Luntz Focus Group:The Debate

[Political Junky]

Frank Luntz Focus Group: Romney Dominated - YouTube

Sorry but he didn't dominate. He attempted to bully this president and Obama wasn't having any of that. He pushed back and had his say in a much classier way than the Mormon.

Obama was the clear winner of this debate.

I disagree. Obama made lying look easy, that was about it.

Not only does Romney lie, but he has cons lying for him.

 

[skookerasbil]

Romney schooled in the MSNBC focus forum too, which made me say, "WTF???!!!!"

 

[skookerasbil]

Shit the k00ks are coming off the rails these days in this forum.............and I'm laughing


And wait'll Romney gets another chance to smack the pumpkin off the tee when the Libya thing comes up again on MOnday night!!!

 

[PoliticalChic]

Sorry but he didn't dominate. He attempted to bully this president and Obama wasn't having any of that. He pushed back and had his say in a much classier way than the Mormon.

Obama was the clear winner of this debate.

I disagree. Obama made lying look easy, that was about it.

Not only does Romney lie, but he has cons lying for him.

Obama, pretending that he had a successful foreign policy, used '"...and al Queda on the run..." as a part of his standard stump speech.....

...until today.



Now that the fabrication about Benghazi has been revealed. and the truth that the video was just a cover for his failures exposed.....



"President Obama may be recalibrating his campaign rhetoric on Al Qaeda, in the aftermath of the Libya terror attack.

Before that attack and as recently as a week ago, Obama had taken to saying Al Qaeda is on the road to defeat. During a Miami stop on Oct. 11, he said: "And today, Al Qaeda is on the run and Osama bin Laden is dead."

But at the debate Tuesday and on the campaign trail Wednesday, the Al Qaeda reference appeared to have been walked back.

"You know four years ago I told you we'd end the war in Iraq, and I did. I said we'd end the war in Afghanistan, and we are. I said we'd focus on the terrorists who actually attacked us on 9/11, and we have, and Bin Laden is dead," Obama said in Mount Vernon, Iowa, on Wednesday.
His language at Tuesday's debate also marked a subtle shift. "I said we'd refocus attention on those who actually attacked us on 9/11, and we have gone after Al Qaeda's leadership like never before and Usama bin Laden is dead," he said.

A representative with the Obama camp did not return an email seeking comment Wednesday. "

Read more: Obama dropping 'Al Qaeda is on the run' from stump speech? - Fox News

 

[PoliticalChic]

Horseshit.

you can watch the video. Obama said it, even if you disagree with the interpretation of how he meant it. I think he was pretty damn weak in the statement myself, but I personally think it's a mountain out of a molehill in the first place.

but you cling to your media bias argument. It's always one of the first things the losers will do.

Watch your language.


No, actually, he didn't.

He made a general statement referring to the original 9/11.
He then tried to pretend that he had a successful foreign policy....and therefore
had to hide the fact that al Quaeda had the ability to not only attack American
installations, but to trumpet that they wore going to do so.

He then sent Susan Rice on a half dozen venues to lie about the bogus video,
And referred to the same video six times during his UN speech....
And finally realized that the cover-up was worse than the crime, and
tried to pretend that he said it all along.


He was hoping that there were enough dim-wits that would still
worship him so much that they'd believe the prevarication.

Raise your paw.

from my previous response: . Obama said it, even if you disagree with the interpretation of how he meant it. (I also noted that Obama handled it poorly.)

Here's the smoking gun....the Lib moderator knew the truth....but threw Obama a life preserver....



"On CNN's "State of the Union" on September 30, Candy Crowley insisted David Axelrod, President Barack Obama's chief strategist, was wrong when Axelrod tried to claim President Barack Obama called the Benghazi attack "an act of terror" on the day after.
"First, they said it was not planned, it was part of this tape," Crowley said when Axelrod tried to spin her.

This was Crowley the journalist, unlike the pro-Obama advocate who moderated Tuesday's debate between Obama and Mitt Romney and interjected herself into an argument between Obama and Romney on the exact same issue -- and took Obama's side.

On September 12, the day after the attacks, Obama did say the words "acts of terror" but he was not referring to the attacks that killed U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens.
Crowley knew that on September 30 and she conceded it again hours after the debate when she went on CNN and said while Romney "was right in the main, but he just chose the wrong word." But the damage had already been done.
With Obama's reelection on the line, Crowley seemed to have conveniently forgotten the facts she knew two weeks before when she grilled Axelrod in a way she should have Obama. "
Crowley to Axelrod: Obama Never Said Benghazi Attack Was 'Act of Terror'



Anything you'd like to say.....withdraw.....apologize for?

 

[Ava]

Frank Luntz Focus Group: Romney Dominated - YouTube

I watched that with high interest last night and very much enjoyed the "reasons" the participants gave as to why they had voted for Obama in `08, but were switching in November, `12.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Luntz is a Republican propagandist and has been for years.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Frank Luntz Focus Group: Romney Dominated - YouTube

If that focus group was in any way representative of the electorate then Obama should be down by 20 points by the end of this week.

We'll see who's right.

 

[skookerasbil]

Luntz is a Republican propagandist and has been for years.

fAiL dumbass.............CNN post debate poll had Romney wholloping the president on the economy, taxes etc..........and shit, even the MSNBC fous group liked Romney. Who'da thunk it????

Big night for Obama........but only to the k00ks.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Luntz is a Republican propagandist and has been for years.

fAiL dumbass.............CNN post debate poll had Romney wholloping the president on the economy, taxes etc..........and shit, even the MSNBC fous group liked Romney. Who'da thunk it????

Big night for Obama........but only to the k00ks.

That CNN poll oversampled conservatives.

 

[NYcarbineer]

"...no liberal media bias..."


"Presidential debate moderator Candy Crowley not only improperly injected her opinion into the Barack Obama/Mitt Romney face-off last night, but she had her facts wrong.

Crowley then interrupted, telling Romney: “He did in fact, sir. So let me — let me call it an act of terror …”

Obama immediately recognized that he had an ally and spoke up loudly: “Can you say that a little louder, Candy?”

She, justifiably, is under attack by folks who think she exceeded her job as a moderator. Predictably liberals rationalized her blunder and conservatives pointed it out."
Candy Crowley botched her moderator's job in the Obama/Romney debate | The Barbershop: Dennis Byrne, Proprietor



Wise up.

Horseshit.

you can watch the video. Obama said it, even if you disagree with the interpretation of how he meant it. I think he was pretty damn weak in the statement myself, but I personally think it's a mountain out of a molehill in the first place.

but you cling to your media bias argument. It's always one of the first things the losers will do.

Watch your language.


No, actually, he didn't.

He made a general statement referring to the original 9/11.
He then tried to pretend that he had a successful foreign policy....and therefore
had to hide the fact that al Quaeda had the ability to not only attack American
installations, but to trumpet that they wore going to do so.

He then sent Susan Rice on a half dozen venues to lie about the bogus video,
And referred to the same video six times during his UN speech....
And finally realized that the cover-up was worse than the crime, and
tried to pretend that he said it all along.


He was hoping that there were enough dim-wits that would still
worship him so much that they'd believe the prevarication.

Raise your paw.

Calling the killings an act of terror is calling the killings an act of terror.

You want to turn this into a birther-esque fantasy go ahead.

 

[Truthseeker420]

I saw the debate....the Stormin' Mormon vs. the Lyin' Liberal, as a clear example of form vs. substance.


On form, I felt it was a draw.


But on substance, it was Romney exposing the Obama failures and broken promises....and Obama obfuscating and outright lying.....
...i.e., claiming that he said the Benghazi attack was a terrorist attack, when he tried as hard as he could to blame the bogus video.....

Which part of substance that Romney provided did you like the most?

1. "On style points it was close,...as a CBS News snap poll found, 65 percent thought Romney would do a better job on the economy and only 34 percent believed Obama would – though the president scored a 37 to 30 overall win over Romney, with 33 percent believing it was a tie.

2. In turn, Romney’s most effective moment came when he laid out the administration’s unmet promises. “What you’re seeing in this country is 23 million people struggling to find a job. The president’s policies have been exercised over the last four years and they haven’t put Americans back to work.” Romney pointed out that growth had slowed year to year and the unemployment numbers looked better than reality as workers have fled the labor market – factors that voters might not understand when reading headlines.


3. Then there were two moments that (inadvertently) told us a lot Obama’s economic vision.

The first occurred when a college student named Jeremy asked for reassurances about his job prospects after graduating. Obama answered: “Number one, I want to build manufacturing jobs in this country again.” Jeremy was probably somewhat stunned to find out that his $100,000 in student loans could only land him a job working the line at a factory making government subsidized electric cars. Hey, in these unselfish, planned economies, Jeremy, you take what you’re given.

And when the candidates were asked by one of those committed undecideds to dispel any myths about themselves, Obama used it to lay out one of the least convincing arguments of the night. “I believe,” he explained, “that the free enterprise system is the greatest engine of prosperity the world’s ever known.

Yet, if a person had listened to the preceding hour (the preceding four years, actually), they would have learned that the free enterprise system wasn’t “great” enough for the health care insurance industry, retirement funds, auto and banking industries, housing markets, education, green energy, or basically any other area that his administration’s policies have touched on in four years. It would be interesting if someone – perhaps at the next Townhall debate –would ask Obama to define what the free enterprise means to him."
Harsanyi: Once again, Obama's record wins it for Romney

If Jeremy isn't smart enough to know that manufactures need managers and CEOs then maybe he should be working with his hands,

 

[Truthseeker420]

I saw the debate....the Stormin' Mormon vs. the Lyin' Liberal, as a clear example of form vs. substance.


On form, I felt it was a draw.


But on substance, it was Romney exposing the Obama failures and broken promises....and Obama obfuscating and outright lying.....
...i.e., claiming that he said the Benghazi attack was a terrorist attack, when he tried as hard as he could to blame the bogus video.....

Which part of substance that Romney provided did you like the most?

1. "On style points it was close,...as a CBS News snap poll found, 65 percent thought Romney would do a better job on the economy and only 34 percent believed Obama would – though the president scored a 37 to 30 overall win over Romney, with 33 percent believing it was a tie.

2. In turn, Romney’s most effective moment came when he laid out the administration’s unmet promises. “What you’re seeing in this country is 23 million people struggling to find a job. The president’s policies have been exercised over the last four years and they haven’t put Americans back to work.” Romney pointed out that growth had slowed year to year and the unemployment numbers looked better than reality as workers have fled the labor market – factors that voters might not understand when reading headlines.


3. Then there were two moments that (inadvertently) told us a lot Obama’s economic vision.

The first occurred when a college student named Jeremy asked for reassurances about his job prospects after graduating. Obama answered: “Number one, I want to build manufacturing jobs in this country again.” Jeremy was probably somewhat stunned to find out that his $100,000 in student loans could only land him a job working the line at a factory making government subsidized electric cars. Hey, in these unselfish, planned economies, Jeremy, you take what you’re given.

And when the candidates were asked by one of those committed undecideds to dispel any myths about themselves, Obama used it to lay out one of the least convincing arguments of the night. “I believe,” he explained, “that the free enterprise system is the greatest engine of prosperity the world’s ever known.

Yet, if a person had listened to the preceding hour (the preceding four years, actually), they would have learned that the free enterprise system wasn’t “great” enough for the health care insurance industry, retirement funds, auto and banking industries, housing markets, education, green energy, or basically any other area that his administration’s policies have touched on in four years. It would be interesting if someone – perhaps at the next Townhall debate –would ask Obama to define what the free enterprise means to him."
Harsanyi: Once again, Obama's record wins it for Romney

Wait a minute...long post but you didn't answer the question..you couldn't one thing Romney said of substance?

 

[Rinata]

Frank Luntz Focus Group: Romney Dominated - YouTube

The Five co-host Bob Beckel sat down with Bill O’Reilly tonight to react to the debate and the focus group results found by Republican pollster Frank Luntz following the debate last night. Beckel slammed what he believed to be skewed results by Luntz, telling O’Reilly it “doesn’t rise to the standard of your show.”

Luntz found that a large number of people in his focus group who voted for Barack Obama in 2008 are switching their vote to Mitt Romney this time around. Beckel sighed and shook his head, telling O’Reilly that he used to work in the polling business and said, “That is not the way you do a focus group, this is ridiculous.”

Beckel To O’Reilly: Frank Luntz’s Debate Focus Group ‘Doesn’t Rise To The Standard Of Your Show’ | Mediaite

 

[Cheddarmelon]

Frank Luntz Focus Group: Romney Dominated - YouTube

The Five co-host Bob Beckel sat down with Bill O’Reilly tonight to react to the debate and the focus group results found by Republican pollster Frank Luntz following the debate last night. Beckel slammed what he believed to be skewed results by Luntz, telling O’Reilly it “doesn’t rise to the standard of your show.”

Luntz found that a large number of people in his focus group who voted for Barack Obama in 2008 are switching their vote to Mitt Romney this time around. Beckel sighed and shook his head, telling O’Reilly that he used to work in the polling business and said, “That is not the way you do a focus group, this is ridiculous.”

Beckel To O’Reilly: Frank Luntz’s Debate Focus Group ‘Doesn’t Rise To The Standard Of Your Show’ | Mediaite

The surest sign that something is untrue, is that Billy boy O'Reilly thinks it's accurate.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Frank Luntz Focus Group: Romney Dominated - YouTube

The Five co-host Bob Beckel sat down with Bill O’Reilly tonight to react to the debate and the focus group results found by Republican pollster Frank Luntz following the debate last night. Beckel slammed what he believed to be skewed results by Luntz, telling O’Reilly it “doesn’t rise to the standard of your show.”

Luntz found that a large number of people in his focus group who voted for Barack Obama in 2008 are switching their vote to Mitt Romney this time around. Beckel sighed and shook his head, telling O’Reilly that he used to work in the polling business and said, “That is not the way you do a focus group, this is ridiculous.”

Beckel To O’Reilly: Frank Luntz’s Debate Focus Group ‘Doesn’t Rise To The Standard Of Your Show’ | Mediaite

The surest sign that something is untrue, is that Billy boy O'Reilly thinks it's accurate.

Yeah, boy......


.....I get my info from David Axelrod!!

...............hang on his every word!

 

[PoliticalChic]

Frank Luntz Focus Group: Romney Dominated - YouTube

The Five co-host Bob Beckel sat down with Bill O’Reilly tonight to react to the debate and the focus group results found by Republican pollster Frank Luntz following the debate last night. Beckel slammed what he believed to be skewed results by Luntz, telling O’Reilly it “doesn’t rise to the standard of your show.”

Luntz found that a large number of people in his focus group who voted for Barack Obama in 2008 are switching their vote to Mitt Romney this time around. Beckel sighed and shook his head, telling O’Reilly that he used to work in the polling business and said, “That is not the way you do a focus group, this is ridiculous.”

Beckel To O’Reilly: Frank Luntz’s Debate Focus Group ‘Doesn’t Rise To The Standard Of Your Show’ | Mediaite

The surest sign that something is untrue, is that Billy boy O'Reilly thinks it's accurate.

Rinty and Cheesy sittin' in a tree..... k-i-s-s-i-n-g, ........first came love, then came marriage .............and then a baby in a baby carriage!

 

[Cheddarmelon]

The Five co-host Bob Beckel sat down with Bill O’Reilly tonight to react to the debate and the focus group results found by Republican pollster Frank Luntz following the debate last night. Beckel slammed what he believed to be skewed results by Luntz, telling O’Reilly it “doesn’t rise to the standard of your show.”

Luntz found that a large number of people in his focus group who voted for Barack Obama in 2008 are switching their vote to Mitt Romney this time around. Beckel sighed and shook his head, telling O’Reilly that he used to work in the polling business and said, “That is not the way you do a focus group, this is ridiculous.”

Beckel To O’Reilly: Frank Luntz’s Debate Focus Group ‘Doesn’t Rise To The Standard Of Your Show’ | Mediaite

The surest sign that something is untrue, is that Billy boy O'Reilly thinks it's accurate.

Rinty and Cheesy sittin' in a tree..... k-i-s-s-i-n-g, ........first came love, then came marriage .............and then a baby in a baby carriage!

What are you? 12 years old, or a drunk redneck?

 

[PoliticalChic]

The surest sign that something is untrue, is that Billy boy O'Reilly thinks it's accurate.

Rinty and Cheesy sittin' in a tree..... k-i-s-s-i-n-g, ........first came love, then came marriage .............and then a baby in a baby carriage!

What are you? 12 years old, or a drunk redneck?

I belong to the National Sarcasm Society….like we need your support.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

As with the first debate, all those lies negate any perceived "win".

Mittens has 533 LIES to his "credit, and yes, I suspect he's proud of all of them. He's not fit to run a Walgreen's store, let alone the US.

Have any of you considered how well his pathological lying would play on the world stage? Sure, his cult teaches their followers to lie to get what they want and yes, you rw's love all his lying and flip flopping but what about the real world?

He has said he wants an even bigger military and that he wants wars. Never mind that we need neither. A world leader who lies easier than he tells the truth, or who flip flops on every word he utters is not going to serve us well.