Because talking points are a product meant to persuade, the blueprint that you use matters.
If you're doing a page of talking points to inform an audience, that's really a fact sheet.
So: what blueprint makes sense?
It depends on the type of debate you're trying to win. And it is a debate. There's at one competing side, if not more.
Ask yourself what you want the audience to do. That's your closing, your last bullet.
Now, what benefit does the audience get for making that choice? What are the costs of choosing another path?
That's one blueprint. Start with the costs, compare it to the benefits and leave it up to the audience to make a choice. This is a debate about the future, about risks versus rewards.
Another blueprint is typically used for debates about facts, when there's controversy about whether something is true or not. Who really killed JFK? These kinds of debates are about the past, and about assigning blame.
Another way to organize talking points is to frame the debate as a value choice. These kinds of debates are about the present, about competing values. For example, does the fact that human suffering -- and human lives -- are saved by animal testing justify animal testing and animal deaths?
Before writing your talking points, think about the best arguments from the other point of view. Pre-empt those arguments in your talking points to take the wind from their sails.
The best talking points use some type of blueprint and structure. They aren't a page full of bullets of equal weight and importance. Build a case with a solid foundation that builds to a climax where you ask the audience to do something.
Related posts: