Why do Iowa Democrats use Republican talking points?

(This phenomenon has bothered me too. - promoted by desmoinesdem)

Every time I receive a fund raising call from the Iowa Democratic party they hit me first with a long list of accomplishments that read exactly like Republican plans : Kept taxes low, encouraged small business growth, balanced the budget.

You know how that sounds to me?  It sounds like this : We kept allowable growth for K-12 education below levels seen under Republican control.  We forced the regents institutions to freeze salaries and use mandated furloughs. We forced layoff to state police and social workers.

If you’re calling a loyal Democrat to get Democratic support, emphasize Democratic goals, don’t try to pre-empt Republican attack ads to me.  The only substantial Democratic thing this group of Democrats have done as far as I can tell is simply not fighting the same sex marriage ruling.

About the Author(s)


  • good diary

    When you are calling your most dedicated Democratic supporters (people with a history of giving money to party organizations), why would you emphasize these talking points? Come up with a better script that speaks to people like me.

    More broadly, I’m concerned about how top Democrats are using these messages in public communications. I see why, looking ahead to a campaign against Branstad, Democrats would want to make a contrast between our approach and the Branstad record. But these talking points support Republican messaging about “big government” being bad. Another issue is that many people’s property taxes are going up, and they’ll be paying those bills in September. Even though the property tax hikes are not solely related to state budget cuts, they will work against the Democratic “we didn’t raise your taxes” message.

  • It's sad

    A few months ago as Branstad was just beginning to test the waters, I’d see anti-Terry ads at sites like the Huffington Post and other liberal sites, that proclaimed that “Terry Loves Taxes” (the same banner ad can now be seen with the text, “Terry vs. Terry”) and that if elected, Branstad would raise taxes. It was a classic Republican campaign advertisement.

    Coming before the legislative session in which the state was facing massive budget shortfalls and in which raising taxes should certainly have been considered an option, this really limited our Democratically-controlled legislature’s options. Of course, it’s unlikely that they would have raised taxes on the wealthy or eliminated corporate tax loopholes anyway, as much of the Dem leadership has proven to be timid.

    I’m disappointed that they’re still using the Republican boilerplate.  

  • Terry Branstad

    Terry Brandstad would raise the sales tax which is a regressive tax, he would not likely raise the traditional income tax.  There’s a reason why people like me would be opposed to a FAIRTAX because its a regressive tax.

  • Taxes

    I live in Sheldon.  And a long time ago,  the town decided that the property taxes would be raised so that every child in town had free books, fees, sports, etc.  by paying just a few dollars more.  Drivers Ed is free,  football, soccer, etc.  lockers, books, lab fees, field trips.  I don’t mind paying a little bit more so that this happens every year.  I am pretty much on a fixed income, even tho I’m working part time,  and I still wouldn’t mind paying more in taxes so that everyone had health care, for example.  I don’t mind paying more in taxes for a lot of things,  as long as it is used correctly and not wasted.  Raise the social security tax to keep it solvent.  I believe that anyone making over $100,000 a year does not need social security after retiring.  And I used to know one of the original board members of the first social security panel.  And she told me that SS was never designed for everyone.  It was designed for the lower income people to live decently.  There are a lot of places taxes could be changed, increased, etc.  as long as its done correctly, not wasted.;