Skip to main content

View Diary: A 'frightened to death' Frank Luntz offers Republicans advice on Occupy Wall Street (174 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  And They Do... (8+ / 0-)

    I don't understand why everyone here hates Luntz.  Unfortunately for Democrats he has chosen to be hired by Conservatives and Republicans. Democrats have their own analysts, he is just better at finding out what people are really thinking.  Have you ever watched Luntz work with a Focus Group?  He can really find out what they are thinking.  If Donna Brazile and James Carville were as good, the Democrats  would do better at messaging.

    •  I think the guy is brilliant.... (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      msmacgyver, DRo, tb mare, claude
      Have you ever watched Luntz work with a Focus Group?  He can really find out what they are thinking.  If Donna Brazile and James Carville were as good, the Democrats  would do better at messaging

      ....and perceptive.

      unfortunately, he uses his talents for wicked ends

      I got yer 'pony'.....RIGHT HERE (don't ask what I did with the 'unicorn.')

      by jds1978 on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 01:14:29 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Luntz is just building on the (4+ / 0-)

        foundation which has been built up by decades of Limbaughisms, GOPer bumper sticker chatter and Fox Pavlovian conditioning.

        Luntz is not playing to an informed voter base.

        May the forces of evil become confused on the way to your house. George Carlin

        by msmacgyver on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 01:24:00 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  In political messaging (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ahumbleopinion, msmacgyver

          I think it is better to assume an uninformed voter base that you won't be able to educate to your liking.  I don't think this is a matter of a populace brainwashed by corporations and moneyed interests, but a facet of human nature.  It is wildly inefficient and impractical to expect everyone to be policy wonks.

          Liberals would do better if only people weren't real people.

      •  No, he's a Pied piper (5+ / 0-)

        He leads low information conservatives thru a series of questions that will bring them to the realization he wants them to have. His framing would be shown for the shoddy construction it is if the democrats would simply push back. They would see how it flimsy his verbal pre fab crap is.

        For instance, 'death tax'. You can't tax the dead. You can't make them serve on a jury or call them on the phone. So take death out of it and frame it as a tax on the lucky sperm club for getting a pile of money they didn't earn. Define the inheritance tax as a tax on the few and very much alive lottery winners. Respectfully of course.

        This clown is beatable. Nobody as gone toe to toe with him yet. That he is scared of OWS is another victory for this leaderless, goalless, formless all powerful fog called almost everybody.  

        •  Thom Hartmann once pressed him on this (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Grabber by the Heel

          and he replied it's because the tax happens when you die....a shallow response that makes no sense when you delve into it, because the dead person is not taxed....notice he did not say the dead should not be taxed ( because that would sound foolish; most people, even knuckleheads, will realize in a minute or so that you can't tax the dead ) just" it happens when you die"

          •  Think I heard that exchange. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            leftangler

            So when they say death tax, we say the tax isn't on the dead but on the very few, very much alive heirs who have inherited more than $5,000,000. Or ask them if they think the tax is on the dead. Flush them out of the talking point pocket.

            I think the subliminal here is "See the Democrats even tax the dead." If they have to say, "Of course I didn't mean it is a tax on the dead," then the conversation is back in peoples heads and out of their guts. Emotion to reason. It is now about what is a fair tax and not about grave robbing.

             If the framing they use can make them seem foolish, Democrats should make them look foolish. And none of the Luntz talking points makes much sense if you think about them and don't just absorb them subliminally over and over again.

            And the tax doesn't happen when you die. Things are done happening to you after you die. It happens to the heir of the  deceased. You can only tax the living.

            Dems have to learn to be just as relentless as the repugs. And this may mean a little more mud time than non-repugs are used to.

             

    •  I think you're right. (4+ / 0-)

      Personally -- and I can't speak for everyone -- I resent him in the way that I resent a talented opponent. His particular bag of tricks seems better suited for Republicans, but perhaps that's just because Dems have largely abandoned the idea of wedge issues -- which is something he is pretty good at.

      Rather than trying to drive a spike between, say, affluent social conservatives and working class social conservatives, by appealing to the latter on bread and butter economic issues, Dems will -- with great futility -- try to demonstrate their own social conservatism. Rather than using a concepts like privacy, agency, and dignity to drive a wedge separating doctrinaire anti-choice activists and those who are on the fence, Dems often (but not always) try to placate religious conservatives at the expense of women. (For example, see this.)

      Luntz is just kinda good at generating language that can be used to siphon off potential Dem voters. Rather than gnashing our teeth over him, we should learn to do it ourselves. The "99%" is a good start, and this is why it has Luntz so afraid.

      Nothing requires a greater effort of thought than arguments to justify the rule of non-thought. -- Milan Kundera

      by Dale on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 01:30:01 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yeah, I've met the guy, he's very good. He picked (0+ / 0-)

      Republicans for ideological reasons btw.

      •  His Positions May Be Closer To The R's...But (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        FG

        his main goal is  to make money.  Many political operatives work against their philosophical positions.  Dick Morris is the best example.

        If the R's wouldn't pay him, he would work for anyone that would.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site