Scandal du jour: Luntz focus group guy shows up twice
posted at 8:54 am on January 7, 2008 by Bryan
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
There’s no doubt it’s the same guy. He shows up in Frank Luntz’s “undecided” focus group after a debate on Sept 5 and again after last night’s debate.
The allegation about him is that he’s a plant for the Romney campaign, but I don’t see the evidence for that. In the first clip, he’s promoting McCain. In the second, he’s promoting Romney. The Freepers are going back and forth over him and some have noted that because Luntz’s focus groups are self-selecting there’s an opportunity there for a devious campaign to stack the “undecided” groups with its own supporters. That would seem to be true. But this particular guy doesn’t shill for the same candidate twice. In fact, he promotes two candidates who evidently hate each other, and he promotes them several months apart. So while it’s interesting to me that he got into the Luntz groups twice, his actions don’t lock him in as a plant for any campaign. He seems more like a Greg Packer figure if anything, a legitimate private citizen who turns up in the press because he sets out to do that on his own.
Update (AP): Yeah, I don’t see the big deal either — assuming the guy genuinely is an undecided voter. Some of the Freepers are wondering if he’s a “professional” focus group member, though. Obviously that would be a problem.
Update: Yup, if anyone has any answering to do for this, it’s Luntz. He controls the focus groups, he called the guy “Chuck” indicating recognition, he ought to explain how people get into his groups.
This, on the other hand, is just funny.
Reporters who walked into this Nashua high school today were immediately struck by the crowd — there are visibly more people here for Sen. Hillary Clinton than were here for Sen. Barack Obama yesterday in the same location.
The Clinton crowd was loud and boisterous and their foot-stomping was thunderous.
Many of them were also from Massachusetts.
Clinton gave a few minute speech about how she sees the race for 2008 shaping up, then started taking questions. As she did, I noticed dozens of people start streaming out via the back doors.
Of the 7 people I interviewed, three said they had taken advantage of the short drive to come see both Clinton and Obama in the area in advance of the Feb. 5 Massachusetts primary.
But the others said they were Clinton volunteers who came up to canvass on her behalf this weekend.
Serap Sankoh, a biostatistician from Acton, Mass., said she had been actively recruited to attend and wave signs wildly by the Clinton campaign. “I got the telephone calls not last night but the night before and I’m a die-hard supporter, so I made the drive,” she said.
It’s also not the first time the Clinton machine has been spotted shipping its crowds in from outside. It’s one of their oldest tricks.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
It’s another nice try on the part of those who don’t like Romney, but I highly doubt Romney (or any candidate for that matter) has had any hand in any Luntz focus group.
davenp35 on January 7, 2008 at 8:57 AM
It’s another example of FOXnews bias. It’s obvious that Luntz’s own portion is scripted to push a predetermined narrative and the ‘guests’ are chosen to comment on that basis.
But what would I know, I’m just a Fred-nut.
Ex-tex on January 7, 2008 at 9:01 AM
The dude likes the free punch and cookies. Is that a crime?
Sugar Land on January 7, 2008 at 9:02 AM
What’s the narrative here? That people change their minds?
Slublog on January 7, 2008 at 9:02 AM
Heh. Evidently it is. But if it’s wrong, he doesn’t want to be right.
Bryan on January 7, 2008 at 9:04 AM
Another scandal du jour??
Ex-tex on January 7, 2008 at 9:04 AM
That is a possibility, of course.
Or he’s just another sad clown with no life who has a hard-on for seeing his own mug on TV.
Misha I on January 7, 2008 at 9:07 AM
I’ve been skeptical about this Luntz dude ever since he showed up some time ago.
I think he picks and chooses to suit his own biases and shows you only the clips to further his biases.
I also have questions about his other preferences, but that is another story.
OBX Pete on January 7, 2008 at 9:07 AM
Oh, and for the record: I don’t like Romney much, but I DON’T think that he’s a plant. I just think that he’s a random narcissist.
But what would I know. We all know what a caring, trusting person I am.
Misha I on January 7, 2008 at 9:10 AM
A chance for some loner to have his opinion heard. His
wifemom probably told him to get out of the house and do something useful.*
Last words leaving the house: “What ever you do, you be nice to that nice young Romney man he seems so sweet, his hair is perfect and I love his smile…here’s you lunch honey”
right2bright on January 7, 2008 at 9:10 AM
Freepers are Facists - I state from personal experience.
I was a happy member of FreeRepublic, joined up in 2004, and made a lot of friends - until I started to talk about Rudy - and then the attacks came.
While I simultaneously stated my favor for Mitt, and Fred Thompson - once I said I liked Rudy - I become a marked man for unbelievable attacks.
Then I had my membership revoked when I open a thread on Rudy vs. Fred Thompson vs. Mitt Romney. No talk - nothing - my account was simply killed.
I wrote letters offering apologies, I offered to do whatever I had to do to get my membership back - I honestly enjoyed the debates I had and the things the members taught me. I never even got so much as a single response - after years of membership.
FreeRepublic has a lot of wonderful members - I made a lot of great friends (which I now have lost), but the management is as close to fascist as anything I have experienced - pure and simple.
The experience I had with them was a real eye opener. Just when you think the left is as bad as it gets - we on the right find worse people in our own ranks.
Do not trust anything coming from FreeRepublic - certainly not its management.
jake-the-goose on January 7, 2008 at 9:10 AM
Luntz is a deceptive partisan.
TheSitRep on January 7, 2008 at 9:12 AM
I’m sorry- it’s early. I meant to say that ANY time I’ve seen Luntz with one of his groups, be it election, amnesty, any topic- I feel that an editorial decision has been made to push a particular viewpoint. Yes- I do think that Murdoch and Ailes have ALOT to say about WHICH candidate is favored. Luntz himmself has been quoted on the Anti-Fred bias at Fox.
It’s rather like the sudden popularity of the Intrade numbers. WHO makes the intrade numbers fluctuate- The money folks. It’s another attempt to give MORE weight to the ‘money elite’ and less to the average voter.
Now that the media elites are exhibiting LESS influence over
regular folks by way of polls- they rely MORE heavily on Intrade and Focus groups - it gives Big Money more control.
You can take it to the bank (pun intended) Bein’ a Fredneck- don’t mean I’m stoopid.
Ex-tex on January 7, 2008 at 9:14 AM
Unless there’s a connection to a campaign, or he’s a Democrat, all I see is a guy who showed up 4 months later for another focus group, in a race that’s been totally shaken up. He’s on the record as having been for two entirely different candidates.
amerpundit on January 7, 2008 at 9:17 AM
It is obviously apparent that Frank Luntz is trying to manipulate the system. He is just a meddling reporter/activist.
TheSitRep on January 7, 2008 at 9:18 AM
I don’t like this at all. Too much of a
calculationcoincidence.FLcapitalistthug on January 7, 2008 at 9:20 AM
I watched the debate and Mitt DID do better than the rest. I am not a fan of Mitt either.
That said, appearance is everything. Plants don’t work in this day and age. YOU WILL be caught. Ask Hillary.
“All your plants are belong to us”.
Talon on January 7, 2008 at 9:21 AM
I’m not going to go so far as to say there was intentional foul play here, but there did seem to be something fishy about Luntz’s focus groups that I couldn’t quite put my finger on.
Yoosaion on January 7, 2008 at 9:33 AM
Looks like David Horowitz. Maybe he’s just messin’ with ‘em.
saint kansas on January 7, 2008 at 9:35 AM
Jake: I have noticed the same thing about FR. I used to read the site quite often and comment occasionally (using a different screnname). There are some great, funny, insightful and delightful posters over there. YOu can pick and choose what to read and what interests to follow.
HOWEVER…
once the primary season began to heat up the absolute HATRED, raw naked VITUPERATIVE HATRED for Rudy Giuliani made itself apparent. People posting pro-Rudy comments were harassed as if they were advocating nuclear jihad, and then they had their accounts suspended without notice. I was on several email ping lists of various candidates - Rudy, Mitt, Duncan — Fred wasnt in the race quite yet, and I kept getting emails from the Rudy supporters saying they had been suspended and please to go to another separate site where they would try to keep a Rudy dialog going.
This comes straight from the top, unfortunately. The guy who runs FR is a generally good guy who has such a woody of HATE for Rudy that he basically cuts off all debate, suspends posters and has embarked on a campaign of SPITTLE against the guy. Not even McCain gets such HATE.
Its gotten to the point where there is NO FREE DEBATE on Free Republic and I rarely go there anymore.
Here on Hot Air, people support different candidates, get emotional, but there is no effort to stifle opinion or cut off anyone because they like candidate A over candidate B.
Even Ronpaul. Gasp.
So FR is really just a marginal site now while HA is the hub of the universe, dontcha know.
Always Right on January 7, 2008 at 9:36 AM
Hillary’s shipping in crowds for staged rallies…hm, isn’t that what commies have to do?
CP on January 7, 2008 at 9:38 AM
Good gravy!!! Are you Fredheads getting into troofer territory now?
Where were these complaints when Fred was the guy the Luntz groups loved?
It is entirely more likely that this guy IS an undecided voter and is able to articulate his views rationally. I’m sure the only vetting Luntz does is to keep the loony troofer types off of national TV.
Besides, the guys analysis was dead on. Romney proved that in the forum of hashing out ideas, he is the king. He also showed he can maintain composure under silly snarky sound bite attacks. He also had no problem speaking to hostile interviewers.
The guy was for McCain, but now was undecided. Now it seems he likes what he hears from Mitt. But I didn’t notice if he raised his hand when Luntz asked who in the group now supports Romney. The guy may still be undecided.
csdeven on January 7, 2008 at 9:39 AM
Maybe the dude just really likes focus groups. Or getting his face on television. Hell, I know I would, looks kinda fun.
Seixon on January 7, 2008 at 9:39 AM
THAT is the truth! No matter how much Allah and Bryan are provoked, or how vituperative the attack- real, sound political discourse IS ENCOURAGED by all.
I think minds have been changed here at HotAir. God Bless this site-and Allah!
Ex-tex on January 7, 2008 at 9:43 AM
Geez, I musta’ missed THAT one.
Ex-tex on January 7, 2008 at 9:45 AM
He kind of looks like the Ponytail Guy from the 1992 town hall meeting to me.
ChartreuseDragon on January 7, 2008 at 9:46 AM
Never cared much for Luntz. He likes hearing himself talk and surrounds himself with an audience of his own choosing.
He’s the Richard Simmons of polling, with stick-on hair.
fogw on January 7, 2008 at 9:51 AM
I do wonder what kind of coaching Luntz might be doing before they come to his segment– it’s pretty easy to lead people to say what you want if they know you’re going to put them on television.
The overwhelming negative for Fred seemed strangely over-the-top the other night.
snickelfritz on January 7, 2008 at 9:51 AM
It’s Politics 101. You always contain the crowd in as tight an area as possible so it seems that the candidate is really popular. Failing that you ship supporters in to augment the locals. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Hillary plants were told to scream and shout and act like they were happy beyond belief. Gotta be pretty demoralizing to be a Clinton supporter this week.
highhopes on January 7, 2008 at 9:53 AM
As a Fred guy I dont see anything here. Actually I almost see it as something good. As most focus groups represent the polls as they sit on that day, why not bring in one or 2 “professional undecided” that are not biased based on the regions makeup? That way you can compare and contrast the differing arguments.
For example, they all loved Mitt. What if this guy that travels and isnt from NH would have said “Well I really think Fred did better than what everyone else said” we would be saying that he truely represents the nations since he isnt from NH. I dont know, move on nothing to see here.
broker1 on January 7, 2008 at 9:58 AM
Karl Rove, you magnificent bastard.
fourstringfuror on January 7, 2008 at 10:11 AM
Dear Always Right
Glad to hear I am not alone.
Thanks for your comments - but I want to agree with one thing you said.
A lot of the Freepers are FANTASTIC People !! The best. I can’t tell you much I enjoyed the friends I made.
SHAME the way I was treated. Real shame.
jake-the-goose on January 7, 2008 at 10:12 AM
You know, I thought this was a strange deal when I saw it live yesterday. It just seemed so unbelievable. When Frank asked them “How many of you guys are undecided?” everyone raised their hands…. Then he asked them after watching this debate, “who will you vote for?” and almost everyone raised their hand again for Romney. I mean cmon, are we to believe that they were truely “undecided”??? 20 people in a room don’t becoming Mitt lovers in the span of 2 hours. It just seemed so fishy.
froghat on January 7, 2008 at 10:15 AM
I get a kick out of the fact that Billery was on TV this morning acting all surprised at the fact that they were only expecting about 1000 people to turn out for the Nashua rally, and they got about 4000. Not hard to do when 3000 of them are Clinton Supporters who were called and asked to come. What a lying sack of shit she is, just like her husband. Might as well just call her Clinton Lite!
P.S. Can’t wait for tomorrow to be over so the parking lots filled with out of state plates ( Mostly NY ) will be gone. I live on the NH line, and do all my daily chores in Salem.
Masscon on January 7, 2008 at 10:17 AM
This fellow looks as though he likes pudding. Perhaps he had a nice bit of pudding the first time, and was looking for a refill.
Nothing wrong with pudding. The whole primary election thing is likely only his ticket to more delicious pudding. I’ll wager the fellow is a butterscotch man.
Nothing to see here… move along.
Scribbler on January 7, 2008 at 10:21 AM
Maybe, but also consider it is on the eve of the primary there. That debate might have been the last thing they were waiting for before deciding.
Spirit of 1776 on January 7, 2008 at 10:29 AM
When I saw the focus group show of hands that Fred had the poorest showing, I thought that some dirty dealing was afoot.
Mitt may smile nice, but he’s got some real killers working for him.
The whole Fox forum was skewed and manufactured as a duke-out between Mitt, Mike and Mc. Pretty much a waste of time IMO.
Let’s donate to fred08.com today and keep him in the mix.
Surprisingly, the ABC debate was the best since I’ve been engaged.
jimmer on January 7, 2008 at 10:39 AM
Don’t we all usually forget the good and remember the bad? I remember because I was surprised by it.
csdeven on January 7, 2008 at 10:59 AM
Great point.
csdeven on January 7, 2008 at 11:02 AM
About the only time Luntz’s analysis supported Fred, is when he took apart Mitt and Rudy on there weak immigration stands. Mitt and Rudy were so weak that it was a matter of non-support for their poor leadership skills, and were duly impressed by Freds leadership.
Sometimes, even the most bias have to give into logic….you will eventually see that when you finally look at how weak Mitt is (although Mitt has great hair)
right2bright on January 7, 2008 at 11:04 AM
Heck who doesn’t love free punch and cookies
Mojack420 on January 7, 2008 at 11:36 AM
Lets see if I have this right……Mitt campaigns and gains support and he’s weak….Fred doesn’t campaign and has huge support, but when he actually starts to campaign, he starts on a downward spiral and he’s the eventual nominee.
Is that what you’re saying?
csdeven on January 7, 2008 at 11:52 AM
They were too much in agreement. It seems unusual to have so many agree on stuff like this when all the candidates in both debates actually did very well. I thought the participants were parroting the media narrative a bit too closely, and nobody seemed to be still distressed about a hard decision still to be made. They all decided, definitively and permanently, after just that debate apparently.
I’m not willing to call foul play either, as it is plausible that this might happen. But that’s what I found to be “fishy.”
aero on January 7, 2008 at 11:54 AM
I agree that the contrast between the ABC forum and the FNC forum was pronounced in this way. Gibson was pretty impartial and gave every participant a nice, long response time for each of the main categories of questioning. He did it as fairly as I’ve seen it done. Wallace clearly focused his time on Mike, Mitt, and Mack, in hopes of provoking some good explosive rhetoric. He pretty much said so himself afterwards in his debriefing with Brit Hume. Wallace went into the debate with the deliberate intent to sideline Rudy and Fred and try to fan some fire with the perceived frontrunners in NH. No wonder they left Ron Paul out. I’m sure they tried to find a reasonable way to leave Fred and Rudy out, too, but couldn’t quite justify it with any polling data they could find. When he said at the beginning, “One of the five men at this table will be the next Republican nominee,” I’m sure he was thinking, “Well, one of three of these men will be the next Republican nominee….”
aero on January 7, 2008 at 12:16 PM
Yeah but it’s still weird. I mean none of the guys said anything that would really persuade anyone to vote for them. So when one guy gets that much attention during the 2nd most boring debate . . . Unless this is the first time they’ve ever heard them speak . . cept for that one guy :)
I just wonder if there was chatter in the jury box is all.
- The Cat
MirCat on January 7, 2008 at 12:17 PM
Holy cow, you’re so right! Haha!
joewm315 on January 7, 2008 at 3:46 PM
Is this the best they can do to say “they do it to” and wipe the slate clean after CNN’s GOP debate full of Dem candidate supporters’ questions? I don’t really see what the big deal is about having a repeat undecided voter… in fact I have kind of assumed that they had used some in the past, and I almost think Luntz mentioned it.
RightWinged on January 7, 2008 at 4:11 PM
The “hey Chuck” did jump out at me when I saw the clip earlier (yesterday? this morning?), but within a few seconds you can see his name tag in the video. Luntz calling him by name doesn’t really seem to be a big deal in and of itself.
Maybe it not so much indicates recognition as it does the ability to read? ;)
Midas on January 7, 2008 at 4:38 PM