The Pollster in Exile - Frank Luntz Runs Into a Wall of GOP Denial

The Washington Post ^ | February 1, 2007 | Robert D. Novak

[neverdem]

Pollster Frank Luntz for the past decade has issued warnings to his fellow Republicans that they did not want to hear, but never has he been so out of touch with them as he is today. "The Republican message machine is a skeleton of its former self," Luntz told me. "These people have no idea how the American people react to them."

Luntz sees a disconnect between Republicans and voters that projects a grim future for the party. That contradicts what House and Senate Republicans are saying to each other in closed party conferences. While Luntz views 2006 election defeats as ominous portents, the party's congressional leaders see only transitory setbacks and now dwell on bashing Democrats.

Like those of Cassandra of ancient Troy, Luntz's prophecies of impending disaster have been both accurate and disregarded. Republicans have never been very comfortable hearing critics in closed conferences. He is not invited to such meetings today. "They do not want to hear the truth," Luntz told me. While truth-telling is celebrated by Republican reformers such as presidential front-runner John McCain, it is a decidedly minority view in the GOP.

Luntz's truth is summarized in a 10-page "addendum," inspired by the 2006 election fiasco, to his new book, "Words That Work" (about the political use of language). He delayed publication and lost Christmas sales in order to deliver a wakeup call to his party.

"The Republican Party that lost those historic elections was a tired, cranky shell of the articulate, reformist, forward-thinking movement that was swept into office in 1994 on a wave of positive change," Luntz wrote. He went on to say that the Republicans of 2006 "were an ethical morass, more interested in protecting their jobs than protecting the people they served. The 1994 Republicans came to 'revolutionize' Washington. Washington won."

[bonehead4freedom]

The problem was the Republican's spent to much time trying to please the media and the Democrats and worried about what they thought but blew off what the people who elected them wanted which was lower taxes,smaller government,strong defense and judges who follow the constitution.What we got instead was a mega drug plan,more federal control over education giving the N.E.A. even more power,and while we're at let's not forget McLame's deal over the judges giving Democrats the ability to remove "offensive judges" all for maintaining collegiality in the senate.
They were afraid to rule now they going to be ruled by people who will shove through their agenda and won't be nice to the minority as the Republican's were.
The Republicans now believe they have to be Democrat lite which they think will get them votes further driving away their base and liberals are going to vote for the real thing anyway so they lose again.Lets not forget about the borders the are going to roll over and pat themselves on the back on their bi-partianship.
You Republicans want to win again start listening to the freepers they and like minded people were the one who bought your ticket to the dance in the first place.

[neverdem]

Gee How many times the Always Whining going to post this SAME story?

What happened is people like Novak and the Clowns at NRO and the 2nd rate Talk Radio hosts spend ALL their time attacking Republicans. They NEVER ever find the guts to either defend Conservatives or attack the Left on anything.

As long as the "Conservative" Media is so PR stupid as to spend all their shooting their own in the back 100% of the time, Conservatives will never win anything ever again.

Reagan kept the focus relentlessly on the Left. Too bad those who scream loudest about being Reagan's Heirs totally lack the guts to do the same thing.

Did the pubbies have a message before the last midterm election besides "vote for me, I'm not a dem, and I'll bring home the bacon"?

[Always Right]

Gee maybe instead of squealing the same nonsense over and over and over the Always Whining might actually bother to pay attention to what is going on in DC. US Senate has a new Republican Senate Leader. Mitch McConnell. Maybe instead of mindlessly screaming the same slogans the Perpetually Pissed MIGHT one time actually pay attention to what he does here.

What the heck are you talking about. You have just spewed the most utter nonsense I have seen it years. Talk about whinning.

[neverdem]

Luntz works for MSNBC if he was not very bad for the GOP MSNBC would not have hired him.

It's one of the few moves of MSNBC that was smart. Like fools, they dumped Laura Ingraham. Luntz knows his business quite well. Former Congressman Joe Scarboro also works for MSNBC. What's wrong with his politics?

The GOP is a rudderless ship today.

The last time the GOP had a coherent message was when Luntz collaborated with Newt in 1994, IMHO.

[FastCoyote]

"While truth-telling is celebrated by Republican reformers such as presidential front-runner John McCain,"

Just gag me with a fork

[Soul Seeker]

I wouldn't go that far.

To an extent they USED to have a coherant message on the war through the 2004 election. Tax cuts and homeland security in 2002. And, of course, judges. Noticeably abandoned as an issue last cycle since their members betrayed us by keeping the filibuster intact. Had they not done so it probably would have helped save a few seats in the Senate.

In 2006? They had a coherant message as well echoed from the W.h through the corridors of Congress straight down to local h.q.'s. That message? Democrats are worse then we are.

For some reason the electorate didn't respond to that message.

[neverdem]

To an extent they USED to have a coherant message on the war through the 2004 election. Tax cuts and homeland security in 2002. And, of course, judges.

I'm talking about a coherent domestic agenda. Conservative judges and taxes, either reform or cuts, are always a given. But they have nothing else, or else I missed it.

[NittanyLion]

Luntz: "They do not want to hear the truth,"

jveritas: "Luntz works for MSNBC if he was not very bad for the GOP MSNBC would not have hired him."

I suspect if Luntz were here, he'd merely respond by saying "I rest my case".

[csmusaret]

I think the GOP was seriously damaged by the "leadership" of Frist and Hastert.

[Wild Irish Rogue]

Luntz was on Laura Ingraham and he made some very valid points about language and politics and White House communication.
For instance,the influx of troops should never have been called a surge by the White House because that gave the Democrats the opportunity to deem it " an escalation."
It should have been called a reinforcement , which is harder to criticize.
" IMHO, Boehner is bad news."
Can somebody keep Boehner out of the tanning booth ?
He looks like George Hamilton .

[LM_Guy]

You are very right - learning how to get your message across and to get the american people behind you is just as important as having a message to speak.

[twigs]

I agree. I've always thought that Luntz was very sharp. I don't always agree with him, but I think he listens and calls it as he sees it. The GOP should listen to him. That doesn't mean that they have to agree with his assessments either, but by really listening, they might look into their own souls, listen more closely to their constituents, and develop plans and strategies that we need from our elected officials.