Luntz Shares His 5-Point Plan for Trump Debate Success

From: insider.foxnews.com, as seen on Fox & Friends, on Oct 17, 2016

Pollster Frank Luntz offers his 5-point plan for Donald Trump to use in the next presidential debate. Frankly, I think Trump would do well to listen to him. But it’s unlikely. Trump still seems to maintain the opinion that he knows everything better than anyone – about any subject or any issue – and is unlikely to even consider taking Luntz’s advice. That’s exactly why Trump keeps shooting himself in the foot and making unforced errors that keep Hillary close. If Trump could mute his inner egotistical know-it-all self for a change and listen to someone else for advice, he might actually convince some voters that he has some answers and relegate Hillary to his rearview mirror.

 

 

Luntz’s suggestions do make some sense and regardless of what you think of his focus group antics, he has indeed spoken to many more diverse voters than anyone that you or I personally know so I’m willing to give him some credit for discerning what’s bugging our voting public.

His first suggestion, the forensic audit, isn’t one that usually comes to mind, but maybe he’s onto something in that I do know that most of us are very displeased at the rate that our government spends our taxpayer dollars. A brief explanation could establish why a businessman would be better at identifying and controlling program costs and benefits than a lifelong politician.

The second, giving examples of people that would fit his criteria to be named as cabinet members. It’s apparently not legal to imply that individuals have been “promised” the jobs, but he can identify names who represent the kind of people he’d be considering.

I can agree with the third suggestion, that he remind voters that Hillary has been a Washington insider for three decades and ask a rhetorical question: did you get the change that you wanted and deserve?

And number four – lay off his defensive statements regarding women. Luntz thinks that he should speak directly to the women of America and make an honest and heartfelt confession and admit to statements he now deeply regrets and ask for their forgiveness and that he will seek to earn that forgiveness.

And fifth, ask which one of us will shake up Washington? Which one is more likely to bring about needed changes and hold Washington accountable?

Will The Donald listen to Luntz? Not very likely, although he could do far worse – like continue to ad lib whatever poppycock his “massive brain” conjures up.

We’ll see … stay tuned …

Garnet92.

 

 



Categories: Political

Tags: ,

2 replies

  1. I think those are pretty good suggestions for the most part but I agree with Kathy on staying away from naming cabinet members. Opening that door could bring a lot of unnecessary problems.

    If I were Trump I would hone a 2-minute answer that explains why people should be terrified about our current national debt and Hillary’s plan to continue the same path. He should point to the catastrophe in Venezuela as a consequence of their socialist leaders and policies and how the people there are now suffering from food and medical shortages, power outages and rampant crime. That’s what we can look forward too in the near future if we do not reject democrats like Hillary. “Google Venezuela, folks.” That’s what Trump should say. Democrats are on the verge of running out of sources of money, but they need more to keep the gravy train going. They will come after our retirement accounts next. You want voters’ attention, just mention that.

    Like

  2. Although he’s incapable of it, succinct responses would be much better. Just because they’re given 2 minutes to answer doesn’t mean he should fill that timeframe. The longer he talks the more garbled his message.

    Before they start the questions, he should make a short statement regarding the women, repeat his apology and point out that the Dems are the ones who continue to generate the new accusations. He should also point out that’s the end of the discussion and if questions are fired at him later, respond with ‘already addressed that, next question please.’

    Hinting at potential cabinet members is a mistake that could cost him votes, if a voter doesn’t like his choice. I’d stay away from that.

    Combine number three with number five and make it his closing line – that’s one of the things that sticks in voters minds.

    My two cents’ worth…

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: