https://www.quora.com/What-is-a-blanket-statement

Everyone identified in this group is X, everyone in that group is Y.

Yea, that's productive.

Interesting reply....coming from a Borg.

I don't condone painting an entire group with a broad brush. But, when you have the group(s) itself proclaiming to be a collective "hive mind" I must acquiesce to their wishes. Most modern liberals have hijacked the classical name in the hope of being perceived as "enlightened" above the masses. Any past connection to "liberty" or even "library", a place of enlightenment, are gone. It has morphed into an opposite for "conservative" taken from conserve meaning: to keep something, especially an important environmental or cultural resource, from harm, loss, change, or decay. It has not lost its meaning, but is frequently used by modern liberals to identify all who disagree with them or used incorrectly to refer to Republicans (of which all are not conservatives, some are classic liberals or Libertarians, among others). The same is true in liberal/Democrat associations, however most conservative Democrats were driven out of the party in the 1990's, leaving mostly liberals and progressives.

Progressives. As Anthony stated, the name sounds forward thinking and it some ways it was. It began in the USA in the early 1900's. President Teddy Roosevelt was a conservative progressive (possibly a nonexistent form today), creating our national park system and taking on the robber barons and corporate corruption. Woodrow Wilson was a progressive. He insured that the Army remained segregated prior to entry into WWI, possibly dealing a great blow to race relations for decades to come. The Progressive movement was extremely popular in 1930's Germany, especially the progressive tenets that included segregation and euthanasia.

With the demise of the Nazis, so the progressives moved into the shadows and embraced socialism, fascism's surviving cousin, to slowly work it's way into the public again. Margret Sanger became a heroine of the progressive movement being a champion for abortion rights (never mind she intended it as a control device for minorities). Odd to see minority women carrying her photo during the 2017 Women's March in Washington DC. As time passed the progressive movement pulled even further to the left to achieve their goals, abandoning any movement toward the right as a much harder road to travel. By the 1990 the movement was again in the open, proudly supporting socialist ideals and instrumental in removing conservative Democrats from office over the same period.

The Nation, a progressive "news" aggregate and opinion source have even purged Teddy Roosevelt from their ranks, and added FDR and Eleanor Roosevelt. Later cementing their Communist/Socialist leanings, they include Saul Alinski and even Micheal Moore as adherents to their philosophy. Their reach now includes most of the media services and they routinely target those they consider enemies (conservatives, libertarians, Republicans, and even some Democrats) with smear campaigns, staged protests, boycotts, and intimidation. Now embracing the minorities they once wanted to keep in check, they use their grievances as victimization, along with any other special interest group that wants to get in on the identity politics action. They are adept at ingratiating into government positions, and ensuring replacements are cut of the same cloth. This is easy to see with recent years scandals with major government agencies, EPA, IRS, FBI, DOJ, NSA, and possibly others that came or will come to light.         

All I can say is JFK would not recognize, and likely would not wish to be a part of, the Democrat Party of today. 

You know Daiwa, I was thinking the very same thing myself. My grandfather (on my father's side) was a dedicated Democrat, so were all his six kids except my father (independent, to the right). he was a coal miner and I know he would have left the Democrat party long ago when it became the "what can the government do for you" socialist band leader. JFK would have too. Know my father and one remaining aunt vote Republican, and I'm sure my departed grandfather, aunts, and uncle are still voting Democrat.

Democrats of the past were inspirational and were worthy of voting for. In my friends basement, his dad had WWII stuff with FDR slogans like We can, we will, we must, and stuff like that. By today's standard, FDR and JFK would be considered religious zealots and military extremists.  I really think JFK was the last real Democrat of any substance and the party never recovered from his assassination. Another thing not yet entered into this discussion is the sheer depth of how far this new movement will go to avoid any contact with reality. Colleges today have been set up with so-called safe zones. Its hard to actually describe the realities of this condition without laughing, but its no laughing matter. When confronted by the faintest sign of reality or truth that doesn't comport with the standards of a so-called liberal student, the fragile eggshell of a specimen must retreat into a plastic bubble with play doh, comfort animals, and pink walls for soothing vibes. It sounds almost comedic, but this is the reality. When I hear something I disagree with, I feel compelled to talk about the reasons why I see things differently, I guess that is normal and healthy. I actually enjoy different points of view. How boring would things be if everyone thought the same things? But I guess when a group has so much reality stacked up against them and their beliefs, they have to plug their fingers in their ears and deny they can hear you.

The general word you might be looking for is "radical". It means changing things from the root, so to be against the status quo to a large magnitude. Not perfect since it could also apply to a person of the right-wing who wants to change things, but through U.S. history it is usually meant for Leftist.

The fringe minority who wear masks and attack people or cause damage are sometimes referred to by police as "Black Bloc." There are still plenty of the tye-dye mellow ones still with us.

There are some center-leaning, strong military advocates left in the Democratic Party. For example, Joe Biden, Claire McCaskill, Jon Tester. (What Senate Democrats argued against any of the wars carried out during Obama's two terms?) To the extent that today's polarization has caused semi-conservative Dems to become rare, you can say the same for semi-liberal Republicans.

Does anyone want to play a Political Machine 2 player game?