United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: After Tiff With Megyn Kelly, Trump Engages In War With Fox's Frank Luntz
Source:
TPM
URL Source: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/donald-trump-frank-luntz-fox
Published: Aug 18, 2015
Author: Caitlin MacNeal
Post Date: 2015-08-18 13:24:35 by nolu chan
Keywords: None
Views: 4247
Comments: 26
After Tiff With Megyn Kelly, Trump Engages In War With Fox's Frank Luntz By Caitlin MacNeal Fresh off his confrontation with Fox News' Megyn Kelly, Donald Trump is now lashing out at Fox News pollster Frank Luntz over the focus group following the first Republican presidential debate. The participants in Luntz's focus group bashed the real estate mogul's performance and called Trump "mean" and "bombastic." Trump was quick to criticize the focus group, calling Luntz a "clown" and a "low class slob" on Twitter. Before the debate, Luntz allegedly told attendees at a South Carolina fundraiser that Trump is "addicted" to attention and could hurt the Republican Party, according to Politico. Luntz would not address the comments he made in South Carolina with Politico on Monday. But he said that Trump taps into the fears of Republican voters without providing solutions. He told Politico that Trump is "delivering a big ‘F you’ to the elites in America." "And that resonates on both sides,” Luntz said. “But ‘F you’ doesn’t solve anything. ‘F you’ doesn’t make life any better. ‘F you’ makes you feel good, but it doesn’t get you where you need to go. ‘F you’ doesn’t make America strong. ‘F you’ doesn’t solve anything. Trump then responded to Luntz and accused the pollster of targeting the real estate mogul since he was not hired by Trump as a consultant, according to Politico. "I caught him cold," Trump told Politico on Monday. "And frankly, if I was [Fox News President] Roger Ailes, I’d fire that guy so fast for what he did that his head would spin."
TPM
Published August 18, 2015, 11:50 AM EDT
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: nolu chan (#0)
"Penn & Teller: Bullshit!" (F' you Frank!) Trump then responded to Luntz and accused the pollster of targeting the real estate mogul since he was not hired by Trump as a consultant, according to Politico. "I caught him cold," Trump told Politico on Monday. "And frankly, if I was [Fox News President] Roger Ailes, I’d fire that guy so fast for what he did that his head would spin." Sure Luntz is a clown and his scam HAS been busted. Anyone who's planning on ambushing Trump had better finish him off because there *will* be a bloody aftermath. I'd rather he tone down the retaliatory verbal abuse a smidgeon ("slob" wasn't necessary,) but in an age of PC where ONLY the Left is allowed to slander and unload (while conservatives are shut down and censored by PC police and "Hate Speech" charges) there's going to be collateral damage. Quite a bit of it. That more people aren't outraged is surprising.
The plethora of "polls" and "focus groups" just underscores the fact that genuine, unvarnished leaders are non-existent in the USA today. Real leaders LEAD - while political hacks and other political vermin rely on polls and focus groups. Can anyone imagine leaders of the past like Washington, Jefferson, Churchill or Patton relying on focus groups? Imagine the world of the present if they did? While I'm not a subscriber to the idea (to the extent that it might be out there) that Donald Trump is the actual solution to the nation's ills, I say that neither is Hilliary Xlinton, the Jebster, or the gop. And Trump - at this point in history - is performing a very needed function. John Hancock's large signature on the Declaration of Independence was a big "F-you" to the power and the establishment of his time. He did it without taking polls and relying on focus groups. And he risked everything - including his life - in making it. Likewise, Trump's big "F-you" to the establishment is a much needed poke in the eye to the Ruling Party. And it has not been focus group tested, either. "Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD . . . " ~Psalm 33:12a
A salient point...that could and should be made by Trump to malign his cowardly opponents. The leaders of the past used the consensus of their peers as "focus groups"; Not hand-picked patsies that politically create a fake consensus. And Trump - at this point in history - is performing a very needed function. Agree. John Hancock's large signature on the Declaration of Independence was a big "F-you" to the power and the establishment of his time. He did it without taking polls and relying on focus groups. And he risked everything - including his life - in making it. Likewise, Trump's big "F-you" to the establishment is a much needed poke in the eye to the Ruling Party. The Ruling Party GOPe need more than a poke in the eye. But then Trump isn't done yet. John Hancock -- a guy with EVERYTHING to lose -- put a bullseye on himself with his F-U. As did the rest of the signers of the DoI. Trump is indeed doing the same. Even if many claim he's "new" on several of his political positions. Hey -- better late than never.
That sounds like a fairly accurate assessment to me.
The Roves, McConnells, McClowns and Boehners have more venom and vitriol for the "tea party" (and now Trump) than they do for the party they're supposedly "opposed" to - or the tyrant at the head of it. If that isn't revealing, I don't know what is. "Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD . . . " ~Psalm 33:12a
Boehner and the rest of the REAL Republicans need to be hurt, and cry a lot more. It's for the children. Excellent point and I plead guilty of the same thing on occasions. I consider it futile to rant and rave and criticize Obama and Hillary, et. al. I did it for years with Slick Willie and it got me nowhere.
Yeah, it's pointless to criticize a skunk (i.e. Hilliary or the dems) for being a skunk. For doing what a skunk does. I may be farther along in my cynicism about the political system than you, however. Since (IMO) it makes no difference anyway, I say "Bring on Trump" "Bread and circuses" is fun. "Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD . . . " ~Psalm 33:12a
Whether it was or not, it was highly inappropriate for the pollster to be seeding his focus group with his own opinions. Luntz and his focus group were a joke, unrelatable to the reality of what took place.
If that isn't revealing, I don't know what is. " EXACTLY !! And that bunch of clowns should be tarred & feathered! Because of them, the American People are getting screwed royally. Because of them, the Republican base is really fed up, and that is why Trump is so popular. It is time for the GOPe to go the way of the Whigs Si vis pacem, para bellum
It's for the children. " Yeah, I'd vote for that! Si vis pacem, para bellum
The Tea Party and paleo-conservatives threaten the GOPe hold on the levers of power within the GOP. Conservatives are their enemy.
I would guess they need to hand-pick so that their "focus group" looks like this:
I don't know how the rest would respond,but just thinking of Patton being exposed to to a focus group is enough to start me giggling. I predict that things wouldn't have worked out well if that had ever happened. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Ya kinda have to wonder what Lutz'S first clue was,don't you? Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
It's for the children. And at least one geezer. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Yeah, that is rather humorous to imagine. I could see ol " Blood & Guts " slapping the shit out of somebody like Frank Luntz. I would pay to watch that. Si vis pacem, para bellum
Just as an aside, 'pete: One of my favorite war movies/biopics off all time is "Patton" - but I'm not a Patton expert so I've always wondered how accurate a portrayal it was. We like to think that WWII was "pre" political correctness (at least to the degree it exists today). But if the movie is accurate, Patton's slapping of the soldier (and the political firestorm that followed) almost got him kicked out of the war. "Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD . . . " ~Psalm 33:12a
If anything it was downplayed. I was friends with one of my father's childhood friends,and literally knew him my entire life,but didn't know he had fought in WW-2 until the early 1980's when I went up to his house to help him move some stuff around. There,under glass on his kitchen table were a bunch of photos of him standing on or around his tank. He was drafted into the army and was in the invasion of North Africa as a PFC tank driver. He won a SS and a battlefield promotion to 1st Lt,and fought with Patton all the way to the approach to Berlin. The only time I ever saw him mad was when I once said something positive about Patton. He hated Patton so much the blood would drain from his face when you mentioned Patton's name. Patton was a glory hound chasing more glory,and didn't care who had to die to provide it,even if it was him. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
You know though, that's probably true of all the leaders mentioned earlier (Washington, Jefferson and Churchill, along with Patton). And it's certainly true of Trump. Well, maybe not being a "glory hound" per se. But he certainly craves attention. I wonder if it would be an accurate statement to say "most leaders are glory hounds, but not all glory hounds are leaders." "Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD . . . " ~Psalm 33:12a
I had an Uncle Charles that served under Patton. Uncle Charles was awarded a number of decorations, was straight leg infantry, not armor, and did not talk highly of Patton. But in his eighties, he said Patton was a SOB, but said if he went back into combat, he would want to be under Patton again.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
Yeah Rufus, that has always been one of my favorites as well. I don't know how accurate it is, I would assume some accurate, some aspects not so. I do not think they could have picked anyone better to play Patton than George C. Scott. I think it was his best role. Si vis pacem, para bellum
If you guys want accurate war movies,I can't recommend "We were Warriors Once,and Young,and "Black Hawk Down" too highly. We were warriors.... is probably the best movie ever made when it comes to portraying army life for career soldiers. It shows the family side and life-long friendships that people that were drafted and only served 2 years or those only in for one enlistment never saw,plus the battle scenes were right on the money. Black Hawk Down is a pretty accurate portrayal of what the confusion of combat is like,as well as a pretty good portrayal of what it's like to be deployed to a war zone as a Ranger or a Special Forces operator. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
I always thought those were fairly accurate, as well as Band of Brothers.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
$5 says you did enjoy calling him a POS... :)
Fox’s Luntz blasted Trump at Koch seminar (Politico)
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#2. To: nolu chan (#0)
Trump was quick to criticize the focus group, calling Luntz a "clown" and a "low class slob" on Twitter.
#3. To: nolu chan (#0)
Frank Luntz . . . focus group
#4. To: Rufus T Firefly (#3)
(Edited)
Can anyone imagine leaders of the past like Washington, Jefferson, Churchill or Patton relying on focus groups? Imagine the world of the present if they did?
#5. To: nolu chan (#0)
Before the debate, Luntz allegedly told attendees at a South Carolina fundraiser that Trump is "addicted" to attention and could hurt the Republican Party, according to Politico.
#6. To: Liberator (#4)
The Ruling Party GOPe need more than a poke in the eye.
#7. To: Fred Mertz, *The Two Parties ARE the Same* (#5)
could hurt the Republican Party
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#8. To: Rufus T Firefly (#6)
#9. To: Fred Mertz (#8)
I consider it futile to rant and rave and criticize Obama and Hillary, et. al. I did it for years with Slick Willie and it got me nowhere.
#10. To: Fred Mertz (#5)
That sounds like a fairly accurate assessment to me.
#11. To: Rufus T Firefly (#6)
" The Roves, McConnells, McClowns and Boehners have more venom and vitriol for the "tea party" (and now Trump) than they do for the party they're supposedly "opposed" to - or the tyrant at the head of it.
#12. To: hondo68 (#7)
" Boehner and the rest of the REAL Republicans need to be hurt, and cry a lot more.
#13. To: Rufus T Firefly (#6)
If that isn't revealing, I don't know what is.
#14. To: Liberator (#4)
The leaders of the past used the consensus of their peers as "focus groups"; Not hand-picked patsies that politically create a fake consensus.
#15. To: Rufus T Firefly (#3)
Can anyone imagine leaders of the past like Washington, Jefferson, Churchill or Patton relying on focus groups?
#16. To: Fred Mertz (#5)
Before the debate, Luntz allegedly told attendees at a South Carolina fundraiser that Trump is "addicted" to attention
#17. To: hondo68 (#7)
Boehner and the rest of the REAL Republicans need to be hurt, and cry a lot more.
#18. To: sneakypete (#15)
" just thinking of Patton being exposed to to a focus group is enough to start me giggling. "
#19. To: sneakypete (#15)
. . . just thinking of Patton being exposed to to a focus group is enough to start me giggling.
#20. To: Rufus T Firefly (#19)
But if the movie is accurate, Patton's slapping of the soldier (and the political firestorm that followed) almost got him kicked out of the war.
#21. To: sneakypete (#20)
Patton was a glory hound
#22. To: sneakypete (#20)
#23. To: Rufus T Firefly (#19)
" One of my favorite war movies/biopics off all time is "Patton" - but I'm not a Patton expert so I've always wondered how accurate a portrayal it was. "
#24. To: Rufus T Firefly, Stoner (#19)
#25. To: sneakypete (#24)
#26. To: Fred Mertz (#8)
I did it for years with Slick Willie and it got me nowhere.
“Let me see which pig "DON'T" I want to vote for, the one with or without lipstick??" Hmmmmm...
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]