rhetoric. It
was much of his rhetoric (including what I considered to be bold faced
outright lies, even dangerous lies - even ones which I think incited (or contributed to an outbreak of) an insurrection at the USA Capitol building - which
primarily made me intensely angry with him and caused me to want him out
of public office forever.
Much of the rest you said in your post I do agree with. Regarding what you say "... predicts success 95% of the time .." I am fascinated by that idea and would like to know what you consider to be evidence in support of that idea (regarding the number of parents one has and the timing of having a kid). I have long thought that the factors you mention confer economic benefits, but I was not aware that that the first two you mention do so to the extent that you allude to.
Rocketman123, though I am politically liberal I can relate to what you said in your post about what you support in politicians and what you don't support in politicians.