Comments on: Bush campaign outsources campaign to India

Bush campaign outsources campaign to India

omidius — Tue, 25 May 2004 09:30:19 -0800

Bush Campaign ran fundraising/vote-seeking from call centers in India. Is this the responsible way to promote jobs in the US? Even a small number as it may be. Every little bit counts.

By: Gnatcho

Gnatcho — Tue, 25 May 2004 09:43:38 -0800

from lakhs of registered Republican voters So that's what a Lakh is! Anyway, I find this ironic and a talking point that could be useful for the Kerry campaign in certain crowds. Still, despite all that, at least the Republicans paid well above minimum wage. I would be extremely disturbed if the jobs had paid less. With that salary I am only slightly disturbed.

By: BlueTrain

BlueTrain — Tue, 25 May 2004 09:43:48 -0800

As long as the Indians were paid with certified campaign dollars, I see no problem with this. In my opinion, this is a fortunate aspect of globalization. Previously unemployed and impoverished Indians are able to provide for their families and support the world's largest democracy.

By: dagny

dagny — Tue, 25 May 2004 09:43:53 -0800

Let's see here: Bush campaign gets service, pays less. Does the money they saved disappear into a black hole? Of course not. It will be spent later, on other services, maybe in the US and maybe elsewhere. The problem is?

By: mcsweetie

mcsweetie — Tue, 25 May 2004 09:50:39 -0800

it's nice that Indians are getting jobs but I bet this sort of thing wouldn't sit well with the "america rulez all other countries drulez!" crowd.

By: mathowie

mathowie — Tue, 25 May 2004 09:53:27 -0800

Bush is pro-free trade (as am I), so his supporters shouldn't have a problem with it.

By: goneill

goneill — Tue, 25 May 2004 09:58:05 -0800

uh, except that many of his supporters aren't free trade, but are factory workers who share his religious beliefs. I was recently in South Carolina where plants were closing, and people were frustrated by that, but who were quite supportive of the President because of his stances on abortion, religion, etc.

By: clevershark

clevershark — Tue, 25 May 2004 09:59:12 -0800

I don't know what the big deal is, this is not the Bush Campaign's first foray into outsourcing.

By: Dillenger69

Dillenger69 — Tue, 25 May 2004 10:11:59 -0800

This just reiterates that big money people (ALL politicians) really don't care about the little guys. THey only care about the balance sheet. It's not immoral ... it's amoral. They just don't care.

By: snarfodox

snarfodox — Tue, 25 May 2004 10:18:59 -0800

From clevershark's link: “It shows a crude indifference to this issue.” I'll be appropriating that phrase with a crude indifference to copyright.

By: Civil_Disobedient

Civil_Disobedient — Tue, 25 May 2004 10:22:10 -0800

a talking point that could be useful for the Kerry campaign in certain crowds Except that he never seems to take advantage of these situations. It's absolutely amazing. Bush hands him these "talking points" on a silver platter, yet Kerry keeps saying the Same Damned Thing. Over and over and over again. It's frustrating as all hell. Clearly both candidates are being advised by a bunch of overly-cautious ninnies more concerned about polls and focus groups than getting their message out. Every single word of a speech is carefully debated until all the life is sucked out of it. It's these same sorts of fools who green-light boring, standard big-budget movies for Hollywood, then are all surprised when something different like the Blair Witch Project comes along and ruins their heuteristics models (I suppose using this analogy, BWP :: Howard Dean).

By: Jart

Jart — Tue, 25 May 2004 10:30:35 -0800

Except Howard Dean was actually scary.

By: wfrgms

wfrgms — Tue, 25 May 2004 10:36:06 -0800

If memory serves me correctly, this happened in 2002-2003 and the GOP quickly pulled the plug when some outrage arose back then... not saying it's right and that it shouldn't still mentioned... just say'n is all. Further, while the demon of exporting jobs overseas is a fun election year talking point... most of us realize that it's not the great unraveling of the fabric of America that some people make it out to be... it's economics and in the end the low cost labor benefits the American consumer more so than keeping an over-paid job here in the States would... I wish it weren't true, but it is. And if you don't like it then I urge you stop patronizing the industries that outsource to foreign countries...

By: signal

signal — Tue, 25 May 2004 10:45:41 -0800

Ah, global redistribution continues. Now, to figure out a way to get some of it away from those pesky Indians.

By: Postroad

Postroad — Tue, 25 May 2004 10:49:20 -0800

If outsourcing is the game currently played and it is perfectly legal and supported, it would seem, by both parties, why the big deal abut the Bush outsourcing? Much more imporant issues to get upset about, or have you no problems with healthy insurance, schooling, pensions, probably draft coming, invasion of Iraq, Patriot spyware act etc etc etc

By: archimago

archimago — Tue, 25 May 2004 10:53:37 -0800

a talking point that could be useful for the kerry campaign in certain crowds except that he never seems to take advantage of these situations Seems to me that he IS taking advantage of these situations. I don't know if it is a strategy, but he's letting Bush hang himself with his own rope. There's no need to go after a man who loses more of the race every time he opens his mouth. Kerry's going to keep letting people turn on Bush for their own reasons and then come September(ish) start steamrolling him (I hope) in his own way.

By: Nauip

Nauip — Tue, 25 May 2004 11:06:53 -0800

Too bad unemployed and impoverished American's are not able to provide for their families and support the world's largest democracy because all the work is being farmed out.

By: BlueTrain

BlueTrain — Tue, 25 May 2004 11:21:39 -0800

Nauip, I'm merely displaying the burden of dual/world citizenship. I guess I wasn't lucky enough to have allegiance to only one country.

By: nofundy

nofundy — Tue, 25 May 2004 11:32:25 -0800

How To Make Enemies and Alienate People. Or, if you prefer, How To Win the Union Vote This Election. Yeah, its not an issue. Uh-huh. Don't spend your money on voters, ship it overseas and save a buck. Great GOoPer idea!

By: knapah

knapah — Tue, 25 May 2004 11:40:36 -0800

Too bad unemployed and impoverished American's are not able to provide for their families and support the world's largest democracy because all the work is being farmed out. how exactly would American's having the jobs be supporting India (the world's largest democracy)?

By: mr_roboto

mr_roboto — Tue, 25 May 2004 12:10:18 -0800

how exactly would American's having the jobs be supporting India (the world's largest democracy)? Maybe he meant something like "American's relatives in India"? That apostrophe must be there for some reason.

By: i_cola

i_cola — Tue, 25 May 2004 12:27:25 -0800

Previously unemployed and impoverished Indians don't work in call centres. It's the educated, bi-lingual, middle class Indians who get the jobs. The call centre & technology sectors are such a teeny tiny part of the Indian economy.

By: jeffmshaw

jeffmshaw — Tue, 25 May 2004 13:38:31 -0800

What's interesting to me is that the Republican National Committee just denied to the Washington Post that these call centers in India ever existed, calling them "urban legends." RNC official denial here, via MaxSpeak. To me, though, the level of detail in the story linked by the FPP seems to be very credible. I suspect this will turn out to be another in a long line of things this administration has flat-out lied about. When the lie is exposed, they'll go to their second line of responses about how it's a good thing for the U.S. economy, etc.

By: vignettist

vignettist — Tue, 25 May 2004 14:07:04 -0800

Timely post. I attended a panel discussion about offshoring jobs last night at USC. The gist went something like this: 140M employed in the U.S. 8.4M unemployed and seeking work. 35% of those 16-19 y.o., i.e. not highly educated/skilled. Number of jobs sent to India: 300,000. A relative drop in the bucket. The general feeling on the panel was that offshoring is much less of an issue that the media portray it to be.

By: bashos_frog

bashos_frog — Tue, 25 May 2004 15:18:56 -0800

from drowningchicken: According to Global Insight, Inc., 150,000 information technology and software jobs will go offshore in 2004. They predict that the rate will grow to 300,000 by 2008. Sounds like a trickle, right? Well, lets do the math: Rate of growth (300000 - 150000) / 4 = 37,500 2004 150,000 2005 187,500 2006 225,000 2007 262,500 2008 300,000 --------- 1,125,000 Over a million technology jobs moving offshore in the next 5 years! Doubt it? Need a sanity check? OK, well Forrester Research predicts 3.3 million jobs and $136 billion in wages will move overseas in the next 15 years, so these back-of-the envelope numbers seem to be in the ballpark.

By: bashos_frog

bashos_frog — Tue, 25 May 2004 15:21:50 -0800

Note that my last post was regarding technology jobs only. In addition to the million jobs lost in that industry, there will be jobs lost from other industries as well. I think it is an important issue, as there is nothing on the horizon capable of taking up the slack. This was not the case when we were losing manufacturing jobs overseas and gaining service/technology jobs at home.

By: inpHilltr8r

inpHilltr8r — Tue, 25 May 2004 18:03:31 -0800

Bush hands him these "talking points" on a silver platter Maybe so, but this "talking point" is a poisoned chalice.