GOP Pollster Frank Luntz: ‘Alabama Is a Symptom of What’s Happening Around the Country’

December 12, 2017

WRITER

He may be a pollster, but Frank Luntz isn’t prepared to call today’s special election in Alabama.

Luntz has been working to show the perspective of GOP voters in Alabama during the controversial election; the state will elect a senator today to fill Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ vacated seat. During a recent panel event covered by Vice News, Luntz moderated 12 conservative voters in Alabama as they discussed the allegations against GOP Senate candidate Roy Moore.

Pollster extraordinaire Frank Luntz

On today’s show, Glenn talked with Luntz about how Alabama voters are responding to the national focus on their election and analyzed their reasons for supporting Moore.

Here’s an excerpt from the interview.

Glenn: So, Frank tell me what you found in Alabama.
Frank: So, we found a very polarized and extremely excited, tense, passionate electorate that desperately wants to send a message to Washington — and to my greatest surprise: That message is coming just as hard to the Republican establishment as it is to the Democrats. There is as much criticism of the Republican leadership in Congress as there was their Democratic opponents. And this is among Republicans. That tells me that Alabama is a symptom of what’s happening across the country.
Glenn: And what’s happening across the country?
Frank: I think that people are just as fed up today as they were one year ago. I think that they’re disappointed with the rate of change in Washington — that the swamp has not been drained. And I think that they’re ready to say, ‘I’ve had it and I’m going to vote even more people out in the next election.’

Thankfully all the speculation will be over once this race is called, but that won't be the end of the drama.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: So if I had to -- if I could talk to only one person to try to figure out what America was thinking, that one person would be Frank Luntz. He runs Luntz Global, and you can find out all about it at FocuswithFrank.com. But he does things for businesses and politicians and everything else. When you're really trying to get a beat on what people are feeling, Frank is really good with his focus groups. And he's just been in Alabama. Welcome to the program, Frank Luntz. How are you?

FRANK: You're always the kindest person on the radio. I don't know if your listeners have ever met you before. But you've always been the kindest guy. And I'm not sure if that's your image. But --

GLENN: Yes, you do, Frank. If anybody knows my image, you would know my image.

STU: I thought you knew the people, Frank. You don't know that's not his image?

GLENN: That's clearly not my image.

(laughter)

So, Frank, tell me what you found in Alabama.

FRANK: So we found a very polarized and extremely excited, intense, passionate electorate that desperately wants to send a message to Washington. And to my greatest surprise, that message is coming just as hard to the Republican establishment, as it is to the Democrats.

There is as much criticism of the Republican leadership in Congress as there was their Democratic opponent. And this is among Republicans. And that tells me that Alabama is a symptom of what's happening across the country.

GLENN: And what's happening across the country?

FRANK: I think people are just as fed up today as they are one year ago. I think they're disappointed with the rate of change in Washington that the swamp has not been drained, and I think that they're ready to say, I've had it. And I'm going to vote even more people out in the next election.

GLENN: So, Frank, the -- the idea that Alabama has to vote for somebody who is accused of improprieties and possibly worse, 20 years ago, and a guy who is abortion on demand, it's really, truly the lesser of two evils. And, you know, for God-fearing people, you know, abortion is more evil than somebody doing something 20 years ago.

Do I have that right or wrong?

FRANK: You have it right. But I'd be careful. Because that's not -- they will not let themselves be caught saying that. What they're saying that it is all evil, that it all needs to change, and that is the guy, Roy Moore, in their minds, this is the guy who they think is most likely to shake the hell out of Washington, DC.

GLENN: So what do they feel about his -- the accusations?

FRANK: They don't think they're true. They don't think that they're real. They think that is woman who have been paid by --

GLENN: Gloria Allred or the left or whoever.

FRANK: Or even what's his name?

GLENN: Soros?

FRANK: Soros and the Democrats. They think that America is under attack, is under siege. And they desperately want to send a message, enough is enough. And they want to do it in an emotional way.

GLENN: So what do you think this means, Frank, assuming that Roy Moore wins? Do you think he's going to win?

FRANK: I can't -- you know, I've never -- in my professional life, I've never held back a -- a projection. I've always felt that I should speak up because that's my job, as a poster is to know what's going to happen. I can't do it this time. Glenn, I just don't know. I don't believe any of the polls. I think someone is going to look really foolish when the election is over.

GLENN: Yeah, I've never seen -- have you seen a 20-point spread in polls?

FRANK: Never. And there was a spread during Clinton. But the spread during Clinton is a ten-point spread. It means that an awful lot of people are lying to pollsters right now. And that's because they're afraid of the pressure. This essence of political correctness, which is the thing that I urge you to address -- I urge you on your shows going forward to talk about it, because it is poisoning our students' minds. It is poisoning the public debate, that we can no longer say what we truly believe of our fear that it will hurt us, professionally or personally.

GLENN: But how do you -- you know, Frank, I would love to have you on for an extended period of time, because I think you can teach us so much. And I mean the audience in America. How do you have that conversation when millennials are saying that, you know, there should be safe zones, there should be limits on speech.

FRANK: Right. But those are by their definitions, safe zones. So that you're not allowed to ask the question, why does a murderer in California who shouldn't even be in this country, why does that person get let off? You can't have a conversation about border security. But on the same token, Glenn, you also can't say, why is there such negativity in this tweeting? Why can't we tweet each other with respect as we are criticizing each other for beliefs that we don't share?

I think that the coarseness of our culture has been so -- so destroyed by social media, that the ability to talk to each other in a tough, but respectful way, is gone.

It's not that it's going. It's gone.

STU: Frank, you and I have seen each other at some really low points. We've seen each other, where I've come to you, Frank, help me. I have no hope left.

Have you found -- have you found hope in all of the polling?

FRANK: No. Not at all. I'm in the worst place I've ever been in my professional life internally. I don't really want to have this conversation with a million people. But no. I don't.

Because I understand the Trump voter, who is desperate to save his or her country.

GLENN: Yeah.

FRANK: I understand the feeling of African-Americans who don't want to go back to the 1950s and '60s, because that was a bad time for them in this country. I understand those who came from other countries legally, but they're being demonized by the illegal population. I get millennials, who are nervous about where the country is headed. They see the fires and they see the hurricanes and they see the weather, and they wonder what's going on.

I hear all of this. And I appreciate it. But the truth is, most people don't. They see what they want to see, and they disregard the rest.

GLENN: Is there a way in this world of social media, is there a way to come back together? Is there a message that will bring us together? Because I feel exactly the same way, Frank. I really, truly believe that the vast majority of people feel this way. They're tired of this. They don't want to live like this. They don't want to be at each other's throats.

FRANK: Well, two things, one is -- this is a plug. But not really. I want to hear from those people. And if they go to Luntz Global, which is my website, they can sign up for the focus groups that you talk about, they can sign up and their voices can be heard, and there won't be any shouting. And there won't be any disrespect.

They'll get a chance to be heard, and they'll get a chance to learn from others. But the other thing is, I want them to see this Vice News HBO clip. And all you have to do is go on YouTube, type in Alabama, and my name. And they'll see the entire seven and a half minutes. Some of it should shock you. Should shock them. By how --

GLENN: What shock -- tell me about it.

FRANK: -- explicit they are.

A simple question, a 14-year-old, one of the people said his grandmother was married when she was 13 and she had two kids by the time she was 15, that there are a lot of people who would be proud that their daughter of that age was dating a district attorney.

I -- I don't get that. That doesn't compute to me. And I don't care if that's 2017 or you're referring to 20 or 30 years ago, it ain't right. It just isn't.

And --

GLENN: But, you know, that's the one thing -- I keep coming back, Frank, to Jerry Lee Lewis, he married his 13-year-old cousin. And nobody in the South had a problem with that.

FRANK: Well, they did have a problem with it. You know this.

GLENN: No, no, no. They had a problem with it in England, and that's what really tore everything apart.

FRANK: Well, he would have been -- I think he would have been as big as Elvis.

GLENN: I do too.

FRANK: That man was one of the greatest piano players. And by the way, he played here in LA three weeks ago. And even in his 80s, the man is brilliant. But he never had the career that he could have had because outside his home area, Americans found that too much to take.

GLENN: Correct. Correct. Outside of his home area. But his home area -- and this is really kind of -- you know, the same kind of area that Roy Moore is from. I mean, it's different, especially back then.

FRANK: But does that make it okay?

GLENN: No.

FRANK: There was segregation back then. Does that make it okay?

GLENN: No.

FRANK: So that's the issue that I have. I know we cannot judge. I've been through this with so many people with these conversations. We cannot judge values and morals by today's standards, looking back 40 years ago. Because we think differently. And we act differently. But that said, I don't feel like we've learned what we should have learned. I don't feel like we have that same commonality that existed in this country years ago. I think there's so much more that divides us than unites us, and we're looking for those divisions. We're seeking to tear ourselves apart. And that's frightening to me.

GLENN: What is the biggest thing we have in common?

FRANK: Well, biggest thing is appreciation for the country. But I will tell you right now that one out of five Americans isn't patriotic anymore. One out of five Americans does not feel that this is the greatest country on the earth, does not feel that our system is the best system. And that's different. That was the one thing that united us 25 years ago. Under Reagan's administration, we all thought that even with our imperfections, we were still the best. That exceptionalism is gone in one out of five Americans.

GLENN: And out of those one out of five Americans, what do they think is the best?

FRANK: They just believe --

GLENN: Anything better?

FRANK: No. They won't give anything better, but they refuse to accept American exceptionalism. By the way, they do tend to vote Democrat a lot more than they vote Republican. But I don't want to bring partisanship into this. When you can't even agree on your country's values, then we're in deep trouble.

GLENN: Have you tested the Bill of Rights?

FRANK: Yes.

GLENN: How are those testing? Those principles?

FRANK: It's really weird. It's like, have you tested mom and apple pie?

GLENN: Right. Right.

FRANK: Well, the first problem is that Americans don't even know what the Bill of Rights are. They don't know the three systems of government. We have more people in this country who believe that UFOs believe than that believe Social Security will exist when they retire. We have more people in this country that can name the home of the Simpsons than where Abraham Lincoln was born. More people can name more Kardashians, than can name members of the Supreme Court.

All of that scared the living hell of me because we know our pop culture absolutely to the last detail and we know nothing about our Founding Fathers.

GLENN: Frank Luntz. He is the founder and chairman of Luntz Global. I urge you to go with -- go to FocuswithFrank.com. And sign up for some of his testing. He is -- he is one of the best listeners.

He is truly empathetic. And can hear beyond the words. I think he is -- quite honestly, I think he is a solution to many of the things that ail us, if more people will speak honestly and more people like Frank will listen.

Please go to FocuswithFrank.com. And sign up to be part of his focus groups. FocuswithFrank.com. Frank Luntz, always a pleasure and a privilege to have you on the program. Thank you, sir.

FRANK: Thank you.

Silent genocide exposed: Are christians being wiped out in 2025?

Aldara Zarraoa / Contributor | Getty Images

Is a Christian Genocide unfolding overseas?

Recent reports suggest an alarming escalation in violence against Christians, raising questions about whether these acts constitute genocide under international law. Recently, Glenn hosted former U.S. Army Special Forces Sniper Tim Kennedy, who discussed a predictive model that forecasts a surge in global Christian persecution for the summer of 2025.

From Africa to Asia and the Middle East, extreme actions—some described as genocidal—have intensified over the past year. Over 380 million Christians worldwide face high levels of persecution, a number that continues to climb. With rising international concern, the United Nations and human rights groups are urging protective measures by the global community. Is a Christian genocide being waged in the far corners of the globe? Where are they taking place, and what is being done?

India: Hindu Extremist Violence Escalates

Yawar Nazir / Contributor | Getty Images

In India, attacks on Christians have surged as Hindu extremist groups gain influence within the country. In February 2025, Hindu nationalist leader Aadesh Soni organized a 50,000-person rally in Chhattisgarh, where he called for the rape and murder of all Christians in nearby villages and demanded the execution of Christian leaders to erase Christianity. Other incidents include forced conversions, such as a June 2024 attack in Chhattisgarh, where a Hindu mob gave Christian families a 10-day ultimatum to convert to Hinduism. In December 2024, a Christian man in Uttar Pradesh was attacked, forcibly converted, and paraded while the mob chanted "Death to Jesus."

The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) recommends designating India a "Country of Particular Concern" and imposing targeted sanctions on those perpetrating these attacks. The international community is increasingly alarmed by the rising tide of religious violence in India.

Syria: Sectarian Violence Post-Regime Change

LOUAI BESHARA / Contributor | Getty Images

Following the collapse of the Assad regime in December 2024, Syria has seen a wave of sectarian violence targeting religious minorities, including Christians, with over 1,000 killed in early 2025. It remains unclear whether Christians are deliberately targeted or caught in broader conflicts, but many fear persecution by the new regime or extremist groups. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a dominant rebel group and known al-Qaeda splinter group now in power, is known for anti-Christian sentiments, heightening fears of increased persecution.

Christians, especially converts from Islam, face severe risks in the unstable post-regime environment. The international community is calling for humanitarian aid and protection for Syria’s vulnerable minority communities.

Democratic Republic of Congo: A "Silent Genocide"

Hugh Kinsella Cunningham / Stringer | Getty Images

In February 2025, the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), an ISIS-affiliated group, beheaded 70 Christians—men, women, and children—in a Protestant church in North Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo, after tying their hands. This horrific massacre, described as a "silent genocide" reminiscent of the 1994 Rwandan genocide, has shocked the global community.

Since 1996, the ADF and other militias have killed over six million people, with Christians frequently targeted. A Christmas 2024 attack killed 46, further decimating churches in the region. With violence escalating, humanitarian organizations are urging immediate international intervention to address the crisis.

POLL: Starbase exposed: Musk’s vision or corporate takeover?

MIGUEL J. RODRIGUEZ CARRILLO / Contributor | Getty Images

Is Starbase the future of innovation or a step too far?

Elon Musk’s ambitious Starbase project in South Texas is reshaping Boca Chica into a cutting-edge hub for SpaceX’s Starship program, promising thousands of jobs and a leap toward Mars colonization. Supporters see Musk as a visionary, driving economic growth and innovation in a historically underserved region. However, local critics, including Brownsville residents and activists, argue that SpaceX’s presence raises rents, restricts beach access, and threatens environmental harm, with Starbase’s potential incorporation as a city sparking fears of unchecked corporate control. As pro-Musk advocates clash with anti-Musk skeptics, will Starbase unite the community or deepen the divide?

Let us know what you think in the poll below:

Is Starbase’s development a big win for South Texas?

Should Starbase become its own city?

Is Elon Musk’s vision more of a benefit than a burden for the region?

Shocking truth behind Trump-Zelenskyy mineral deal unveiled

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have finalized a landmark agreement that will shape the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations. The agreement focuses on mineral access and war recovery.

After a tense March meeting, Trump and Zelenskyy signed a deal on Wednesday, April 30, 2025, granting the U.S. preferential mineral rights in Ukraine in exchange for continued military support. Glenn analyzed an earlier version of the agreement in March, when Zelenskyy rejected it, highlighting its potential benefits for America, Ukraine, and Europe. Glenn praised the deal’s strategic alignment with U.S. interests, including reducing reliance on China for critical minerals and fostering regional peace.

However, the agreement signed this week differs from the March proposal Glenn praised. Negotiations led to significant revisions, reflecting compromises on both sides. What changes were made? What did each leader seek, and what did they achieve? How will this deal impact the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations and global geopolitics? Below, we break down the key aspects of the agreement.

What did Trump want?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump aimed to curb what many perceive as Ukraine’s overreliance on U.S. aid while securing strategic advantages for America. His primary goals included obtaining reimbursement for the billions in military aid provided to Ukraine, gaining exclusive access to Ukraine’s valuable minerals (such as titanium, uranium, and lithium), and reducing Western dependence on China for critical resources. These minerals are essential for aerospace, energy, and technology sectors, and Trump saw their acquisition as a way to bolster U.S. national security and economic competitiveness. Additionally, he sought to advance peace talks to end the Russia-Ukraine war, positioning the U.S. as a key mediator.

Ultimately, Trump secured preferential—but not exclusive—rights to extract Ukraine’s minerals through the United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, as outlined in the agreement. The U.S. will not receive reimbursement for past aid, but future military contributions will count toward the joint fund, designed to support Ukraine’s post-war recovery. Zelenskyy’s commitment to peace negotiations under U.S. leadership aligns with Trump’s goal of resolving the conflict, giving him leverage in discussions with Russia.

These outcomes partially meet Trump’s objectives. The preferential mineral rights strengthen U.S. access to critical resources, but the lack of exclusivity and reimbursement limits the deal’s financial benefits. The peace commitment, however, positions Trump as a central figure in shaping the war’s resolution, potentially enhancing his diplomatic influence.

What did Zelenskyy want?

Global Images Ukraine / Contributor | Getty Images

Zelenskyy sought to sustain U.S. military and economic support without the burden of repaying past aid, which has been critical for Ukraine’s defense against Russia. He also prioritized reconstruction funds to rebuild Ukraine’s war-torn economy and infrastructure. Security guarantees from the U.S. to deter future Russian aggression were a key demand, though controversial, as they risked entangling America in long-term commitments. Additionally, Zelenskyy aimed to retain control over Ukraine’s mineral wealth to safeguard national sovereignty and align with the country’s European Union membership aspirations.

The final deal delivered several of Zelenskyy’s priorities. The reconstruction fund, supported by future U.S. aid, provides a financial lifeline for Ukraine’s recovery without requiring repayment of past assistance. Ukraine retained ownership of its subsoil and decision-making authority over mineral extraction, granting only preferential access to the U.S. However, Zelenskyy conceded on security guarantees, a significant compromise, and agreed to pursue peace talks under Trump’s leadership, which may involve territorial or political concessions to Russia.

Zelenskyy’s outcomes reflect a delicate balance. The reconstruction fund and retained mineral control bolster Ukraine’s economic and sovereign interests, but the absence of security guarantees and pressure to negotiate peace could strain domestic support and challenge Ukraine’s long-term stability.

What does this mean for the future?

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

While Trump didn’t secure all his demands, the deal advances several of his broader strategic goals. By gaining access to Ukraine’s mineral riches, the U.S. undermines China’s dominance over critical elements like lithium and graphite, essential for technology and energy industries. This shift reduces American and European dependence on Chinese supply chains, strengthening Western industrial and tech sectors. Most significantly, the agreement marks a pivotal step toward peace in Europe. Ending the Russia-Ukraine war, which has claimed thousands of lives, is a top priority for Trump, and Zelenskyy’s commitment to U.S.-led peace talks enhances Trump’s leverage in negotiations with Russia. Notably, the deal avoids binding U.S. commitments to Ukraine’s long-term defense, preserving flexibility for future administrations.

The deal’s broader implications align with the vision Glenn outlined in March, when he praised its potential to benefit America, Ukraine, and Europe by securing resources and creating peace. While the final agreement differs from Glenn's hopes, it still achieves key goals he outlined.

Did Trump's '51st state' jab just cost Canada its independence?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Did Canadians just vote in their doom?

On April 28, 2025, Canada held its federal election, and what began as a promising conservative revival ended in a Liberal Party regroup, fueled by an anti-Trump narrative. This outcome is troubling for Canada, as Glenn revealed when he exposed the globalist tendencies of the new Prime Minister, Mark Carney. On a recent episode of his podcast, Glenn hosted former UK Prime Minister Liz Truss, who provided insight into Carney’s history. She revealed that, as governor of the Bank of England, Carney contributed to the 2022 pension crisis through policies that triggered excessive money printing, leading to rampant inflation.

Carney’s election and the Liberal Party’s fourth consecutive victory spell trouble for a Canada already straining under globalist policies. Many believed Canadians were fed up with the progressive agenda when former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau resigned amid plummeting public approval. Pierre Poilievre, the Conservative Party leader, started 2025 with a 25-point lead over his Liberal rivals, fueling optimism about his inevitable victory.

So, what went wrong? How did Poilievre go from predicted Prime Minister to losing his own parliamentary seat? And what details of this election could cost Canada dearly?

A Costly Election

Mark Carney (left) and Pierre Poilievre (right)

GEOFF ROBINSPETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

The election defied the expectations of many analysts who anticipated a Conservative win earlier this year.

For Americans unfamiliar with parliamentary systems, here’s a brief overview of Canada’s federal election process. Unlike U.S. presidential elections, Canadians do not directly vote for their Prime Minister. Instead, they vote for a political party. Each Canadian resides in a "riding," similar to a U.S. congressional district, and during the election, each riding elects a Member of Parliament (MP). The party that secures the majority of MPs forms the government and appoints its leader as Prime Minister.

At the time of writing, the Liberal Party has secured 169 of the 172 seats needed for a majority, all but ensuring their victory. In contrast, the Conservative Party holds 144 seats, indicating that the Liberal Party will win by a solid margin, which will make passing legislation easier. This outcome is a far cry from the landslide Conservative victory many had anticipated.

Poilievre's Downfall

PETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

What caused Poilievre’s dramatic fall from front-runner to losing his parliamentary seat?

Despite his surge in popularity earlier this year, which coincided with enthusiasm surrounding Trump’s inauguration, many attribute the Conservative loss to Trump’s influence. Commentators argue that Trump’s repeated references to Canada as the "51st state" gave Liberals a rallying cry: Canadian sovereignty. The Liberal Party framed a vote for Poilievre as a vote to surrender Canada to U.S. influence, positioning Carney as the defender of national independence.

Others argue that Poilievre’s lackluster campaign was to blame. Critics suggest he should have embraced a Trump-style, Canada-first message, emphasizing a balanced relationship with the U.S. rather than distancing himself from Trump’s annexation remarks. By failing to counter the Liberal narrative effectively, Poilievre lost momentum and voter confidence.

This election marks a pivotal moment for Canada, with far-reaching implications for its sovereignty and economic stability. As Glenn has warned, Carney’s globalist leanings could align Canada more closely with international agendas, potentially at the expense of its national interests. Canadians now face the challenge of navigating this new political landscape under a leader with a controversial track record.

Glenn's Show Prep