Third Debate Talking Points - Please Get This To The Kerry Campaign

[mhr]

Here are three sets of talking points and memes that underscore issues in the forthcoming third debate.

1. "I am for Free Trade, Fair Trade, but not Slave Trade."

"... as Americans we compete in goods and services but not people."

"... yet, that is what the President's policies do, they force Americans to compete on wages not capability."

"... by supporting outsourcing, the President supports Slave Trade."
------

2. "When I wake every morning, I will be fighting to keep good American jobs and working tirelessly to create more."

"... yet, as the President begins each day he works to outsource American jobs making his corporate contributors wealthier.

"... the choice is clear, do you want someone fighting for you or the corporations?"
------

3. "We have a choice to make as Americans, do we want a society that supports an economy?

"... or do we want an economy that supports a society?"

"... we know were the President stands. Unlike him, I stand for you!"
------

Since I am unaffiliated with the national campaign, I have no way of getting these to anyone in authority. Could someone at DU with connections get this to anyone that will actually read and consider these ideas.

[mhr]

1. Kick

eom

[mhr]

2. Kick Again For Response

eom

[Vincardog]

4. Kick it up LOOK AT THIS KE

[Onlooker]

3. It's been said by others ...

... that there are people from the Kerry campaign who read and participate on this board. Your ideas are good and clear, and one hopes like other ideas posted on this board they are at least reviewed by some sort of campaign intern who has some level of access to decision makers.

[fearnobush]

5. Mr. President, If not for liberals like FDR... You'd be speaking German!!

Stuff that one in his Chimp ass face.

[Vincardog]

6. aWol for Wall street I am for Main street Keep it up

[Carolinian]

7. * will attack K/E senate voting records & trial attys. How to respond?

Voting record:
General public does not understand the process so they are easily misled. Explain the process in very simple terms.

Trial attorneys:
Why doesn't * attack CORPORATE attorneys instead of trial attorneys who defend us?

[crispini]

10. Trial attorneys = Personal Protection Attorneys (nm)

[Carolinian]

13. Well, that went over my head. Can you explain?

[crispini]

21. sorry, I'm reframing.

"Trial attorneys" is bordering on BushCo speak for "those bad ambulance chasers." I prefer to look at them as "personal protection attorneys." Hey, when a big corp. is negligent and shows a pattern of negligence and injures you or one of your loved ones, don't you want someone to fight in your corner?

reframe, don't use rethug language. I don't like "tort reform" either. Not sure what to substitute yet though.

[Cats Against Frist]

16. Wasn't there recently a report out that said that

most of the court cases clogging up the system were businesses suing each other? That could put some things into perspective.

[Carolinian]

18. Yes, but * will blame high medical costs on large damages awarded

for medical malpractice cases such as those that JE handled. Never mind the huge profits goint to insurance & drug companies.

[mzmolly]

8. Anyone can contact the campaign. I suggest you do.

Contact National Headquarters
Kerry-Edwards 2004, Inc.
P.O. Box 34640
Washington, DC 20043
202-712-3000
202-712-3001 (fax)
202-336-6950 (TTY)

They do appreciate ideas and will listen to you.

[lawladyprof]

9. And another important talking point for Kerry

This is an powerful but never used argument in support of the progressive income tax. What Kerry proposes regarding the restoration of higher rates for people earning over $200,000 is consistent in that it begins to restore the proper/most efficient degree of progressivity.

When the tax structure is properly progressive, it acts AUTOMATICALLY to "smooth" out the downturns in the economic cycle. Works this way. Ec. downturn leads to reduced income in the aggregate (and individually for a number of people). B/c their taxes fall faster than their gross adjusted income the very nature of the tax structure acts (without any intervention, e.g., extension of unemployment benefits) to sustain buying power and thus demand, which in turn mitigates the effect of the downturn on employment. I am not sure (and maybe you could check with US history/ec. profs. whether income tax in the 1920's was progressive or flat, but this was one reason that FDR made the income tax progressive/increased its progressivity. Anywhoo, one theory might well be that we have gone too far (think payroll taxes, fee for service type financing, etc.) in flattening the progressivity of the tax system so it is less effective in "smoothing out" the downs (and, by extension, the ups) of the economic cycle. Hence, the current recession went deeper and lasted longer than it would have.

This is not an argument I have seen/heard since my days as an ec. major so I don't know if it is still considered valid. When put with the to-whom-much-is-given-much-is-required point of view, it substantially strengthens the argument for a progressive income tax. Note that under a flat tax, the potential for an ec. meltdown a la 1929 is increased to a virtual certainty. There is the thought that without progressivity in the tax structure, the lower demand leading to loss of jobs/income leading to less demand spiral can get beyond control (read Great Depression).

[Cats Against Frist]

17. You just lost me to an A&E Biography of Hugh Heffner

just kidding. Not me, the average voter.

[Pobeka]

11. I don't get point #3. What society?

The other 2 points are excellently put. Perhaps you meant:

3. "We have a choice to make as Americans, do we want a priviledged few that supports an economy?

"... or do we want an economy that supports a priviledged few?"

"... we know were the President stands. Unlike him, I stand for you!"

[mhr]

12. The Point Is We Now Have A Society That Supports A Corporate

Oligarchy, which is another version of the privileged few.

My point is we should have an economy that supports all Americans, not just the dictates and wishes of the corporations.

So, Instead of the corporations controlling our lives we should control the corporations.

[Pobeka]

15. Me, personally I like using oligarchy instead of society.

Society is too ambiguous.

Oligarchy is dead on. But sadly, 10's of millions of voters don't know what an oligarchy is.

So I'd go with "priviledged few".

[exsoccermom]

14. Unemployment for September

I was looking at the employment data on the BLS website. One thing that struck me was that the civilian population (non institutionalized and 16 years old or more) since bush came to office increased about 10 million but the labor force only increased by 3.7 million. Then I looked at the participation rate: 67.2 percent in Jan. 2001 and 65.9 in September 2004. Had the participation rate remained the same, then 150.5 million persons would currently be in the labor force (there are currently about 147.5 million persons in the labor force). While the baby boomlet is now off to college, that population is not cover the difference. I would suspect that a sizable proportion of these 3 million are additional people that just gave up looking--above and beyond the 8 million shown as unemployed. This is a sad situation. (By the way, I was looking at the seasonally adjusted data.)

[BlueNomad]

19. and this too!@

which I wrote this morning and wish someone would think about--they can make it pithy on their own....

Well. I have watched the debate twice now and continue to check my guy out on the stump. Technically this should Be his week and his debate.....

1. Kerry needs to move away from the "people like you" to I will fight for you; "we will fight for you." One line is inadvertently haughty. It sets you above the crowd--no matter how well meaning--the other asserts what it needs to assert--that regardless of where you are and where I am I will fight for YOU.

2. The trial lawyer issue. One reason the Gallup polls came back favorable this summer on Edwards' trial experience is because of his work helping the "little guy" against greedy corporate mongers. That can evaporate if Edwards does not remember to hit on the whole fighting for the little guy issue. When people scream about the doctors, tell the stories like the swimming pool case (run in the Washington Post) where a little girl had her intestines eviscerated by the drainage tube's faulty cover. The company had at least 10 complaints/cases and simply failed to pay the pittance to fix them.

Talk more about their "plan" for a case review panel to reduce frivolous lawsuits. Mention how frivolous cases are less than 1% of the total cost of rising medical costs.

3. Jobs. From Kerry, I am not hearing enough about how so many new jobs are low wage no insurance service jobs. Geezus. Just say $7.00 an hour jobs are replacing 20.00 an hour jobs. And keep repeating it. I want to hear that on a minimum wage job a family earns $11,0000 a year and George Bush has not supported raising the minimum wage-- not I got a "plan", "plan", "plan."

Furthermore, when is someone going to say--the average family got their BUSH tax rebate and it was what? $200 or 400 (insert figure whatever the average was-) Did that cover your extra cost of gas? NO! Did that cover the huge jump in your food bill? NO! Did it cover your medical insurance premiums that have jumped to nearly 10,000.00? NO! Who are we kidding about these tax cuts?

Also fact check has corrected the Kerry thing on job loss. So frigging add PRIVATE SECTOR JOBS if you are going to keep using that loss figure or say hundreds of thousands of jobs. Make a decision.

4. Orwellian....on the environment...I like "Orwellian" but does the trucker from Ohio get that. Hit the environment on the destruction of air and water --lead and asthma for us folks in the cities--deterioration of camp and fishing grounds for the rural and suburban sports men and women...

5. Kerry needs to know when to stop explaining. That second debate comment on the military handles the war; the president handles the peace was brilliant, beautiful. He should have just stopped right there. BANG. Same on abortion. I am a Catholic, pro choice too and thought he was sensitive and on the money when he began saying it was not right to legislate his morality onto someone else's. That's the ticket baby...but then he persisted in rambling. You don't need to keep going and going because if a person is rabidly anti-abortion---nothing--nothing you say it going to make them vote for you.

Now I will get off my soapbox and go back to my coffee.

[SpiralHawk]

20. Why are we spending billions of tax dollars nation building

in Iraq, and turning our back on so many great needs here at home? What are your priorities, Mr. Bush? Do you care about the homeland* at all?


* True patriots refer to this propaganda-born neospeak ("the homeland") as the good old United States of America. We are not some right-wing Madison Avenue such creaton as "homelanders;" we call simply call ourselves citizens and Americans.