Video: Frank Luntz debunks the focus group non-scandal du jour
posted at 10:45 pm on January 7, 2008 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
We end the day where we began. Luntz is lucky the guy spotted by the Freepers as the “plant” had changed his mind from McCain to Romney between the earlier focus group and the one last night. It makes his explanation here a lot more convincing.
I included a few comments from the new focus group just because they, er, prove a point.
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
whatever happened to the O’Reilly “scuffle” at Obama rally i didn’t get to watch the factor tonight, anyone got the clip?
mainmann on January 7, 2008 at 10:49 PM
Crow taste pretty good sometimes.
Texyank on January 7, 2008 at 10:50 PM
Seriously, how can you be undecided at this point, especially if your first thought is illegal immigration and you stil have McCain as a choice!?!?!?
SouthernGent on January 7, 2008 at 10:53 PM
Wow,AP,
You and Bryan are some busy guys today huh?
conservnut on January 7, 2008 at 10:54 PM
How can you be undecided!
And how could you vote for John McCain!
msipes on January 7, 2008 at 10:58 PM
Dang, talk about scouring the archives. Now this is investigative journalism.
- The Cat
MirCat on January 7, 2008 at 10:59 PM
I think they all raised their hands to say they’ve changed their support during the campaign. It would have been interesting to know who they all supported initially and what made them change.
The media won’t go there in fear that they will all say that they initially supported a candidate that the media convinced them wasn’t a “top-tier” candidate.
Buddahpundit on January 7, 2008 at 11:00 PM
Glad this faux scandal got obliterated.
Vizzini on January 7, 2008 at 11:00 PM
I’m glad they answered the question. I was curious - I thought the guy was probably just a publicity hound, but tracking trends makes sense.
No matter how many times I watch that Onion clip I still laugh.
Spirit of 1776 on January 7, 2008 at 11:00 PM
Idgits rule!
lorien1973 on January 7, 2008 at 11:01 PM
BTW just saw on fox news that New Hampshire votes starts in one hour ?
William Amos on January 7, 2008 at 11:02 PM
Wow, what a bunch of nerf-heads. We’re doomed.
AUINSC on January 7, 2008 at 11:02 PM
At least they arent saying Ron Paul
William Amos on January 7, 2008 at 11:04 PM
Not just idgits. Jellybrained idjits.
snickelfritz on January 7, 2008 at 11:05 PM
Wow. It’s like being a fly on the wall at the Second Continental Congress. Well spoken, Mr. Adams!
a4g on January 7, 2008 at 11:06 PM
Here’s the other one from the archives too.
Spirit of 1776 on January 7, 2008 at 11:07 PM
Though I knew that Luntz was using undecided voters in his focus groups, I guess I just thought that “undecided” actually meant “leaning hard toward a candidate but not totally committed yet” or “I have decided but I’m going to lie and say I’m not so I can get free punch and cookies.” But if they really and truly are undecided, that explains why they always claim to be concerned about issues but always give reasons for their decisions that are not issues-related at all, such as a candidate’s age, saggy jowls, or great hair. They go off gut reactions, like “He seemed presidential,” or “He just looks comfortable up there.” As others have pointed out, they pay lip-service to issues, like the one who said immigration was important, but they put the lie to their own words when they say immigration is important in the same breath that they say McCain is an option.
Luntz isn’t screwy. “Undecided” voters are!
aero on January 7, 2008 at 11:08 PM
No wonder they didnt like fred he actually stands for something unlike the voters !
William Amos on January 7, 2008 at 11:09 PM
Are Idgits related to “Zombies”?
MsDollie on January 7, 2008 at 11:10 PM
I think it is obvious that Luntz only excepts dolts in his survey groups.
TheSitRep on January 7, 2008 at 11:10 PM
New Hampshire law allows towns/villages with fewer than 100(?) voters to vote beginning midnight, lasting until the last person looking to vote gets to vote.
amerpundit on January 7, 2008 at 11:10 PM
I hate this “trend” crap. They are just like polls, causing people not to think for themselves. We are such a bunch of sheep sometimes.
gator70 on January 7, 2008 at 11:14 PM
Oh, and Luntz always raves about how “sophisticated” NH voters are. That may be, but his focus groups aren’t necessarily all that sophisticated. It just occurred to that woman, the day before the primary, that John McCain is kinda old? Really?!
aero on January 7, 2008 at 11:15 PM
Where does Luntz find all these cretin focus group people?
They look like a paper sack of 10 watt lightbulbs.
TexasJew on January 7, 2008 at 11:21 PM
That about debunks evolution AND intelligent design. Thanks, undecided voters!
joewm315 on January 7, 2008 at 11:31 PM
There is absolutely nothing wrong with opting out.
Lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way.
Saltysam on January 7, 2008 at 11:32 PM
I think if Frank Luntz waved some shiny objects in front of his focus group, 80 percent of them would vote for the shiny objects, 19 percent would vote against them for being too flashy. The last person would vote Ron Paul under the belief that Ron held the same paranoid view that shiny objects were responsible for 9/11.
jacobh on January 7, 2008 at 11:37 PM
GOOOOODDDDD GREEEEIIIIFFFFF
New Hampshirites still undecieded
William Amos on January 7, 2008 at 11:53 PM
“Someone told me John McCain was too old….”
After hearing her comment, I get the impression that if someone told her the 19th amendment was a stupid idea she’d sign a petition to have it repealed. Thinking…an easy mark for Penn & Teller.
Gunny on January 7, 2008 at 11:53 PM
From what I read in the comments here, there isn’t a consensus of who the best candidate is. There has been some weeding out of the bad ones, but I can’t blame NH residents for being undecided. There is no clear conservative except for Ron Paul or Fred, and RP has no chance with the media and Fred doesn’t want it badly enough. The remaining choices are meh.
Even if we win, we lose.
fossten on January 8, 2008 at 12:05 AM
I saw a lot of looking around the room when they were putting up their hands to answer. Oh that’s scientific alright. I just wonder what’s happening when they are dialing these polling machines for the graphs.
Rawhide on January 8, 2008 at 12:08 AM
On my way to work this morning a bird pooped on my windshield. This was a clear omen that I needed to reconsider my vote. On the way home from work this afternoon a cardinal, mind you a RED cardinal, flew from left to right in front of my car. Then I knew I had to vote a different way. At the dinner table tonight my husband choked briefly on a broccoli stalk just as the cat came in from the porch and I thought deeply that….
Oh it feels good, living here in New Hampshire,to know I can responsibly contribute to the ongoing establishment of this great republic./s
wepeople on January 8, 2008 at 12:11 AM
Aren’t all towns in NH under 100?
right2bright on January 8, 2008 at 1:04 AM
I feel that focus groups are good examples of “group think”.Watch the people in the Luntz groups,lots of them look around to see what everybody else is doing and then raise their hands.
oldsalt on January 8, 2008 at 1:13 AM
Frank Luntz is tracking a bunch of flip-floppers how can someone changes their mind that much?
I have supported Rudy since the beginning and still do..
He’s the best one!
Chakra Hammer on January 8, 2008 at 3:41 AM
Maybe they are all trying to be “politically correct”, you know like Mitt Romney and John Kerry.. ;)
Chakra Hammer on January 8, 2008 at 4:33 AM
Wow - listen to these twits.
If you’re undecided the day before the primary, you probably shouldn’t vote. You’re too frigging fickle.
Ludwig on January 8, 2008 at 9:20 AM
uh, Paul has a Lifetime ACU rating of 72
he is not conservative in any sense.
jp on January 8, 2008 at 9:23 AM
Frank Luntz is someone conservatives should have nothing to do with. He’s basically an elitist liberal who thinks people are Pavlovian dogs. He’s a leftist liberal who reads Orwell, as opposed to a classic liberal who understands Orwell (notice the paraphrase).
mram on January 8, 2008 at 9:38 AM
props first: I watch oreilly a lot less since michelle left the show.
In the segment he showed, he came off as pretty aggressive and you can see him pushing the buffoon who was trying to get in his way. I wouldn’t have behaved like that but that’s why i’m a craven office monkey. It was either start a ruckus or just give up and let some lackey stop him form asking a question.
meandchi on January 8, 2008 at 9:43 AM
The Luntz segments are my least favorite segments….it reminds me of when he was on Chris Matthews who I detest.
You can tell that the focis group is not sincere…they’re mugging for the cameras trying to say someting witty or deep and they just come out sounding like a bunch of self important dolts.
Can the focus group.
Just keep showing the candidtaes speaking for themselves and let everyone make up their own minds.
Anyway, I love it when the liberal media hacks plug candidates who get walloped. The looks of surprise and disillusionment are priceless when their favorites get beat!
wildweasel on January 8, 2008 at 12:26 PM
Undecideds that late = Republicans are uninspiring
Drunk Report on January 8, 2008 at 6:02 PM