Frank Luntz:  Those other candidates do have personas.  Mike Huckabee is the anti-corporate candidate and his language about accountability and responsibility for CEOs is remarkable.  He is the living, breathing embodiment of health care in action.  And he got elected in a Democratic state as a conservative Republican.  I believe his persona will play incredibly well.  

Mitt Romney, his persona is one of competence and the ability to get things done in a difficult, if not impossible, environment and the ability to forge compromises while still governing out of principle.  Each of these Republicans candidates has persona.  

Sam Brownback--straightforward, honest, principled.  All these candidates are as much about the way they carry themselves as people as what they believe as politicians.

Liz Mair: So, I guess what I'm wondering is, it sounds as though you think they all stand a pretty good chance as long as the public is made aware of those personas?

Frank Luntz: Well, it's not that they stand a pretty good chance, but it's that you can no longer write somebody off because they're at the back of the pack.  Ever since Jimmy Carter's election in 1976, dark horse candidates do get elected.

Liz Mair: It sounds like you don't buy into this logic that the Republican party always picks the next in line, as a matter of course.

Frank Luntz: Well, they do.  The Republican party is much more likely to pick the "heir apparent."  The Democratic party is much more likely to pick the grassroots candidate.  But there are exceptions to both those rules, and as recently as 2004, the grassroots candidate crashed and burned before he ever faced the general electorate.  And he crashed and burned because his personality, in the end, got in the way of his message.

Liz Mair: OK, next question.  What do you think the most important words will be for politicians to use over the next few years, in order to attract the support of the maximum number of voters?  I know you talk about bipartisanship, or non-partisanship as a pretty important theme, in your book.

Frank Luntz: Accountability is number one.  The public wants to know that you are accountable and responsible for your actions, and for your success or failure.  If you can demonstrate accountability, you will be re-elected.  

Number two is getting things done.  The public is tired of rhetoric, talk, argument and negativity.  They want candidates who have a demonstrated record of success and they will vote for people who they believe can actually get it done.

Number three is solving our conscience crisis.  There's a great degree of anxiety and fear out there.  We want to be led by individuals that we know won't crumble when things get tough.

Number four is reform.  It's not about being a conservative, or being a Republican.  It's about being on the side of change, on the side of reform.  On the side of making government more responsive and more effective, which almost always means making it smaller--but not always.  The battle over big versus small government in the minds of the electorate is over.  They're not asking for smaller government anymore, they're asking for better government, more effective government.  And that calls for reform of institutions.

One more: common sense.  There's this belief that when you get elected to office, you lose your ability to listen and respond to the average American.  The public wants to feel like the people they elect get it.  And common sense is in way too short of supply, particularly in Washington.

Liz Mair:  OK, five words to note.  Now, the next question I had was, you talk about the changing nature of language, and how words like "crisis" have become increasingly used in the political sphere.  One of your points seems to be that political rhetoric is becoming more and more extreme, presumably because everyone is looking to market every story, every issue, and every debate as the most important thing ever, to get more attention.  It strikes me that this trend is totally bizarre--we seem to be moving towards more and more extreme language, while the overwhelming majority of Americans are less extreme in their philosophies and ideologies.  I'm wondering what you think the effect of this trend will be, in the long run.  Are people going to get more and more switched off from politics, or do you think the heightened rhetoric has the potential to push people to engage more in political debates?

Frank Luntz: Overall, I find it a destructive component of American politics.  You always need a sense of common ground.  You always need someplace where we can meet in the center, and at least agree to disagree.  We now have political discourse, particularly in the blogs, that is so angry and bitter that there is a complete repudiation of the other person's point of view before you even hear it.  I know that in the reviews of "Words That Work," people were commenting on it without even having read the book.

Liz Mair: Yeah, I noticed that on Amazon actually.  I think three out the first four comments were from people who hadn't read it.

Frank Luntz: And how is that helpful to the political process?

Liz Mair: Uh, not at all!

Frank Luntz: That's it, that's my point.  I think that there's an acidic nature in the political dialogue right now.  There's one blog where two different people had talked about wanting to slap me if they ever met me.   In the same posting, they complained about the violent nature of American society, and why are we turning to violence in Iraq, when we should be trying a more peaceful approach.  And in that same blog, two separate people talked about wanting to physically assault me.

Liz Mair: That's an interesting dichotomy...

Frank Luntz: Well, that's an example of a rhetorical system that is deteriorating, and it's not good for us.

Liz Mair: I agree.  Now, the next question I have is this.  The President's plan for a troop surge, as outlined in his address, seems to have fallen a bit flat.  What advice would you have given him, in relation to that address?

Frank Luntz: He should have talked about a realignment, a reassessment, rather than a surge.  A reassessment of the war, to acknowledge that things have not gone as planned, and a realignment of troops and resources, which would have demonstrated a focus on strategy, tactics, his plan of action, rather than just the number of troops.

Liz Mair: It sounds like doing something like that would have picked up on two of the five words that you mentioned as being very key words, namely "accountability" and "reform."

Frank Luntz: Exactly.

Liz Mair: OK, how confident are you that Republicans will alter their language to enable us to win again in, say, two years' time?

Frank Luntz: I'm not confident at all.  I think that many of the same mistakes that led to the Republican loss in 2006 were easily foreseeable and preventable, but no one chose to prevent them.  I think the same ingredients exist and could bring Republicans crashing down in 2008, as well.

Liz Mair: What about the language do you think we need to change?

Frank Luntz: Republicans need to be more focused on the words that brought them to power, both in 1980 and in 1994.  Ending wasteful Washington spending.  Restoring accountability to Washington.  Promoting prosperity.  Developing strong national security.  And they have to have policies that back up their words.  Policies and actions to back up their words.

Liz Mair: Yeah, I definitely agree with that.  My view on it really is that if we get back to the fiscal and the good governance element, and we actually back up our words with our deeds, then we should start winning again.  Whether that will happen or not, I guess I'm not sure at the moment.

Now, switching tack, who do you like for the 2008 nomination?

Frank Luntz: I'm not picking sides.  I think that there's a case to be made for all of these candidates.  What I'm hoping--and I will make one statement about it--I do hope Newt Gingrich runs.

Liz Mair: Yes.  Is that so that we can raise the tone of the debate a bit?

Frank Luntz: I think that he will raise the level of intellectual discourse and he will inject an innovative approach to policies that the Republicans need right now.

Liz Mair: I think that's absolutely correct, and I know a lot of my readers are hoping he'll get into it as well, for exactly that reason.  Now, who do you think will be the Democratic nominee?

Frank Luntz: Well, I still think Hillary.

Liz Mair: It sounds like you're less sure about that than you were at one point.

Frank Luntz: Well, [Obama] he takes votes right from her base, right from the African American population, and that's going to hurt her a lot.  So, I think that one's open.  The thing that I'm projecting right now, the surprise, is that John Edwards wins Iowa.

Liz Mair: Yeah, that's actually what I've predicting, and I think he's going to take Nevada as well.

Frank Luntz: Now, that's interesting.

Liz Mair: Yeah, I just think the predominance of the service employees union people out there.. they're people who seem very aligned with him.  I guess we'll see what happens, but it sounds like you think Edwards could be in it for real, too.

Frank Luntz: Yes.

Liz Mair: Well, thank you very much for taking the time to talk today, Frank.