Do Frank Luntz "undecided focus groups" use actors? (video)

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPQNdj3NqXE

Or perhaps merely "professional undecided voters"?

On Edit: In the (brief) video, the same "undecided voter" is in Luntz's "focus group debate discussion" from debates several months apart.

[NMMNG]

1. Frank Luntz is a professional shill for the RW

I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him (which wouldn't be far). Fake voters in his videos wouldn't surprise me at all.

[BuyingThyme]

2. I'm not sure what this means, but kcik.

[libnnc]

3. Wouldn't surprise me one bit

[GoneOffShore]

4. According to a Rep media consultant I know

Even Rep consultants think Luntz is a schmuck.

[bridgit]

5. Only Luntz's recurring database can say for sure, I wouldn't put it past him...

he's stacked every other deck in the RW house, and he's not about to offer failure as a product to his 'clients' by way of screening from unbiased pools of participants, it's all in the screening process...

"Do you vote?"

"Yes."

"Are you a registered Republican, or an Independent?"

"No."

"You may, or may not qualify for this session. May we contact you for any future focus groups we may conduct?"

"Yes."

"Thank you for your time." click!

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

6. kick

[Bolo Boffin]

7. I think things like this are symbiotic

Luntz rewards people who say what he wants to hear by putting them up front and on camera.

People figure out what he wants to hear and say it. It isn't like he's hiding it.

People who are good at figuring out what he wants to hear wind up being reliable focus group people.

The military calls it "incestuous amplification."

[butterfly77]

8. Exactly, what I think anytime I see them