ScoobieDoobs

Ah, Rachel ended her show tonite so perfectly. She clearly made the point about Dems passing into law, negotiating Medicare drug prices -- and how Rubio wants to role this back. She shook her head sadly & asked why the people of Florida (a state bursting with older people) would want him as a senator -- as he'll likely get re-elected cuz the infinitely more qualified Val Demmings is trailing him in the polls. See, this is why I miss Rachel so much as she used to be, before this pretty-much retired shtick she's in now. We need her clear-eyed, dead-on analysis so much now, but we only get these tiny glimmers . . . I agree, Molly had a great chemistry with Andy Levy on The New Abnormal. Actually, I mentioned Molly cuz I thought maybe Rach might consider doing a similar podcast. Now, that would be great!!

Speaking of podcasts, I'm now hooked on Molly Jong Fast's new podcast. If you miss Rachel, cuz she's pretty much never on anymore or spends most of her shows (the rare time she is on) giving history lessons, I highly recommend Molly's podcast! It has become my replacement for Rachel's show as it is now. Yup, I tried watching Rach last week & this week, and it left me puzzled & thinking Rach is in some bizarro alternate universe where she's thinking she's still on every day & can do the same show & she thinks it'll work the same way. Welp, you're not, Rach & someone needs to clue you & your production crew in that when you spend half your show giving a history lesson, then you have zero time to interview with anyone with any kind of depth, or talk much about any of the latest news. Last week, she never talked about Letitia James or any of the week's Trump news. Really, Rach? Ugh! She had Dahlia Lithwick on this week & sure, she has a great chemistry with her, but so what? Dahlia has so much important analysis to discuss on what's going on with this horrible & frightening Supreme Court, & Rachel must've spent (maybe) 5 minutes with her. Sorry, Rach, but that just sucks! Molly (on her podcast) spent nearly a half-hour with a terrific in-depth interview with Dahlia. This is what Rachel used to do, but sadly, and notedly, now does NOT do. Sorry, Rach, but I'm ready to move on from you if your show (and career) is headed to mostly (or only) giving history lessons. Maybe it's time for Rach to retire completely from TV & teach & write books? She'd make a great professor!

Anyone watching Rachel or Alex lately? I watched Rachel's interview with Geoffrey Berman & it highlighted the problem with her being on -- is it once a week? Seems like once a month. The interview was short & she missed so much, cuz he really had a ton to say. Honestly, I thought she accomplished zilch with this interview cuz she had so little time to devote to him. Nicole did a way better, much longer, more incisive interview with him. Sure, Rach looks very happy & peppy, but sorry, being on once every never, just isn't the same. It shows a big lack of commitment on Rachel's part. The show is not the same. It's not working, Rach -- and if you don't wanna do the show anymore, which you clearly don't, kiss it goodbye & just make some rare appearances on special occasions & fish to your heart's content. And Alex? I've been watching her & I think she's really good. I recommend giving her a try! She's smart, she's trying hard, has good guests & clearly very good producers. I'm surprised to find I'm liking her & watching her more often. OK, I'm not watching her yet as much as I did Rachel, but I think it's time to accept Rachel is finished doing a show in this format. I hope Alex's ratings grow . . .

I've watched Alex a bit & she's OK, but here's the biggest prob I have with her. I find her mostly unmemorable & unremarkable. And I have almost zero incentive to watch her regularly cuz of my indifference to her. She did a very well produced segment last week on FL teachers that were shocked by some looney orientation they attended, which was backed by DeSantis, enforcing the idea that separation of church & state is bad & Christianity should be taught in public schools. A great piece, but Alex was kinda meh. Welp, I never keep track of, or care about ratings, but they will tell the story. Big ratings on Monday nite & ratings in the shithole the rest of the week? Will the genius execs who gave Rach this deal, give Alex a chance or will they get rid of her once they see how bad her ratings are? Sorry, but I find this whole Rachel-on-once-a-week crap depressing as hell. Particularly as CNN ramps up efforts to become another Fox News -- and make no mistake, it is starting to do just that, with more Trumpers popping up on all their shows, along with long segments promoting anti-abortion propagandists. Ugh, guess I'm just left to watch LOD & maybe Nicole every once in a while. Rachel's show is just not the same, being on once a week. She's gotta spend so much time catching up on all the news she's missed. So she'll do her long history shtick start-off, go over the old news from a week prior that's stale by air-time & maybe have time for an interview or 2 -- rinse, lather & repeat? It's disappointing.

I noticed when Rach introduced the Hearing analysis "in Prime Time" (her words) she said they've made a commitment to cover each & every Hearing fully. And did anyone else notice Rachel seemed in full control of the 2-hour analysis? Idk, I can't shake the feeling Rachel loves doing what she does so much, she'll eventually want to do more than appear once a week. Maybe this Hearing analysis is an indication of that? Well, we can hope anyway . . .

I suspect they were looking to put in a "new face". She does strike a similar tone as Rachel -- or she tries to. Can't say I'm interested in watching her much or at all. I predict her ratings will tank, but they're stuck with her for the time being. Jen Psaki might be an interesting choice for a replacement when she fails. Loved her press conferences, particularly when she'd swat away stupid questions from Fox dopes.

Who said anything about her owing anything to anyone? Honestly, I just don't get what she's about now. And I still don't get why she did this deal of blowing off the show & then only being on a handful of times. I mean, sure, she'll get paid zillions to do a tiny fraction of what she was doing before, so cha-ching, cha-ching, it's a great cash payout for her, but to me it's disappointing. I figured she'd be itching to talk about what's going on in Ukraine. She's been talking about Putin (& his oligarchs) for what seems like decades, and now that he's doing the horrific things he's doing, we hear absolutely nothing from Rachel. That's what's disappointing to me. Not that she owes anything to viewers, but again, I don't get her. Doesn't she want to comment on what's going on now? Guess she has more important priorities and/or commitments. Yeah, she said she'll be back in April, but it's already been announced the show is ending by then, so it probably won't be more than once or twice. Wonder if Putin (and/or his oligarchs) has sent her a thank you muffin basket for her trip to oblivion. Btw, the comment about Chuck Toad wanting Rachel's timeslot gave me a hearty belly laugh. He's lucky to have the 1 o'clock time he's got. Apparently, they're considering giving him the boot totally. The only one more deluded than him must be Andrew Cuomo!

No doubt, Ali is quite good. It's just very hard adjusting to life without Rachel. So this is how it's gonna be from now on, cuz of this idiotic deal the delicate geniuses at NBC/Universal worked out with her? Will she mostly be in oblivion/retirement, but pop up sporadically & randomly & completely unpredictably? Sounds awful to me. Why even bother to have a Rachel Maddow Show anymore? Really should be the Ali Velshi Show now. Alex is better suited to a weekend timeslot & given how she's not been seen lately, that's likely where she'll end up. While Ali may be capable, is he getting anywhere near the ratings that Rachel did? I suspect eventually CNN is gonna finally replace Cuomo's timeslot with Chris Wallace & then MSNBC is really gonna get killed in ratings. I'm astounded at the laziness/stupidity in NBC/Universal not even attempting to find a replacement for Rachel that could garner decent ratings.

I don’t agree. Movies come & go & tend to be easily forgotten. And political movies? And by Ben Stiller, whose peak has come & gone 15 years ago & who specialized in stale comedies? We’ll see how that well goes. A nightly show is absolutely a steady influence, which is what is desperately needed now to combat the nightly blaring & blatant lies coming out of FOX. I see Ali isn’t on every nite & they’re trying out some really lackluster others. Ugh. As I predicted, ratings have collapsed — not just for this show, but for the whole network. Well, at least there are some other hosts that still get decent ratings, such as LOD, Joy, Ari & Nicole. But as far as subs for Rach? Not happening.

Well, Idk if we’re that dependent on whether Rachel fades out or not. My point was — I don’t think this deal she put together with NBC is gonna work. Either you’re all in (or mostly in) or not. But to do specials once in a blue moon is bullshit. Rachel has hinted how exhausting her schedule has been been & we don’t have a clue just how intense it’s been for her. Sounds like she’s tired & needs a break — and has realized she just can’t physically continue what she’s been doing. Guess it’s wait & see if she can continue to be a powerful influence in a way she can also manage to be happy with.

Rachel was (in her sign-off) trying not to make a big deal out of her being away from the show, but sorry, I wasn't buying it all. She's not gonna be away for a week or 2. She said she won't be back "regularly" until April, and before then, only making an appearance maybe once or twice. To me, that spells the end of this show as of now. Idk, I'm still hoping she's gonna realize very quickly, if she only appears sporadically, with no regularity at all, her influence is just gonna evaporate. And I hope that'll bother her & motivate her to appear on the network more often, maybe even take the show back -- cuz there is just nobody that can replace her, to counter the Fox fools. I watched a little of Ali on Friday nite. He's very good, but he's not Rachel. I doubt I'll be watching much. I wonder if the show's ratings are gonna completely crater. Anderson Cooper seems to mostly be filling in now for Cuomo on CNN, as that network falters, so the RM show doesn't even have much competition with AC. Welp, Rach, you may be very excited & happy about leaving this show, but just keep in mind, so is Hannity, Carlson, the rest of the Fox idiots, Rupert Murdoch, Trump, Trumpers, anti-vaxers, and maybe all Republicans. I'd bet Putin is probably thrilled too! Rachel was particularly pointed, hard & focused on Putin very regularly, as she was Thursday, which I considered her last show (ugh).

I'm very conflicted about Rachel's "break" Look, she seems excited about it & that's lovely for her. But it really makes me very anxious. The Repubs have their well-established propaganda/bullshit network in Fox that consistently gets the best ratings in cable. And the other side? CNN's ratings have always been meh & since Cuomo left, and their inability to find a decent replacement, their ratings have stunk. MSNBC needs Rachel badly. There are way too many hosts that are really not good (lookin' right at ya, Hayes the racoon). Melber is snotty & annoying as hell, Chuck Toad has needed to get the boot for far too long, Andrea Mitchell should be retired, Katy Tur is good but is likely to take more time off to have more kids. Joy Reid is OK but she often goes too far & makes herself fodder for Fox & the like. LOD is great but his good ratings were likely coming from Rach. So what will become of MSNBC when Rach leaves Thursday? The network is likely to become a hodge-podge of rotating hosts. So viewers won't know at all who to watch when. To me, that spells disaster -- and ratings will certainly sink like a stone. Ugh. I blame the execs at MSNBC (or was it NBC/Universal?) that made this deal with Rach. She probably forced them into it. Honestly, I don't think anyone is gonna come out of this a winner. I get what Rachel wanted to do -- she wanted more time off & she wanted to do other types media, including podcasts. You know, the format of TV has not changed much. Podcasts rarely offer the same power & influence that a regular TV show can. Joe Rogan is an extremely rare exception to that. Can Rachel maintain the same influence with a podcast, as she has with her TV show? Maybe, but not if it's once a week or even less frequent, as she seems to want to do. Joe Rogan is on 3 hours every day. Doesn't sound like Rach wants to do that. Can she build an audience as large as his without the same frequency? Idk, maybe yes, maybe no. I'm hoping she'll change her mind & want to go back to her TV show, even if just for 3 or 4 times per week, particularly if she sees Dems are struggling before the election this year & as Biden continues to struggle with messaging & low approval numbers.

Wow, Rach went on & on & on, for what seemed like 800 years, at the top of her show tonite, that it’s Brian Williams last nite. Yeah, yeah, whatever, Rach, I was too anxious to hear her talk about the latest bad news for Trump to care anything about BW. But it did make me think — what if Williams is set to take Cuomo’s place on CNN & maybe Rach already knows? Hmmmm, just sayin’ . . .

I suspect it’s a combo of she cares nothing about fashion & she doesn’t want to distract from what she’s saying with her clothing. I agree that she could add some color. All black all the time seems so dull & depressing. But it’s her choice. Doesn’t bother me in any way about her. Just thought seeing her in that black pinstripe blazer was a shocker!

Oh my, huge news on the Rachel Maddow Show — and I mean really, really, really HUGE NEWS!!! Rach is NOT wearing plain black — she’s wearing a pin-stripe black blazer! What the what??? I’m spending the whole hour (and beyond) rubbing my eyes in disbelief!! Can it be? Why, Rach, why? 😀😀😀

Thank you, Rachel, for the only sensible take on the election results in all of media. Seriously, WTF is up with the rest of media — including The Times, WaPo & pretty much every moron on CNN & MSNBC (except maybe LOD)? While they were pushing the same stupid narrative that the Dems should now be panicked cuz of last nite’s results, Rach wasn’t buying it. Yay, Rach!! What are we gonna do when her show goes bye-bye? I shudder to think of it . . .

So glad that Rach has picked up on regularly mentioning the awfulness we’re still enduring with DeJoy & how he’s destroying the USPS. She started off Friday’s show saying she had news about him & later got sidetracked with the Texas anti-abortion story. Did she ever get back to DeJoy? Keep your spotlight on that roach, Rach! It’s the only way to pressure this administration not to forget about him & to finally get rid of that creep!!! Btw, I was always wondering about the moles on Rachel’s neck. She had several & they’re all gone now . . .

So last nite, Rachel did effectively explain the Times story of the Barr appointed US Attny in CT who filed that idiotic indictment. But wow, that was complicated. Good thing Rach explained it at least twice (or was it more?) cuz I was totally lost. Guess Rachel’s point on this bit of nonsense, that probably only she’s paying attention to, & the awesome Barb McQuade alluded to directly, is — Garland, WTF are you doing & why the heck haven’t you gotten rid of this Barr stooge & Trump suck-up/crony?

Yeah, Rach was off Friday for Labor Day weekend. Idk, she was looking so disturbed at what’s going on with Covid & with this horrible Supreme Court we’re now gonna be stuck with for decades — particularly in her interviews with the FEMA official & with Dahlia Lithwick. Is she really gonna be OK getting rid of this show next year & only being on intermittently? Really? Her influence won’t be the same & I bet she’ll be chomping at the bit to chime in when something awful happens. Guess we’ll see . . .

Poor Rach. ALL cable news is now stuck in an unwatchable cycle of the same endless coverage. Yup, it’s ONLY: Hurricane, Covid & Afghanistan — rinse, lather & repeat. Ugh, it’s so depressing & awful & non-stop, I can’t stand watching it! Will Rachel be forced to only cover these like the others? Welp, knowing Rach, she’ll hopefully keep up the coverage of voting rights mostly everyone else in media has forgotten about . . .

Latest news is Rachel’s daily show is likely to end sometime in 2022 — so enjoy it while you can. Her new contract is for about 30 “specials”, which may or may not be weekly. Well, this is clearly what Rach wants. Her show was so good last nite, getting used to not having her commentary every nite during the week is gonna be damn hard!! 😢

Yeah, but once again, Rachel (and to some degree, LOD too) is on a vastly different track than the rest of MSNBC, & pretty much all the rest of media, which is endlessly blasting the negativity of Afghanistan (with unduly biased blame only on Biden, and with no acknowledgement of Trump’s involvement). All the rest of media is covering Afghanistan & Covid — and that’s it! Makes me wonder if people are exhausted by coverage of both stories & are shutting off their interest in either. At least Rachel is covering other topics, such as what’s going on in TX with voting rights. And Rachel is not covering Afghanistan the way the others are. She’s either hearing from people who are experiencing what’s going on now or from experts with relevant knowledge to provide helpful analysis. She’s not just blasting grim images & screaming about it, like the others. Sheesh, I’ve really had enough of watching that shit.

Guess Rach was right — it’s August 13 & no, Trump has not been re-installed as Prez. So the pillow guy was wrong? Should we look for Rach to take a Friday nite swig of a very smart cocktail to celebrate? 😀😀😀

You never know with Rachel. She may work something out to take a break for a year & then come back. Look, there was absolutely a sense of urgency for her to be around before Biden, covering & highlighting the constant & endless barrage of scandals, lies, leaks, court proceedings, indictments, investigations & admin turnovers like nobody else in media. That sense of urgency doesn’t exist right now. So it’s actually a fairly good time for her to take a break. She’ll certainly be missed exactly because nobody in media now covers American politics like she does. A fine example of that was the way she covered Cuomo the other nite — not the same shit everyone else was repeating endlessly. She dug deep into the rotten history of New York State politics & made plain (rightfully so) how angered she is that it took a scandal for NY to finally get a woman gov. But she succinctly stated her thoughts on Cuomo & moved on. Hey. maybe she’ll replace Cuomo on CNN . . .

Yes, her coverage of this story is absolutely essential. Will she have much (or any) influence over Garland? Who knows? But it’s worth the effort for her to try! What I have no doubt of is this White House is listening to her, given that Ron Klain has been a frequent guest in the past. I was just disappointed last nite that she didn’t get to more coverage of those awful govs in FL & TX, but I’m sure she’ll get to it . . .