January 7, 2008
More On Frank Luntz Group
UPDATE: And for those who love to accuse me of coming up with these things myself, this story had already been picked up by Michelle Malkin, The Campaign Spot at NRO, Bryan at Hot Air, PPP, hillbillypolitics, wizbangpolitics, thebuffalobeast. They all picked it up before I did.
I’m not blaming the campaigns, but I think, as Malkin says, the blame belongs on Luntz:
Yep. I think Frank Luntz, not any of the campaigns, is the one who needs to answer the questions about who Mr. Undecided is–and how he managed to end up in both focus groups. Transparency about how all of the people in the room ended up there would be wise.
And that would be before the second one was found.
I was hoping to have a vacation today since we’re not competing in NH, but I guess not. I’m back with my trusty still photographs! 
Person #2 who attended Luntz’s event both times:
UPDATE: Here’s the first person at both debates as pointed out earlier and by Michelle Malkin:
Photos of 1st man found here (beware if language sensitive, it’s a Paul forum)
http://race42008.com/2008/01/07/more-on-frank-luntz-group/trackback/
January 7th, 2008 at 2:40 pm
Well, that also gives me a sigh of relief. It means anything these people said has to be taken with a grain of salt the size of a battleship.
January 7th, 2008 at 2:40 pm
Oh no, another person who has been undecided for a few months. You guys got em!
Doesn’t matter, everyone agrees Romney ran the house last night.
January 7th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
i don’t get it? what is the point?
January 7th, 2008 at 2:44 pm
if he is going to use the same people, he should at least disclose that info.
January 7th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
What’s the point TOMMY???
Is this because the group thought FDT was a bit boring?
January 7th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
In the first picture, on the right, is that Mitt’s hand holding a gun to their head?
January 7th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
thats grasping at straws i think
January 7th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
Point?
My observation is that that particular person seemed to be going on what everyone else was saying. She looked around before she raised her hand on anything.
January 7th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
Rombots calm down, we all know that these groups are being thrown your way.
January 7th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
Clearly the NH focus group was a set up. There wasn’t a single person from Tennessee.
January 7th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
Tommy,
How do you know that those two ladies are not twins or just similar looking? Do you know for sure that it is the same person both times?
January 7th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
Tommy,
How do you know that those two ladies are not twins or just similar looking? Do you know for sure that it is the same person both times?
January 7th, 2008 at 2:47 pm
I don’t think this has anything to do with Romney, Jason. This has something to do with Frank Lunt, and these people he’s using. I said myself that Romney had a good night last night. I am more interested in the comments they made about my personal candidate, which seemed to be against the grain of those who watched on TV and blogged about it.
January 7th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Clare, becuase this is the second person to be used twice.
January 7th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
This stuff is just so funny. Luntz is going to be embarassed.
January 7th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
Tommy chalk it up to Yankee prejudice.
Yankees assume bad things about white males who use a Southern drawl. Southerners are ignorant or dull in these voter’s minds.
January 7th, 2008 at 2:50 pm
I see your point Tommy, and let’s take the 2 people out that you have found as repeat offenders. That would mean that instead of 23 out of 25 choosing Romney in the end, 21 of 25 did. Still impressive I would think.
January 7th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
Sorry jared, it would be 21 out of 23, right?
January 7th, 2008 at 2:53 pm
i have always thought the luntz thing although fun to watch is stupid.
January 7th, 2008 at 2:53 pm
If you look real close, the guy in the front has a cross and a “Go Hillary” button. It is a subliminal trick to get us to vote for the Hillary/Huckabee ticket once it’s official.
January 7th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
TOMMY…I am not sure, but didn’t that woman in the first photo actually make a positive comment about FDT?? I thought so, but it might have been another woman in the front row…it occurred after the two people on the left made negative comments about FDT.
January 7th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Think about it….A room full of people show up to play “focus group” with Frank Luntz. First, what’s the likelihood of that many people being “undecided” this late into the NH campaign? And then, secondly, what’s the likelihood of that many people who have been undecided until the 11th hour deciding so decisively for one candidate after one debate? I think the whole Luntz focus group is as bogus as Fox’s “fair and balanced” routine.
January 7th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
At this point, I trust Fox News to be “fair and balanced” about as much as I can throw them. The other night they had on their front-page after Iowa results came in that Huckabee took first place and that Thompson and McCain were battling for 2nd. I think they missed someone there who cliearly had 2nd locked up. Then today they report that a poll which showed Romney with 31% support to McCains 34% as Romney only having 21% to McCain’s 34%. Either they don’t care to double check their work, or they are trying way to hard to swing this thing one way or another. My personal opinion, is that they are trying to set Romney up. I think that if he comes in 2nd, they will refer back to their own analysis which said he should have won. I think Carl Cameron is in Huckabee’s pocket. I just think they are clearly working on an agenda.
January 7th, 2008 at 2:55 pm
The Luntz group is a few dozen people, hardly enough to be statistically significant. FOX does it just to have one more reason to watch their debate instead of some other channels.
January 7th, 2008 at 2:57 pm
ilfigo, i think i remember that as well. they were supposed to say why they didn’t like fred but she went off on how he was great.
January 7th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
Hilarious. The same people come to each debate and start off by swearing they’re uncommitted but favor some random candidate other than Mitt. At the end of each session they’re overwhelmingly in favor of Mitt. Next debate they’re all unsure about some non-Rom guy at the beginning, all Mittnamoured at the end. Rinse. Repeat. Brain washing at its finest.
January 7th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
#18 – yea, whatever it is. I just think it is silly to put much credibility in this whole Luntz thing. It is interesting, yes. But hardly shows a trend. People work under a “herd” mentality, and they will do what everyone around them does. I am sure that they talk to one another as the debate goes on, and if there is a particularly good speaker in the group, they could probably convince the group to see it their way. Not taking anything away from Romney’s strong performances in the debates, I just wouldn’t put much in the outcome of the focus groups. That said, I liked their outcome though!
January 7th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
That’s my whole point #22 and #23
I don’t doubt that Mitt Romney did well, but I think Fox News is doing something clearly wrong in theri coverage.
January 7th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
In regards to FOX NEWS…most people thought they were in Rudy’s pockets to begin with…during the last Iowa Des Moines register debate, the All-star panel said that Huck was the winner (contrary to focus group and most bloggers).
To think that they are for Romney is absurd…they continue to say that Romney is done if he gets 2nd, no real news on the Wyoming caucus, nor was there any report that Romney is leading all among delegates and still will with a 2nd place in NH!
January 7th, 2008 at 2:59 pm
I mean, those two could just be similar looking. It is kind of strange though. I was happy with the response Romney got, but I thought that Thompson did well at the debate, and for them to unanimously think he did poorly was weird.
January 7th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
This focus group phoniness leans me to believe that Romney will win tomorrow.
I believe Luntz and FOX were lazy in who they choose but that Romney supporters deliberately lied about their “undecided” status.
If his supporters have gone so far as to stack such a group I believe they have other tricks up their sleeve.
I also believe Romney will not be elected President.
January 7th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
so hunter’s announcement was that he was not going to drop out?
January 7th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
Opinionated,
Please offer one shred of evidence that romney supporters deliberately stacked the room and lied. Do we even know if the lady with the arrow is in fact the same person, or someone who just looked a like? And is it beyond the realm of possibility that Mitt just wooed people last night? He did woo nearly every blogger and pundit.
You sound utterly retarded.
January 7th, 2008 at 3:07 pm
actually they thought they all idd well except huckabee if you watched the whole response.
January 7th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
Jason,
I don’t think Romney stacked the room. I think he won the debate. However, I think there’s something else going on.
Dubious in #34,
I agree.
January 7th, 2008 at 3:09 pm
Question: How did the duplicates vote in the focus groups?
January 7th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
Tony,
I don’t know, I think they are swayed in a favorable direction and pick from certain candidates. I thought McCain was awful last night, and yet their comments didn’t exactly go with their numbers.
January 7th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
According to this report — http://www.pollster.com/blogs/poll_of_pollsters_rating_the_n.php — Fox’s polls aren’t rated as very reliable.
January 7th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
33
Common sense.
No one gets converted in two hours, being undecided for months and through numerous debates, to all of a sudden ape one campaign’s platitudes in remarks.
I posted my opinion of the phoniness of this group on the debate thread as soon as they opened their mouth. Based not just on what they said but the words they used.
January 7th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
There may or may not be. But is it unreasonable to use some of the same people again in a focus group? Especially if they are undecided?
And I was responding to Opinionated’s charges of Romney people stacking the room.
January 7th, 2008 at 3:13 pm
BTW, I noticed that particular woman caught in both groups looking around at the others in the group before she would commit to raising her hand.
January 7th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
Yea. If you remember, All night I heard that McCain was tanking on their dials, and yet I don’t remember one negative comment about him.
January 7th, 2008 at 3:16 pm
I think they keep their regular people and bring in certain newcomers. Apparently, a Ron Paul supporter got into the focus group last night and videotaped the whole thing. Luntz would make comments about Paul (who wasn’t there) that were pretty low. I wonder about the other candidates and what he said.
January 7th, 2008 at 3:17 pm
41. Greg: I was about to say the same thing. I actually thought it was funny that she cared so much what the others were doing. How did she vote, though? Can you remember?
January 7th, 2008 at 3:18 pm
Fox News has been anti Romney for a very long time. Most of us know that they are pulling for Rudy, and whatever it takes short term to support that long term goal, that’s the way they go, thus sometimes it looks like they are directly for Rudy, sometimes for Huckabee (to win Iowa), and sometimes for McCain (to win NH). Any Romney fan watching can see this situation as clear as a bell.
To say that a sample size of 25 is insufficient to be statistically meaningful, shows you don’t know much about statistics. It all depends on what you are looking at. For example, with 5 candidates to choose from, and for 23 of 25 to choose the same candidate as having won the debate has huge statistical significance. I won’t get into the details of this, because its quite complex. Also, when they are using their little dial indicators, they have no idea what others are doing, unlike the show of hands thing. In that situation, for 25 people to show an average reading of 95 when the highest possible is 100 is extremely statistically significant. For it to just happened that they all would choose a particular point in time to be that high (without it being warranted) would be extremely remote, as in 1 in the billions somewhere (literally).
January 7th, 2008 at 3:21 pm
Tony, I recall she went with the herd.
Basically, anyone who’s still reportedly undecided at this stage of the NH primary race doesn’t know what they believe.
January 7th, 2008 at 3:24 pm
Illinoisguy, as a Rudy supporter, take my word for it that Fox is NOT pulling for Rudy. My sense was that through the summer and early fall, Fox was propping up the impending Fred campaign, but I’ll defer to a Fred supporter to let us know if they agree.
January 7th, 2008 at 3:24 pm
#39 – You have to remember these people are not nearly as tuned into this thing as we are. They may have given very little thought to the process, and a 2 hour debate for them is a tremendously long time for them to devote to a decision like this. They probably came in with the intent of trying to make a decision, and based on what they heard last night, it’s easy to see how they could have chosen Mitt as the right candidate. Most of the open minded bloggers on this site agreed Mitt won the debate, even if they didn’t agree with everything.
January 7th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
Opinionated, you are going against your best buddy, MetroRepublican’s mantle. He claims (as have many of us) that the voters do not make up their minds until days, hours or even minutes before they stand in the voting booth. So, yes, there may be a great number of voters who are leaning toward the candidates, but that does not make them absolutely sure of their decisions.
January 7th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
48. Illinoisguy “They may have given very little thought to the process, and a 2 hour debate for them is a tremendously long time for them to devote to a decision like this.”
This is a good point. It is difficult for political wonks to remember how little most people tend to think about a campaign before making a decision.
Most of us at Race42008 have probably spent hundreds of hours thinking about it. Most voters, a few hours at most in research. Casual conversations here or there. Whatever they happen to see on tv on the news or in ads between their favorite shows.
January 7th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
So there are a couple of people that were there from last time.
That just means they are still considered undecided. I don’t see what the point is.
Tommy, if you post something like this please give us your conspircay theories or reasons.
January 7th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
It seem like anything that breaks in Romney’s favor has to be meat with accusation of fraud and lies. Please, how would it help Luntz’s career to commit fraud, and if he wanted to do something dubious, why wouldn’t he cover his tracks better?
Conspiricy theories begin.
January 7th, 2008 at 3:36 pm
bjalder,
I don’t think this has anything to do with Romney. I think Romney won the debate, if anyone did. I think they are predisposed to bash FDT, since the whole thing when Jim Mills left Thompson’s campaign.
Greg,
Then you don’t watch Fox News. Since Thompson declared, they have torn into him whenever they get the opportunity.
January 7th, 2008 at 3:37 pm
Actually,
I think they’re propping up McCain, if you want my opinion. Notice how badly we all thought he did, and not a negative word was spoken about him.
January 7th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
There have been focus groups before. I wondered about their intelligence and knowledge but didn’t question their legitimacy.
Last night was different. They didn’t act and sound like someone who had just had their minds made up.
The ones who spoke made campaign speeches, including issues not touched upon in the debate, for Romney.
As a post at that exact moment will evidence, it struck me immediately that this group did not go in undecided.
January 7th, 2008 at 3:39 pm
People, Jim Geraghty mentioned this today, as well. These aren’t conspiracy theories working in my brain.
January 7th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
I’m not the one who even came up with this one. This was picked up by Hotair, the campaign spot, and Malkin.
January 7th, 2008 at 3:45 pm
Yes, Tommy, they are temporarily propping up McCain, because they feel Romney is the bigger threat if he takes NH, and he would be. But their longer term goal is to support Rudy.
January 7th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
Something I just realized, Chuck, the guy who was first noticed, in both videos only basically says a candidate is viable against the Dems, McCain in the first, and Mitt in last night’s. That didn’t seem like a ringing endorsement either.
January 7th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
Here is Hannity raising money for Rudy at a fund raiser, but it goes a lot deeper than that.
On the December 17 edition of Fox News’ Hannity & Colmes, co-host Sean Hannity interviewed former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R), but did not disclose during the 13-minute interview that he has reportedly helped raise money for Giuliani’s presidential campaign. On August 19, the New York Daily News reported that Hannity “introduced the Republican front-runner at a closed-door, $250-per-head fund-raiser Aug. 9 in Cincinnati, campaign officials acknowledge.” Bill Shine, Fox’s senior vice president of programming, was quoted in the article saying, “Sean is not a journalist — Sean is a conservative commentator.”
January 7th, 2008 at 3:59 pm
I think is stupid to that Romney doesn’t win that debate, however I really think thompson did well. from my point of view this was the result:
1-Romney
.
.
.
2-Thompson
3-McCain (he looked old and tired)
4-Rudy
5-Huckabee (He doesn’t belong in this group of excelents candidates)
January 7th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
[...] group”: …http://digg.com/… Fox News and Frank Luntz caught red-handed!: More On Frank Luntz Group: I was hoping to have a vacation today since we?re not competing in NH, bu… Video: Ron Paul Supporters Confront GOP Pollster Frank Luntz: The GOP doesn’t want Paul [...]
January 7th, 2008 at 4:21 pm
#55. Tommy, I think it’s interesting how people’s take on Fox’s bias toward this or that candidate is colored by their whom they themselves support. Earlier this summer/fall, Fox seemed to have Fred on more than any other candiate.
January 7th, 2008 at 4:23 pm
Jason,
While there may be no evidence that Romney supporters deliberately stacked the room last night, may I remind you (and others) of antics quite similar that I personally witnessed Mitt supporters being guilty of six months ago.
Thanks to our archives, here’s the exchange on July 9, 2007 between you and I (along with a question from commenter, Murphy):
Aron Goldman Says:
July 9th, 2007 at 10:38 am
Young Republican convention organizer Brian Graham: “Straw Polls are intended to be fun, not to be scientific.â€
Aron Goldman Says:
July 9th, 2007 at 11:21 am
The results of all straw polls, which are nothing more than blatant attempts at media manipulation, should receive as much coverage in the news as the pre-determined outcomes of WWE wrestling matches in the sports section…which is to say, NONE!
To claim “victory†in a straw poll, in my estimation, is worthy of derision and ridicule, and any reporting by the media should seek to expose these contrived events for the irrelevant farces they are.
Jason Bonham Says:
July 9th, 2007 at 11:56 am
Isn’t the whole process about media manipulation? Dictionary.com defines manipulation as “skillful or artful management.†What candidate is not trying to manage the media through the money it raises.
I think it’s kind of silly to hear other camps whine when Romney beats them outat a straw poll or in Iowa because he spent money to win.
Is Giuliani not planning on spending money? Is he planning on donating all the money to the Council for Truth in MEdia and run merely on his 9-11 accolades? Not a chance. He is raising money so he can try and sway voters minds as Romney has. It’s called campaigning, they all do it and Romney is just more successful at it at this moment.
Packing a poll? Isn’t that what got GWB the win in 04? Only we called it get out the vote? Did George buy all those votes with his manipulative ads and sinister staffers who asked people to come vote? I mean this is nothing more than ridiculous sour grapes.
Instead of Thompson supporters (not really here but on other places) whining, why not try and exercise some organizational prowress as well?
Aron Goldman Says:
July 9th, 2007 at 12:24 pm
Jason,
Dictionary.com also defines manipulation as “devious management, especially for one’s own advantage.â€
Feel free to align yourself with a candidate who has no reservations about engaging in shifty or crooked practices.
You could make comparable analogies of the actions of Romney’s campaign in rigging a straw poll with Bush’s 2004 victory, if President Bush had actually pulled strings to allow double votes, convicted felons and the deceased to vote for him. That would be packing a poll.
Trying to stand up for the ‘integrity’ of a straw poll is, frankly, a ridiculous, embarrassing attempt to defend the indefensible.
Jason Says:
July 9th, 2007 at 12:48 pm
Aron,
Are you serious or scared?
if President Bush had actually pulled strings to allow double votes, convicted felons and the deceased to vote for him.
OK…
It gets old Aron, nothing shifty has been uncovered, except you leaving out the first word of the definition you just quoted…
Shrewd or devious management, especially for one’s own advantage.
Why did you leave out Shrewd? Was Romney Shrewd? Yes. Was he devious? You will need to show the law that was broken to prove that one.
You could make comparable analogies of the actions of Romney’s campaign in rigging a straw poll with Bush’s 2004 victory, if President Bush had actually pulled strings to allow double votes, convicted felons and the deceased to vote for him. That would be packing a poll.
Can you please show me where Romney did these things you mentioned? All these things are illegal, please show me where anything Romney did was illegal. Romney just (if Thompson’s accusations are true) got people to vote for him. The whole committee and candidates new the rule changes and they did not do anything until they lost.
I think your beef is you are beginning to realize just how potent Romney can be, and it’s going to be a difficult task to deal with come caucus time. I am sorry, but right now all the complainers just sound like a sore looser.
murphy Says:
July 9th, 2007 at 12:50 pm
Aron,
Do you have any evidence of Romney pulling strings to allow double votes, or convicted felons and the deceased to vote for him? Those certainly seem shifty, as do your attempts to associate crooked practices with Romney.
Aron Goldman Says:
July 9th, 2007 at 1:17 pm
murphy,
I was there. Because I put no weight whatsoever into bogus straw polls and do not feel such contrived results are newsworthy, I dismissed accusations by irate Thompson supporters at the event that Romney supporters were voting multiple times and complaints that many people (young teens and those over 40) weren’t supposed to be casting votes. The charges of double/triple voting I can not verify, but I did witness the anger from members of Fred’s team and there were many individuals well over 40 years of age improperly taking part in the poll.
Rigging a straw poll is not illegal because they are not supposed to be of any consequence. As the Young Republican convention organizer said: “Straw Polls are intended to be funâ€
Lastly, it was Jason, not me, who, without basis, attempted to draw comparisons between Romney packing a straw poll and Bush, allegedly, ‘packing the polls’ in 2004.
Jason Says:
July 9th, 2007 at 2:21 pm
Aron,
Once again your use of words is at odds. How did Romney engage in “rigging?†You are accusing him of something that you choose not to back up with evidence. Did he act dishonestly? Did break a rule of the straw poll?
Yes I did draw a comparison between GOTV of Bush 2004 and your complaining. You answered with a list of things that are highly illegal and some even felonies, nothing of the sort happened with Bush, at best your response was wrong if not misleading.
Then sending people to a site that is clearly for Thompson who I guess we should believe because he is the one complaining, yet we don’t have any other candidates complaining and we have nothing in proof worthy, only some Thompson supporters complaining.
It just gets kind of Ridiculous. Whether had people show up for the poll or not, it should show Romney can work with in the rules to overcome even the old war horse with no substance.
Aron Goldman Says:
July 9th, 2007 at 3:06 pm
Jason,
Yes, rules of the straw poll were broken, as only those under 40 were supposed to participate; and I saw many people in their 40’s, 50’s, 60’s and 70’s with my own eyes casting ballots for a straw poll in which they were ineligible to vote.
I also watched a group of Thompson supporters all riled up over their observations of individuals voting multiple times. Their level of exasperation hardly seemed contrived. Instead of investigating further, I blew it off, laughing at them for taking seriously something that has no meaning (or shouldn’t, at the very least). Furthermore, it should be noted that this straw poll was conducted immediately after Romney’s speech, many hours after Thompson had left the event.
Personally, I couldn’t care less what methods Romney employed to stack the results in his favor…because the outcome is IRRELEVANT.
My biggest beef is not with Romney for manipulating a survey that’s intended as nothing more than a “fun†exercise, but with the media for even reporting it.
January 7th, 2008 at 5:51 pm
First, assuming that they are, indeed, the exact same people:
I know it must be hard for some of us who have been deeply committed to one candidate for it seems like forever to understand, but there are people out there who have not genuinely made up their minds on this. They are vacilating from one candidate to another, to undecided, back to the first candidate, then back to undecided, then to the first candidate again, then to another, then another, etc. etc. etc. I have seen numerous people make decisions, only to start second guessing themselves within hours,
even minutes.
They could also just be media junkies. They get wined and dined by Fox News, get some lovely parting gifts, and they get to be seen on National Television.
There is an old saying that goes, “Never ascribe malice to something that can be explained by stupidity”. Words to live by.
January 7th, 2008 at 7:34 pm
I knew something was fishy about that focus group. I watched the debate with 8 family members, 2 huckabee supporters, 1 fred thompson supporter, 4 mitt romney supporters, and a democrat. Everyone in the room agreed that mitt made himself look like the world’s biggest jackass last night, especially when he kept interrupting other candidates. I had been thinking that I could vote for whoever got the nomination, but after last night I could support 4 out of the 5 candidates… if Romney is the nominee (fat chance I know), I will sit at home, and I know many others who are equally turned off by his typical Northeastern rudeness and elitism feel the same way.