This one is rather simple.
Just listen for the catchphrase, "Voter ID disenfranchises blacks."
They'll explain to you at length (god, can they generate a lot of CO2 for little traction) that lots of blacks are unable to get ID, something something poverty.
Now, state IDs are very cheap, easy to get, and states that require voter ID will take several types. Anyone receiving public aid of any kind should have a state ID.
And to the point: Lots of whites, Asians and Hispanics also live in poverty. But the "liberals" don't mention them at all. Apparently, they know how to get ID.
Obviously, liberals believe blacks are too stupid to do what everyone else does.
And, they assume a majority of blacks will vote for them.
They're still pining for their plantations and slaves, with the good liberals saving those poor darkies who are too stupid and helpless to do it themselves.
They DO occasionally mention the Indians, but only with the false narrative that tribal ID isn't valid for voting (it is) and reservation Indians are unable to vote because of this (false).
~~~
Rounds Two, Three and Four.
Elizabeth Warren was never Cherokee by genetics, by blood fraction, by upbringing, by involvement. As far as anyone can tell, she knows literally nothing about them. Even her recipe submitted to "Pow Wow Chow" was first, a plagiarized French recipe, and second, had no relation to any native cooking at all, especially the Cherokee.  However, she was more than willing to claim minority status for college and teaching benefits, thus depriving a person of real native ancestry those same jobs.
Further, if you can proudly claim minority status for advantage, it gives lie to any claim you believe they're disadvantaged. (HINT: Actual natives are often disadvantaged, often more so than the descendants of former slaves.)  You just think of them as a convenient checkbox in your greed for power and millions.
That's about as fucking racist as you get. 
By comparison, my older kids ARE Cherokee by blood fraction, but not recognized, because at the time of the Dawes Rolls, the great grandmother claimed to be Greek, because that was a whole lot safer than being Indian.
My youngest is Cherokee AND Choctaw by blood fraction, and may be able to get recognized once some documentation is reconstructed.
But I've met plenty of "liberals" who insist my family are "white," because they "look it" (actually, my wife and the older two don't look European), but support E Warren.  Who is paler than me, and I'm Scottish and English by origin, and an immigrant.
They're vile fucking racists willing to fuck over my actual native relatives for some leftist street cred.
 
Beta O'Dork claims to be Hispanic because he lived in an Hispanic neighborhood. By that logic, I'm black and Korean.  Once again, he has no blood relation, no genetic relation, no cultural background, doesn't speak Spanish.  All he wants is the imprimatur of association for political benefit.
It doesn't work on most Hispanics.  But all over Twitter, his "liberal" followers were wailing that they had to "vote for Beto" to beat that "Racist Ted Cruz."
So, Rafael Theodore Cruz is half Cuban, half American, speaks fluent Spanish, can be jokingly described as a Person of Swarth, and actually has relevant cultural background.
But if you're a racist "liberal" piece of shit, the white Bostonian with the Irish name is the Hispanic, and the Cuban is the white guy.
 
Then there was the case where they had to measure the relative skin points of the murderer trying to smash someone's head in, with his victim's, to claim that a man with a Peruvian mother, a black grandfather, and both Jewish and Catholic cultural input, was suddenly a "white Hispanic." Because obviously, to support the false narrative of him being the attacker, he had to be "white." Even though he wouldn't be allowed within 50 miles of a Klan gathering.
Because when a punk who doesn't live in the neighborhood (an uncle's house doesn't count) realizes he's being tracked while he cases the joint, turns on his observer and tries to smash his head in, and gets shot in the process, he's suddenly the victim.  The responses of:
*Photoshopping a picture of him at age 12 to look cleaner and more innocent, when he's almost 18.
*Lying about his criminal background and claiming there wasn't one.
*Insisting he lived in the neighborhood when he didn't.
*Doctoring the 911 audio to suggest the defender was racist, when was ASKED what race the perp was.
*Insisting that at 5'10" athletic man beating someone's head into the ground is "an unarmed boy."
*LIGHTENING the images of the mixed race Hispanic to claim he's "white."
*Insisting the defender "could have just walked away" when he was doing just that, but not that the attacker should have.
*Insisting that somehow the prosecutor, the mixed-race jury, and the FBI are all part of some racist white cabal to murder the "child."
*Stalking the defender for years, harassing him, claiming every reaction to being harassed non-stop proves he's a bad person (and even if he was, irrelevant to the case).
Are just a bingo game of virtue signaling, lies and propaganda to try to distract the world from the fact that modern American "liberals" are VILE FUCKING RACISTS, who cannot judge anything on the merits and facts, but only on the skin color of the parties involved, and that those poor darkies need their help, because they can't handle it alone.
I concede the possibility that a non-racist "liberal" exists.  I've yet to meet one. I HAVE met non-racist socialists, old school Democrats, and even communists who are decent, egalitarian people. But modern "liberals" are literal fucking Nazis, and need reminded of it regularly.
Eventually they're going to get what the previous Nazis got.
I will cheer.  
EDIT: oh, yeah, and then there's "gentrification."  Because apparently, only white people can have a nice neighborhood, and blacks need to know their place, with their stereotype, and they better stick to it.