Frank Luntz Net Worth

Others




Frank Luntz’s net worth is estimated at $1 Million – $5 Million.
Frank Luntz (Frank Ian Luntz) was born on 23 February, 1962 in West Hartford, CT, is a Republican Party strategist, communication consultant, and political pollster. Find out about the life of this billionaire, including Frank Luntz’s net worth, age, family, dating life, salary, and assets.

Popular As Frank Ian Luntz
Occupation Republican Party strategist, communication consultant, and political pollster
Age 59 years old
Zodiac Sign Pisces
Born 23 February 1962
Birthday 23 February
Birthplace West Hartford, CT
Nationality CT

What is Frank Luntz’s net worth?

Frank Luntz’s net worth has been growing in 2020-2021.Frank Luntz is 59 years old and has a net worth of $1 Million – $5 Million.

Frank Luntz Social Network

Instagram
Linkedin
Twitter Frank Luntz Twitter
Facebook
Wikipedia Frank Luntz Wikipedia
Imdb

Early Life: Source Wikipedia

2019

On July 25, 2019 Luntz spoke in front of the United States House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis where he shared his advice to people pushing for action on the climate crisis. Furthermore he stated that “I’m here before you to say that I was wrong in 2001″,”That was a lifetime ago” and ” I’ve changed.”. He promised to help the Democrats on the climate committee, provided that they put “policies ahead of politics” and commit to nonpartisan solutions.

2015

Luntz predicted that 2015 would likely result in a hung parliament. The prediction did not come to pass, because British voters returned a majority Conservative Party.

2014

Martin gained an important ally in GOP pollster Frank Luntz, whose polling revealed that ‘death tax’ sparked voter resentment in a way that ‘inheritance tax’ and ‘estate tax’ couldn’t match. After all, who wouldn’t be opposed to a ‘tax on death’? Luntz shared his findings with Republicans and included the phrase in the GOP’s Contract with America. Luntz went so far as to recommend in a memo to GOP lawmakers that they stage press conferences ‘at your local mortuary’ to dramatize the issue. ‘I believe this backdrop will clearly resonate with your constituents,’ he wrote. ‘Death is something the American people understand.’ Apparently, he’s right. Spurred by Luntz, Republicans have employed the term ‘death tax’ so aggressively that it has entered the popular lexicon. Nonpartisan venues like newspapers and magazines have begun to use it in a neutral context—a coup for abolitionists like Martin.

According to a 2014 article in The Atlantic, Luntz became frustrated with the contention and argumentation of voters after the 2012 presidential election and, at the time of the interview for the article, was in psychological turmoil: “Something in his psyche has broken, and he does not know if he can recover.” As a result, in 2014, he sold the majority of shares of his polling business, LuntzGlobal, but he continues to be a contributor to news outlets.

In fact, what Luntz has done is simply reveal the kind of thinking that goes on in the minds of too many on the right who, whether they realize it or not, have been intellectually and culturally bullied that there is some sort of ‘right way’—’right’ as in ‘correct’—to think. Resulting in some conservatives who suffer from what might be called a political version of Stockholm Syndrome—where the captives identify with their captors.

And they get great ratings, and they drive the message, and it’s really problematic. And this is not on the Democratic side. It’s only on the Republican side. … [Democrats have] got every other source of news on their side. And so that is a lot of what’s driving it. If you take—Marco Rubio’s getting his ass kicked. Who’s my Rubio fan here? We talked about it. He’s getting destroyed! By Mark Levin, by Rush Limbaugh, and a few others. He’s trying to find a legitimate, long-term effective solution to immigration that isn’t the traditional Republican approach, and talk radio is killing him. That’s what’s causing this thing underneath. And too many politicians in Washington are playing coy.

2013

On April 25, 2013, The American Spectator, a conservative news outlet, published a scathing article about Luntz entitled “The Problematic Frank Luntz’s Stockholm Syndrome”.

The article was a response to an April 22, 2013 leaked recording of Luntz at the University of Pennsylvania, where he said conservative radio personalities (specifically Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin) were being “problematic” and “destroying” Republicans’ ability to connect with more voters, or even maintain a majority in the House of Representatives in the 2014 mid-term elections.

2012

In 2012 Luntz conducted a poll that found that sizable majorities of gun owners supported gun control measures such as mandatory criminal background checks, minimum age restrictions, and eligibility requirements for concealed weapon permits.

2011

In November 2011, during the height of the Occupy Wall Street movement, Luntz had a meeting with the Republican Governors Association to discuss how to address the growing populist Occupy movement sweeping the country.

2010

In 2010, Luntz announced new research that shows the American people are eager for Congress to act on climate legislation that would promote US energy independence and a healthier environment. “Americans want their leaders to act on climate change—but not necessarily for the reasons you think,” Luntz said. “A clear majority of Americans believe climate change is happening. This is true of McCain voters and Obama voters alike. And even those that don’t still believe it is essential for America to pursue policies that promote energy independence and a cleaner, healthier environment.” In reference to recent political events, Luntz added: “People are much more interested in seeing solutions than watching yet another partisan political argument.”

During the 2010 UK General Election, Luntz led focus groups during the Prime Ministerial debates between Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Nick Clegg, and also appeared on the BBC’s Daily Politics.

Luntz was awarded the 2010 PolitiFact Lie of the Year award for his promotion of the phrase ‘government takeover’ to refer to healthcare reform, starting in the spring of 2009. “‘Takeovers are like coups,’ Luntz wrote in a 28-page memo. ‘They both lead to dictators and a loss of freedom.'” In an editorial response, the Wall Street Journal wrote that “PolitiFact’s decree is part of a larger journalistic trend that seeks to recast all political debates as matters of lies, misinformation and ‘facts,’ rather than differences of world view or principles.” The editors of PolitiFact announced “We have concluded it is inaccurate to call the plan a government takeover.”

2008

In December 2008 to January 2009, Luntz wrote a report titled “The Israel Project’s 2009 Global Language Dictionary” that has been used by the Israeli government to defend Israeli policy in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. The report, commissioned by The Israel Project, advised media spokespeople to use specific language that Luntz believed would create a more favorable impression of Israel in the United States and the rest of the international community. For example, when discussing the contours of a two-state solution, the report advised describing Palestinian negotiating points as “demands” because Americans dislike people who make “demands.” The report was marked “not for distribution or publication”, but it was leaked to Newsweek shortly after it was written. According to the Guardian, Luntz also wrote that “Israeli spokesmen or political leaders must never, ever justify ‘the deliberate slaughter of innocent women and children’ and they must aggressively challenge those who accuse Israel of such a crime.” Luntz cited as an example of an “effective Israeli sound bite” one which read, “I particularly want to reach out to Palestinian mothers who have lost their children. No parent should have to bury their child.” Patrick Cockburn criticized the report as essentially admitting “the Israeli government does not really want a two-state solution, but this should be masked because 78 per cent of Americans do.″

2007

In a 2007 interview on Fresh Air with Terry Gross, Luntz redefined the term “Orwellian” in a “positive” sense, saying that if one reads George Orwell’s essay on language, “To be ‘Orwellian’ is to speak with absolute clarity, to be succinct, to explain what the event is, to talk about what triggers something happening… and to do so without any pejorative whatsoever.” Luntz believes that Orwell would not have approved of many of the uses to which his pseudonym is applied by quoting Orwell’s essay “Politics and the English Language”, where Luntz focuses on how Orwell derides the use of cliché and dying metaphors.

Additionally in his 2007 interview on Fresh Air, Luntz discussed his use of the term “energy exploration” to refer to oil drilling. His research on the matter involved showing people a picture of current oil drilling and asking if in the picture it “looks like exploration or drilling.” He said that 90 percent of the people he spoke to said it looked like exploring. “Therefore I’d argue that it is a more appropriate way to communicate.” He went on to say, “if the public says after looking at the pictures, that doesn’t look like my definition of drilling—it looks like my definition of exploring—then don’t you think we should be calling it what people see it to be, rather than adding a political aspect to it all?” Terry Gross responded, “Should we be calling it what it actually is, as opposed to what somebody thinks it might be? The difference between exploration and actually getting out the oil—they’re two different things, aren’t they?”

Luntz is the author of the 2007 New York Times Best Seller, “Words That Work: It’s Not What You Say, It’s What People Hear.” His second book, “What Americans Really Want … Really: The Truth About Our Hopes, Dreams and Fears,” climbed to #6 on the New York Times Business Best Sellers list. In March 2011, Luntz released his book,”Win: The Key Principles to Take Your Business From Ordinary to Extraordinary”.

Luntz led a focus group telecast with the Irish state broadcaster RTÉ to gather the opinions of the Irish people before the May 24, 2007 general elections. RTÉ hoped to show viewers some of the campaign techniques the political parties were using without their knowledge.

Another focus group of swing voters was analysed by Luntz in the lead-up to the November 2007 poll between the ruling Coalition and the opposition Labor party. Luntz noted that, like the Irish scenario, the Coalition was well established, presiding over the country for 11 years and overseeing continued economic growth for much of that period; and that unlike the lead-up to the Irish elections, Australia had a stronger and more popular opposition leader in Kevin Rudd: “This is much closer to the Irish election where the leader just barely scraped in, Bertie Ahern, because the economy was so good. But the big difference there was the opposition leader was not as good as Kevin Rudd.” Luntz was brought in to conduct his research in a collaborative effort by Sky News Australia and The Australian newspaper.

2005

In 2005 Luntz conducted a focus group broadcast on the Conservative leadership race on the BBC current affairs show Newsnight. The focus group’s overwhelmingly positive reaction to David Cameron was seen by many as crucial in making him the favorite in a crowded field. Cameron was the eventual victor. In March 2007, Newsnight invited him back to gauge comparative opinions on Cameron, Gordon Brown and Sir Menzies Campbell in the city of Birmingham.

2002

In a 2002 memo to President George W. Bush titled “The Environment: A Cleaner, Safer, Healthier America”, obtained by the Environmental Working Group, Luntz wrote: “The scientific debate is closing [against us] … but not yet closed. There is still a window of opportunity to challenge the science. … Voters believe that there is no consensus about global warming within the scientific community. Should the public come to believe that the scientific issues are settled, their views about global warming will change accordingly. Therefore, you need to continue to make the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue in the debate, and defer to scientists and other experts in the field.”

2000

In 2000 he was censured by the National Council on Public Polls “for allegedly mischaracterizing on MSNBC the results of focus groups he conducted during the [2000] Republican Convention.” In September 2004, MSNBC dropped Luntz from its planned coverage of that year’s presidential debate, saying “[W]e made a decision not to use focus groups as part of our debate coverage. This decision had nothing to do with Frank’s past work or politics.” Luntz disagreed, believing that MSNBC “buckled to political pressure” from activist David Brock.

1997

In 1997, the American Association for Public Opinion Research, of which Luntz was not a member, criticized Luntz for refusing to release poll data to support his claimed results “because of client confidentiality”. Diane Colasanto, who was president of the AAPOR at the time, said

1992

Luntz was Pat Buchanan’s pollster during the 1992 U.S. Republican presidential primary, and later that year served as Ross Perot’s pollster in the general election.

1990

Luntz also served as Newt Gingrich’s pollster in the mid-1990s for the Contract with America. During that time, he helped Gingrich produce a GOPAC memo that encouraged Republicans to “speak like Newt” by describing Democrats and Democratic policies using words such as “corrupt,” “devour,” “greed,” “hypocrisy,” “liberal,” “sick,” and “traitors.”

1989

He was an adjunct professor at the University of Pennsylvania from 1989 until 1996 and also taught at George Washington University and Harvard University.

1962

Frank Ian Luntz (born February 23, 1962) is an American political and communications consultant, pollster and pundit, best known for developing talking points and other messaging for Republican causes. His work has included assistance with messaging for Newt Gingrich’s Contract with America, and public relations support for pro-Israel policies in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. He advocated use of vocabulary crafted to produce a desired effect; including use of the term death tax instead of estate tax, and climate change instead of global warming.

The contents of this page are sourced from Wikipedia articles.The contents are available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license.