Who won the main Fox Business Debate?

[Penelope]

Fox Luntz focus group says Cruz
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vvc9oYmLsiY

Christie and Rubio also got high marks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CeJ44Svruis

Didn't Huckabee win the Luntz focus group for the first debate? lol

[Likely Voter]

IIRC the focus group from the first Fox debate had Carson as the winner and everyone scratched their head at that as the pundits and commenters here all thought he was out of his depth.  Yet, polls quickly showed Carson jump into the top tier after the debate.     

[ProgressiveCanadian]

My friend watching the debate told me it was Kasich

Your friend must be an idiot lol

First time i agree.

[Lief 🗽]

IIRC the focus group from the first Fox debate had Carson as the winner and everyone scratched their head at that as the pundits and commenters here all thought he was out of his depth.  Yet, polls quickly showed Carson jump into the top tier after the debate.     

You and I both know these focus groups are unscientific garbage.

[Alcon]

Luntz focus groups:

* Let's take a ridiculously small sample size

* Then, let's intentionally make it non-random and non-representative, including encouraging people to call in to join our focus groups

* And let's take any pretense of representation out of it by allowing the respondents to discuss between each other (although to be fair maybe he waits until after polling them on questions to do this)

Near-total junk.

Focus groups have their limited place, in drilling in to how people make decisions (including socially), and getting nuanced responses to certain questions that are less subject to social pressure biases, but I think Luntz kind of abuses them.

[Lief 🗽]

I actually signed up for the Luntz Group over the holidays and have so far gotten two emails about focus groups happening in NYC, asking me to fill out a demographic info form. I wasn't picked for either of them, but if I am picked for a focus group in the future I hope to get to the bottom of this charlatan's enterprise.

[Alcon]

I actually signed up for the Luntz Group over the holidays and have so far gotten two emails about focus groups happening in NYC, asking me to fill out a demographic info form. I wasn't picked for either of them, but if I am picked for a focus group in the future I hope to get to the bottom of this charlatan's enterprise.

That's my favorite part -- How he's like, "Think my focus groups aren't accurate?  JOIN ONE FOR YOURSELF!"

That's the problem, dingus!

[Lief 🗽]

I don't think the self-selection is necessarily that problematic (though of course it's not ideal); internet polling firms like YouGov are also based on people choosing to sign up and volunteering to take surveys (in a way that randomly being called on your phone is not), but those are still fairly accurate and I would think scientifically valid, right? I agree with your other critiques though.

I really am curious what actually goes on in these things though, since we only see like three or four minutes of it (and this is presumably after all the discussion has actually occurred) when he puts these on television. I hope I get picked eventually.

[Alcon]

I don't think the self-selection is necessarily that problematic (though of course it's not ideal); internet polling firms like YouGov are also based on people choosing to sign up and volunteering to take surveys (in a way that randomly being called on your phone is not), but those are still fairly accurate and I would think scientifically valid, right? I agree with your other critiques though.

I really am curious what actually goes on in these things though, since we only see like three or four minutes of it (and this is presumably after all the discussion has actually occurred) when he puts these on television. I hope I get picked eventually.

All surveys inherently include some self-selection bias, but no, even internet pollsters like YouGov go out of their way to avoid pure self-selection.  Pure self-selection logically has to be bad unless highly passionate people are somehow representative of the general election (they aren't), or there's some way of controlling for passion in poll responses without doing something like destroying your likely voter screen (there isn't).

Maybe Luntz makes some effort to address this, but I haven't seen it.  His response seems to basically be geared toward people who don't like his focus group results: "well, then, come skew it towards results you do like!"  dumbbbbbb.

To be fair, I don't know Luntz's methodology, and maybe something smart is going on, because he never seems to get focus groups stacked with Paul supporters or whatever (and they would so do that if they could).  Still, it seems unlikely that whatever he's doing makes up for the fundamental flaws in his approach.

[Beezer]

That Trump response...if you didn't shed a tear you're not human. I think we can pinpoint that this was the exact moment when he secured the nomination and won the state of NY in the general election.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

IIRC the focus group from the first Fox debate had Carson as the winner and everyone scratched their head at that as the pundits and commenters here all thought he was out of his depth.  Yet, polls quickly showed Carson jump into the top tier after the debate.     

You and I both know these focus groups are unscientific garbage.

Agreed. You can't look at a focus group to see what all Republicans reaction to the debate is unless there are a hell of a lot more people. Trump will most likely rise after this performance and Ted Cruz will most likely fall.

[Eraserhead]

I want some of whatever anybody who thinks Trump didn't win is smoking.

[EliteLX]

I want some of whatever anybody who thinks Trump didn't win is smoking.

I just want to know what the hell you think winning a debate means, because "WE LOSE TO CHINA!!", the 9/11 card, being boo'd various times, scrambling to recover for poor answers ("Oh no, it backfired & they're booing! I better blame Barack!"), having a majority of focus groups seeing little in your performance, and being grilled on his handicapped conspiracy theorist career is not winning a debate.

Although I am on the forum who forecasted Kasich storming the nomination and forfeit their opinions and wagon others just to be liked and what not, so I'll take the opinions here with a grain of salt.

[JMT]

Trump won the debate. His response to Ted Cruz over NY was actually very impressive and emotional, it had Ted Cruz from sharply criticizing "New York values" to literally applauding them in about 20 seconds. Trump also seemed to be more prepared this time to answer policy questions, and was more engaged in this debate than any others in this past. This was by far his best debate performance, and since his poll numbers only went up after prior debates, I have no doubt they will go up after this one.

That being said, I would say Rubio came in 2nd. His attack on Cruz over his flip-flopping record (even if it wasn't completely true) was perfectly timed and highly affective. Cruz attempted to respond by saying he was "thankful" that Rubio unloaded opposition research, and Rubio was smart by saying it was his record.

Cruz is still really good at debating, but this wasn't his best night. His opponents affectively attacked him, and he didn't respond as strongly.  I do believe at some point there will be a debate with just Trump, Rubio, and Cruz, but Cruz didn't do himself many favors last night in the debate.   

[Torie]

Guess who thinks Trump won the debate? Yes, you guess it not, William Kristol, the man who will not vote for Trump if nominated. Why did he think Trump won? Because his opponents did not slam him on the three issues where he thinks Trump is vulnerable with the Pub base: Obamacare, SCOTUS nominees, and Putin. Odd about the Putin bit. Everybody knows about how much the two strong men love each other.

As is often the case, Kristol's political instincts are off here I think. In addition to the Trump-Putin bromance, folks I think also know that Trump has remade himself for this little enterprise of his, and that he used to run with Democrats and all the rest. They don't care about that. What they care about, his that he is tough, he's simple, he's decisive, and will use his high energy to make all these irritations out there go away. And they want to believe in the kool-aid, because there seem to be no other alternatives out there that will make it all better, and make it all better sooner rather than later. In short, it's a leap of faith. It's tough to reason with those who have leapt.

In an odd way, although Trump and Cruz dominated the debate, perhaps the guy who did himself the most good is Rubio. I say that, because potentially he has made some progress in clearing away the other establishment Pub candidates, to give himself that lane. Obviously, what is not at all clear, is whether or not that lane leads to the nomination. But first you have to clear it, in order to find out.

[RINO Tom]

I thought Christie performed the best and proved himself (once again) to be the strongest candidate, but it's hard not to say Donald Trump won poll-wise.  He had his best debate yet (including roasting Ted Cruz's sorry ass), and I think he came off the most likable that he has yet.  He'd still lose the general, IMO, and more importantly have a Bush-like effect on the GOP brand for years to come.