• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Luntz focus group sums up debate

He makes his living in many different ways Pete. The part you highlighted is what he does for his consulting firm. It's what makes him such a sought after political consultant and a valuable asset to his clients. That however, is not part of what he does as a pollster, or with his focus groups. If he did that as a pollster, he wouldn't be able to craft the correct messages for his political clients.

Use a little common sense for Christ's sake... As far as the political aspects of what he does, he uses his focus groups to determine what the public thinks about the candidates, their ads and their message, in order to determine what's effective, what's not effective, and why, so he can better serve his clients. That requires him to take every measure possible to prevent influencing their opinions, so he can effectively craft a positive message for his clients and a plan can be implemented. Once that is done, the cycle starts all over again.

The opinions of those focus groups on TV after a debate are based on the words, thoughts and messages they received from the candidates, not from Luntz. The only way he could manipulate their responses, would be to ask them leading questions... Do you have any examples of Luntz asking leading questions, or setting up a question to illicit a certain response?

Adam, even if you choose to ignore my response to you, feel free to answer the question I posed to Pete.
 
Adam, even if you choose to ignore my response to you, feel free to answer the question I posed to Pete.

Seriously, man, give it up! Everyone knows who Luntz is. He is, without a doubt, the most famous Republican shill in the world. He makes his living bending language to support Republican causes. I already gave the you example -- ON TAPE -- of him saying that he told his group that Palin fought the bridge to nowhere, when in fact she supported it. WTF else do you need? I already pointed out that he has been sanctioned on two occasions by two national polling organizations for his methodology. Just let it go. No one who isn't a hard core right winger takes Luntz seriously when he purports to be unbiased.
 
He makes his living in many different ways Pete. The part you highlighted is what he does for his consulting firm. It's what makes him such a sought after political consultant and a valuable asset to his clients. That however, is not part of what he does as a pollster, or with his focus groups. If he did that as a pollster, he wouldn't be able to craft the correct messages for his political clients.

Use a little common sense for Christ's sake... As far as the political aspects of what he does, he uses his focus groups to determine what the public thinks about the candidates, their ads and their message, in order to determine what's effective, what's not effective, and why, so he can better serve his clients. That requires him to take every measure possible to prevent influencing their opinions, so he can effectively craft a positive message for his clients and a plan can be implemented. Once that is done, the cycle starts all over again.

The opinions of those focus groups on TV after a debate are based on the words, thoughts and messages they received from the candidates, not from Luntz. The only way he could manipulate their responses, would be to ask them leading questions... Do you have any examples of Luntz asking leading questions, or setting up a question to illicit a certain response?

Can you tell me why most of the people in the focus group mostly voted for Obama in 2008? I would think that roughly half of the undecideds would have voted for John McCain in 2008, but that doesn't seem to be the case. The selection of the group is biased, because they were already leaning against President Obama. Otherwise they wouldn't be undecided voters.


Re:Bold above: You do not know that. He could have used his body to influence what they thought during the debate. Haven't you ever wondered why the focus groups say things that you agree with?
 
Re:Bold above: You do not know that. He could have used his body to influence what they thought during the debate. Haven't you ever wondered why the focus groups say things that you agree with?

The focus group is also addressed before the debate so changes can be tracked. A perfect example for Luntz to do some push polling.
 
Seriously, man, give it up! Everyone knows who Luntz is. He is, without a doubt, the most famous Republican shill in the world. He makes his living bending language to support Republican causes. I already gave the you example -- ON TAPE -- of him saying that he told his group that Palin fought the bridge to nowhere, when in fact she supported it. WTF else do you need? I already pointed out that he has been sanctioned on two occasions by two national polling organizations for his methodology. Just let it go. No one who isn't a hard core right winger takes Luntz seriously when he purports to be unbiased.

I see you have decided to respond to my post after all...

It's really unfortunate that you aren't honest enough to at least retract those falsehoods and unsupported accusation you made based on that phony Media Matters piece... But oh well.

I wish I could say I expected different from you, but unfortunately I can't. You did exactly what I've come to expect from you, and it's a damned shame. In my view, standing by those phony allegations not only speaks volumes about the kind of person you are, it also creates further doubt for me about the integrity of your beliefs.

Have a nice day.
 
Can you tell me why most of the people in the focus group mostly voted for Obama in 2008? I would think that roughly half of the undecideds would have voted for John McCain in 2008, but that doesn't seem to be the case. The selection of the group is biased, because they were already leaning against President Obama. Otherwise they wouldn't be undecided voters.

Because either those are the people he wanted opinions from (I know I did), or there just aren't that many people who voted for McCain in 2008, that are still undecided this late in the race with 2 debates already in the can...

To be honest Pete, I don't know what your beef is here... There is absolutely nothing wrong or improper about surveying specific groups of voters, as long as it's disclosed and the group isn't being misrepresented in some way. And just so you know, the first debate they were about even between those who voted Obama, and those who voted McCain... Second debate was about 60/40 for Obama, and this last one was 63/37 Obama.

Look Pete, McCain didn't get elected in 2008, so there is not much reason for anyone to reconsider that support. Obama has had 4 years, so surveying the people that voted for him in 2008 to see where they stand now is very significant. Besides, do you really think that the people who didn't support Obama in 2008, have been given much of a reason to support him now?




Re:Bold above: You do not know that. He could have used his body to influence what they thought during the debate.

I have been given no reason to believe any different than what I stated Pete. If you have any evidence to the contrary, please share it with me.

Haven't you ever wondered why the focus groups say things that you agree with?

They sure as hell didn't sit all that well with me in 2008, when all 3 of his groups thought Obama won the debates. So to answer your question, no I haven't wondered that, because they don't always say things that I agree with.
 
Back
Top Bottom