Why don't Democratic politicians attack Scalise like how the GOP attacks Dems?

[Suburbia]

Republicans are poor at messaging to attract new voters, they only gained new voters in 2016 with the Trump white middle class mania.

Republicans are good at vicious persuasion messaging and attack ads.

Republicans attack AOC, Ilhan Omar, etc., especially Donald Trump.

That's politics. You're supposed to criticize your opponents, but not personally.

Why don't Democrats attack Louisiana Rep. Steve Scalise on Twitter, who was injured in a gun shooting in 2017.

Why don't they viciously attack Scalise, especially with his past, the "David Duke without the baggage"?

[Mr. Smith]

Because Dems are cowards generally.

[Santander]

Because everyone already knows the entire Republican Party is David Duke without the baggage.

[Suburbia]

Because everyone already knows the entire Republican Party is David Duke without the baggage.

Scalise should be attacked on that, but it does not mean he should have died because of his views.

Scalise just had reprehensible views.

[Inmate Trump]

You know what I’d like to see?

All these Republicans who claim to be so patriotic standing up to those within their own party when they act out or say something stupid.

You guys have no real agenda for America other than to own libs.  You guys are the party of quasi and fake patriots parading around with your confederate flags/monuments and grabbing women by the pussies.

With the death of John McCain you have no one in your party with any shred of dignity whatsoever.

[Santander]

If you think "David Duke without the baggage" is such a terrible comment, you clearly don't understand what that even means.

[GP270watch]

 David Duke without the baggage, who was saved by two brave African American Capitol police officers.

[GP270watch]

If you think "David Duke without the baggage" is such a terrible comment, you clearly don't understand what that even means.

Representative Steve Scalise of Louisiana Acknowledges Addressing Racist Group in 2002.

Representative Steve Scalise of Louisiana, the No. 3 Republican in the House, addressed a group of white supremacists and neo-Nazis in 2002, a Scalise spokeswoman confirmed Monday as his party prepared to take control of both chambers of Congress.

[Santander]

If you think "David Duke without the baggage" is such a terrible comment, you clearly don't understand what that even means.

Representative Steve Scalise of Louisiana Acknowledges Addressing Racist Group in 2002.

Representative Steve Scalise of Louisiana, the No. 3 Republican in the House, addressed a group of white supremacists and neo-Nazis in 2002, a Scalise spokeswoman confirmed Monday as his party prepared to take control of both chambers of Congress.

"David Duke without the baggage" means that, in the years following Duke's rise to prominence in the early 90s, many of his proposed policies (which, remember, were not segregationist or white nationalist during his 90s Gubernatorial or Senate runs), have entered mainstream GOP thinking. The "baggage" is David Duke's white nationalist past (and, as we found out, present).

[GP270watch]

If you think "David Duke without the baggage" is such a terrible comment, you clearly don't understand what that even means.

Representative Steve Scalise of Louisiana Acknowledges Addressing Racist Group in 2002.

Representative Steve Scalise of Louisiana, the No. 3 Republican in the House, addressed a group of white supremacists and neo-Nazis in 2002, a Scalise spokeswoman confirmed Monday as his party prepared to take control of both chambers of Congress.

"David Duke without the baggage" means that, in the years following Duke's rise to prominence in the early 90s, many of his proposed policies (which, remember, were not segregationist or white nationalist during his 90s Gubernatorial or Senate runs), have entered mainstream GOP thinking. The "baggage" is David Duke's white nationalist past (and, as we found out, present).

 

 Duke's policies were always pro-white and anti everybody else. Scalise was saying I'm with Duke but they can't put me in a Klan robe.

 
 

[Santander]

If you think "David Duke without the baggage" is such a terrible comment, you clearly don't understand what that even means.

Representative Steve Scalise of Louisiana Acknowledges Addressing Racist Group in 2002.

Representative Steve Scalise of Louisiana, the No. 3 Republican in the House, addressed a group of white supremacists and neo-Nazis in 2002, a Scalise spokeswoman confirmed Monday as his party prepared to take control of both chambers of Congress.

"David Duke without the baggage" means that, in the years following Duke's rise to prominence in the early 90s, many of his proposed policies (which, remember, were not segregationist or white nationalist during his 90s Gubernatorial or Senate runs), have entered mainstream GOP thinking. The "baggage" is David Duke's white nationalist past (and, as we found out, present).

 

Duke's policies were pro-white and anti everybody else. Scalise was saying I'm with Duke on everything but they can't put me in a Klan robe.

... in the same way Reagan or Bush or Paul Ryan's policies were, not in an openly white nationalist way. Have you watched the '90 or '91 campaigns?

[GP270watch]

... in the same way Reagan or Bush or Paul Ryan's policies were, not in an openly white nationalist way. Have you watched the '90 or '91 campaigns?

 So what are you arguing?

 Duke was a racist who's racial hatred and policies were not in question. The fact he put a suit on and adopted Republican lingo, which we all know because of Lee Atwater was just racist dog whistles anyways doesn't change what his intent was. It also doesn't make sense for Scalise to compare himself to Duke if he's just a normal Republican because Duke was never really that.

 You need to do more research into how white supremacists do this. Read the writings of Derek Black the son of Stormfront founder Don Black(and godson of David Duke) and how he explains how Donald Trump won on a platform he helped to popularize.

On Black's usage of white nationalist talking points in a campaign for the West Palm Beach County Republican Committee

Black: I knew from the time that I was a child that white nationalism, as long as it was not necessarily calling itself white nationalism, could win campaigns. So I did things like run little Republican county elections [to] demonstrate that I could win with the majority of the vote [using] white nationalist talking points in a very normal South Florida neighborhood.

I ran training sessions on how people could hone their message to try to get that audience, not freak people out and just tap into things like, "Don't you think all these Spanish signs on the highway are making everything worse? And don't you think political correctness is just not letting you talk about things that are real?" And getting people to agree on that would be the way forward.


He never used racial slurs. He didn’t advocate violence or lawbreaking. He had won a Republican committee seat in Palm Beach County, Fla., where Trump also had a home, without ever mentioning white nationalism, talking instead about the ravages of political correctness, affirmative action and unchecked Hispanic immigration.

[brucejoel99]

What is the suggestion here? That Democrats ought to go around making absurd comments to the effect of "I like Congressional leaders who don't get shot in the posterior"? Maybe I'm an outleir, I've never noticed a paucity of criticism surrounding Steve Scalise.

This. There has been no lacking in respectful criticism of his destructive ideas & policies.

[Tintrlvr]

What is the suggestion here? That Democrats ought to go around making absurd comments to the effect of "I like Congressional leaders who don't get shot in the posterior"? Maybe I'm an outleir, I've never noticed a paucity of criticism surrounding Steve Scalise.

I think the meaning is trying to run ads connecting random Republican candidates to Scalise, etc. that don't talk about policy or whatever and instead harp on him being a scary arch-conservative generally. On the one hand, Scalise isn't a household name the way Pelosi is. On the other hand, making him a household name might be beneficial for the Democrats.

[Crumpets]

Democrats don't want to be associated in any way with the guy who tried to kill him, and we have bigger fish to fry generally.

[Indy Texas]

Why don't Democrats attack Louisiana Rep. Steve Scalise on Twitter, who was injured in a gun shooting in 2017.

Why don't they viciously attack Scalise, especially with his past, the "David Duke without the baggage"?

I'm not interested in attacking someone who can now barely walk because someone fired a round of bullets at him for politically-motivated reasons.

[Pandaguineapig]

I mean Democrats did attack him.......

[brucejoel99]

I mean Democrats did attack him.......

r/technicallythetruth

[TML]

In general, establishment Democratic politicians on Capitol Hill have been paid by special interests to be relatively cowardly compared to their Republican counterparts.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Democrats are bound to a double standard that Republicans aren't, and they know it. Disparaging a man who was nearly assassinated as Scalise was would only backfire on Democrats. Meanwhile, Trump can disparage whoever he wants, no matter how sympathetic, and suffer few to no consequences. It's just the world we are living in.

 Anyway, beyond that; for me personally, as much as I may disagree with Scalise:

Why don't Democrats attack Louisiana Rep. Steve Scalise on Twitter, who was injured in a gun shooting in 2017.

Why don't they viciously attack Scalise, especially with his past, the "David Duke without the baggage"?

I'm not interested in attacking someone who can now barely walk because someone fired a round of bullets at him for politically-motivated reasons.

[Suburbia]

Democrats are bound to a double standard that Republicans aren't, and they know it. Disparaging a man who was nearly assassinated as Scalise was would only backfire on Democrats. Meanwhile, Trump can disparage whoever he wants, no matter how sympathetic, and suffer few to no consequences. It's just the world we are living in.

 Anyway, beyond that; for me personally, as much as I may disagree with Scalise:

Why don't Democrats attack Louisiana Rep. Steve Scalise on Twitter, who was injured in a gun shooting in 2017.

Why don't they viciously attack Scalise, especially with his past, the "David Duke without the baggage"?

I'm not interested in attacking someone who can now barely walk because someone fired a round of bullets at him for politically-motivated reasons.

Why don't Dems try to run someone against Scalise in LA-01?

[brucejoel99]

Democrats are bound to a double standard that Republicans aren't, and they know it. Disparaging a man who was nearly assassinated as Scalise was would only backfire on Democrats. Meanwhile, Trump can disparage whoever he wants, no matter how sympathetic, and suffer few to no consequences. It's just the world we are living in.

 Anyway, beyond that; for me personally, as much as I may disagree with Scalise:

Why don't Democrats attack Louisiana Rep. Steve Scalise on Twitter, who was injured in a gun shooting in 2017.

Why don't they viciously attack Scalise, especially with his past, the "David Duke without the baggage"?

I'm not interested in attacking someone who can now barely walk because someone fired a round of bullets at him for politically-motivated reasons.

Why don't Dems try to run someone against Scalise in LA-01?

It's an R+24 district. Enough said.

[Santander]

You need to do more research into how white supremacists do this.

Oh believe me, I don't think I need to do that.

[Mister Mets]

There are several factors.

1. Trump is a better target. Scalise is relatively obscure. If Democrats start yelling about Steve Scalise, a lot of the public is going to ask "Who?"

2. Scalise is still somewhat sympathetic as the survivor of a shooting.

3. Politicians tend to get attacked for new stuff, rather than older controversies. AOC, Omar, Tliab and Priessly give plenty of material. Scalise doesn't.

4. There isn't much advantage to going after an obscure figure now. It would be a smarter move to go after him when it's either closer to an election or he's in a position to be the Republican House Leader.

[SteveRogers]

1. Trump is a better target. Scalise is relatively obscure. If Democrats start yelling about Steve Scalise, a lot of the public is going to ask "Who?".

This is the correct answer.