Posted on 01/06/2008 11:41:17 PM PST by CounterCounterCulture
Luntz may have a dog in the Republican race that he wants to promote, but he’s not a Democrat. He used to advise Gingrich and other Republicans, and he supposed to be the man who came up with the term “death tax” to refer to the estate tax.
It just has been and it's going to take off like WILDFIRE!! :O)
I’m guessing that’s not him, but we did have an undecided Freeper make one of Luntz’ focus groups, and he reported that at the end Luntz said he loved what he said, and would like to have him back.
I can’t remember who it was though.
BTW, it’s not interesting that they same guy was there twice — the question is did he say he had committed by the end of the previous debate?
Does the september transcript show him saying he was for Romney at the end of the debate?
He was for McCain last time, and now he was an undecided. Did he actually end up for Romney at the end?
Both debates were in New Hampshire, so it’s not like they brought him in from another state.
If he was articulate in the first focus group, and was undecided, Luntz would bring him back.
Awesome catch!!....the only thing he appears UNDECIDED about is whether to sit in the front or middle...lol
In november, when Luntz' focus group picked Thompson, the focus group was the best thing since sliced bread.
It's a shame how every supposedly rational view on an issue, personality, or position is now decided on a simple binary scale here -- based solely on how it relates to Fred Thompson.
“Luntz may have a dog in the Republican race that he wants to promote, but he’s not a Democrat.”
Still, there’s some uncertainty. I lean toward believing Luntz is a liberal, based on the way he conducts this “focus group” in order to deceptively influence public opinion against the real conservatives and also because of his book Words that Work.
As I’ve heard Luntz describe it, the basic premise of his book peddles the importance of language. This premise is right in line with basic leftist ideology which as I understand it is largely dependent on the notion that language has the power to “create” reality.
Thanks!
This is not about who supported who after the debates, it's about planting the same people to promote a specific agenda for a particular candidate.
The Dims do it, as we have seen Hitlery plant her own questions to her audience as well as invade the Repub debates, and she got caught. Now, we have Luntz's planted 'undecideds' getting caught.
That is the issue.
He is a luntz-o-crat... out for himself and he is a liberal.
LLS
It is beyond me how Luntz could be so stupid.
His credibility as a pollster depends at a minimum on the appearance of neutrality.
Doh!
From what I saw last night, those signs were for Ron Paul.
As someone else pointed out, the person in the picture here was promoting McCain the last time.
I can’t watch the full video for this one, so I don’t know, but some have said at the end he was for Romney this time, although nobody’s posted a transcript or quote so I don’t know if that’s just people saying things without knowing.
But it does seem that he isn’t promoting a “specific agenda for a particular candidate”, if he was for McCain in september and is for Romney now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.