Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

Rhodes Scholar Reporting the News Show Discussion

maraleia

By maraleia
in The Rachel Maddow Show

  • Start Topic

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

jjj
jjj

What she actually said was "*thirty-five-year-old* real estate developer", and while age is not a criterion for wisdom (just look at the 70-year-old menace in the news), part of her point was that he

jjj

jjj

1 hour ago, M. Darcy said:

Even without the Trump factor, they probably would have.  The Republicans just have too many seats to defend.  Then next time, that will be the Dems problem.

I wonder if Rachel took the night off because they figured no one would be watching because of the Opening Ceremonies.

Well, if so, that is again the Eastern-centric view of the world, because in the two western time zones, Rachel's show was on before the opening ceremony.  And I would have watched Rachel anyway!

1 hour ago, Quilt Fairy said:

It could be, but considering the amount of hours she put in at the conventions for the previous 2 weeks, I'm not surprised she took a night off.

And yes, I am sure this was more the reason.  I think it is much less work to do a couple of hours of convention hosting than spending eight hours preparing for a one-hour show that is scripted, but the Brian factor has to make the convention much more stressful.

  • Love 3
alias1

alias1

(edited)

Sorry, I find all the speculation meaningless, even stupid.  This is what they're doing to fill time.  And I fear it will make Democrats complacent and not turn out to vote.  Speculating on states that might turn blue (at this point in time) is ridiculous.  I know it's what Kornacki does.  Maybe that's why I still find him unwatchable.   I was ready to throw something at the TV if I heard him say "landslide" one more time.

Edited by SierraMist
  • Love 5
jjj

jjj

I agree that all the speculation is like spinning wheels.  That is why bringing Kornacki to substitute for Rachel is a poor choice -- he projects and speculates, while others like Joy editorialize and contextualize. 

Now the speculation is not just "who will win?", but "how big will the landslide be?".  They think that to keep us watching and the advertisers paying, they need to create a sense of a contest to make it *news*.   It is already news, big news, if HRC is elected president. 

  • Love 4
Grommet

Grommet

Oh, agreed that speculation isn't generally useful. I was just in the mood for some optimism last night.

I hope we get some focus on HRC and the historic nature of her nomination but it seems like Trump just sucks everyone's attention away. Instead of pointing out his lies, maybe someone could rebut some of the more egregious untruths spouted about HRC by his supporters.

  • Love 3
jjj

jjj

(edited)

Ahhhhh, yes, thank you for coming back!

Rachel at the :33-minute mark, about Trump's claim that he will win New York state -- really wonderful.  "No, it's not that I'm saying you probably won't win New York.  You. Will. Not. Win. New. York."  And then showed the huge difference in the polls, which I am afraid to quote because I might get it wrong, but humongous.

ETA:  The final minute, featuring the Irish rowers -- wonderful!  "It's real, it might look superimposed, but it's real." (the view)

Edited by jjj
Podium Pants (if you don't get it, you'll just have to watch the final minute!)
  • Love 5
alias1

alias1

1 hour ago, Medicine Crow said:

No one has mentioned that Ivanka is reported to be in the Ukraine (or Russia?) visited Putin's girlfriend!!!???

Lawrence mentioned that Ivanka is in the Ukraine (after showing the Trump boys with something they killed).  I didn't hear him say she was visiting Putin's girlfriend, but he did show a picture of her with another female. 

  • Love 1
car54

car54

That clip of young Trump was a real find.   I loved the interview with Trudeau when she had him on.   Goodness young Barron is going to look like him when he grows up.    

I totally forgot how Trudeau used to portray HW Bush as invisible.

Here is the info on Ivanka's vaycay.   And the boys were off hunting about 10 days ago--the days whenthere was going to be an intervention but then it didn't happen because the boys were gone on a hunting trip.

http://gawker.com/ivanka-trump-hanging-out-in-croatia-with-vladimir-putin-1785290129

I find it interesting that Trump is supposedly taking Chris Christie to his intelligence briefing.

represent

represent

(edited)

But see, Christie does have a brain, he's not a moron in a sense of, he can fucking read. I have no doubt that he actually earned his degrees, he has brain cells, he's just a nasty prick and on the wrong side as far as I'm concerned.  So Trump needs him there because Trump's brain is fried, and I have serious doubts that he earned any of his degrees. I believe they were bought by his daddy quite frankly. He needs a brain there with the ability to explain the damn information to him at that briefing. He needs someone with enough intelligence to school him on what follow up questions need to be asked. They are allowed to ask questions, and that fool isn't going to know where to start, but I'm pretty confident that Christie would at least know where to start.

Edited by represent
  • Love 4
jjj

jjj

26 minutes ago, represent said:

But see, Christie does have a brain, he's not a moron in a sense of, he can fucking read. I have no doubt that he actually earned his degrees, he has brain cells, he's just a nasty prick and on the wrong side as far as I'm concerned.  So Trump needs him there because Trump's brain is fried, and I have serious doubts that he earned any of his degrees. I believe they were bought by his daddy quite frankly. He needs a brain there with the ability to explain the damn information to him at that briefing. He needs someone with enough intelligence to school him on what follow up questions need to be asked. They are allowed to ask questions, and that fool isn't going to know where to start, but I'm pretty confident that Christie would at least know where to start.

Completely agree.  I did not hear Rachel say this -- will listen on the rerun.  But I'd be terrified to give Trump a briefing of sensitive materials, because either he will go out of the room not able to differentiate between confidential material and campaign fodder, plus his public position has been "I know more than the generals know."  Will he contradict the briefers?  Christie, I am sure, was thrilled to be asked to join the briefing, and will indeed ask better questions. 

Plus, who is the woman who is moderating the Bush-Dukakis debate that Rachel showed?   

jjj

jjj

I wrote this over on the MSNBC thread earlier today:

Quote

Rachel did do quite a hilarious segment on the dead doctor's letter about Trump's "astonishingly excellent" health, back when the letter was released late last year.  I remember her tapping the desk with a pencil in that sarcastic "REALLY???" punctuation she creates with the clicks. 

Very glad she has re-introduced the letter from Trump's "physician", complete with pen clicking on the desk.  And that Rachel (of course it is Rachel) is taking the right-wing media to task about the forged "documents" about HRC's health.  Glad she also addressed the need to rebut these made-up symptoms.  I don't think I have heard an interview with Robby Mook, and he actually seems like a manager, unlike the other campaign's top staff. 

  • Love 7
represent

represent

(edited)

There goes the 8-11 time slots actually doing their job and putting it right out that we're a heartbeat away from having a white supremacist and all his friends take hold of the oval office.  Thanks for connecting the dots out loud while your spineless, colleagues try to report on said campaign as if it's business as usual.  

Edited by represent
  • Love 8
teddysmom

teddysmom

Quote

Rachel did do quite a hilarious segment on the dead doctor's letter about Trump's "astonishingly excellent" health, back when the letter was released late last year.  I remember her tapping the desk with a pencil in that sarcastic "REALLY???" punctuation she creates with the clicks. 

I was LOL last night when she read that letter again.  And the guy's email and web site don't exist any more? 

It sounds like Trump wrote the letter and got the doctor to sign it. 

  • Love 4
attica

attica

1 hour ago, teddysmom said:

It sounds like Trump wrote the letter and got the doctor to sign it. 

When we know that Trump has posed as his own publicist more than once in the past, I don't doubt Trump wrote it himself. (Or "wrote" it. wevs) I do doubt the "doctor" signed it -- it's not like we'd know his real signature.

  • Love 3
teddysmom

teddysmom

(edited)

I think this is all we need to know.  I wouldn't let this guy check the air in my tires, let alone give me a physical. I'm positive. 

http://cdn1.thr.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/landscape_928x523/2015/12/screen_shot_2015-12-17_at_9.05.32_am.png

To Whom My Concern indeed.  

Edited by teddysmom
jjj

jjj

Fabulous segment about F.A.C.G., and the determination of Trump's doctor to keep using the affiliation to which he is no longer entitled, according to the organization that actually determines its membership, the Fellows of the American College of Gastroenterology.

Rachel was so filled with glee -- an answer both from the F.A.C.G. *and* from the actual Trump doctor.  Said Rachel:  "But this is the election of 2016, and honestly, I've never loved you more."

Yeah, someone who would write a letter like that would continue to claim an affiliation that he stopped paying for twenty years ago.  "Astonishingly excellent."

  • Love 1
represent

represent

(edited)

I swear if anyone had the chops to hack into Trump's college records, I have no doubt we could prove his degrees/certificates were bought as well. Oh man..that doctor looks sleazy.

Oh, Rachel is so cool. You can hear the camera folks and producers in the background laughing and having so much fun.

Edited by represent
  • Love 4
jjj

jjj

2 minutes ago, Grommet said:

I don't want to know what ads I'd start seeing if I clicked on that link.

I had to click for the rest of you, happy to help -- and it was surprisingly free of popups!  It was hours ago, and no detrimental aftereffects on my computer! The article actually noted other MSNBC hosts by name as rising in ratings -- Lawrence O'Donnell and Chris Hayes. 

4 hours ago, attica said:

I'm glad the headline summarizes the info, @jjj, so I don't have to give them my click. Heh.

And whoo hoo for TRMS!

  • Love 3
Deputy Deputy CoS

Deputy Deputy CoS

(edited)
On 19 August 2016 at 9:55 PM, jjj said:

I had to click for the rest of you, happy to help -- and it was surprisingly free of popups!  It was hours ago, and no detrimental aftereffects on my computer! The article actually noted other MSNBC hosts by name as rising in ratings -- Lawrence O'Donnell and Chris Hayes. 

I hope AM Joy and TRMS were also listed. In any case, I am glad these are the msnbc shows that more poeole are tuning into. They are the few truth tellers on the network and entire mass media as far as I am concerned.

 

I would hate it if a show like Chris' Matthews or Morning Joe rises in ratings.

Edited by Deputy Deputy CoS
represent

represent

(edited)
21 hours ago, car54 said:

I felt like hearing that Bannon watches her show every night kind of creeped Rachel out tonight.  "Maddow leaves a mark"  indeed.

Yeah, I'm afraid for her, that stopped me in my tracks when I heard it.  WTF? Kind of chilling IMO.

But the guy said he goes after those who are fact-based, so if you think of it that way the pickings are slim and Rachel Maddow would no doubt be at the top of that list. 

He was like yeah Rachel...he watches your show...say what? LOL

Well did you hear her say many weeks ago that David Duke calls her up every time she covers him? Then she looked into the camera and told him not to call, and told her political guest to tell him not to call.

Edited by represent
  • Love 4
represent

represent

(edited)
3 minutes ago, Medicine Crow said:

I don't think Andrea Mitchell likes Hillary .... just sayin'.

No she doesn't and neither does her loser husband who helped crash the fucking economy, Alan Greenspan.  I heard that old frog on the radio over the weekend while driving around doing my errands, talking shit about dems... and their policies.

Edited by represent
  • Love 2
jjj

jjj

2 hours ago, Deputy Deputy CoS said:

I hope AM Joy and TRMS were also listed. In any case, I am glad these are the msnbc shows that more poeole are tuning into. They are the few truth tellers on the network and entire mass media as far as I am concerned.

Oh, yes, the article actually was about TRMS, and her name is even in the URL. 

Thanks for the report on Alan Greenspan (below) -- very useful to know, and I would not have heard him talking anti-Dem on the radio. 

1 hour ago, represent said:

No she doesn't and neither does her loser husband who helped crash the fucking economy, Alan Greenspan.  I heard that old frog on the radio over the weekend while driving around doing my errands, talking shit about dems... and their policies.

  • Love 1
represent

represent

(edited)

I knew it!

I knew I had Jeff Weaver pegged right, it comes out of his pores, LOL.  You don't have proof, but the person just oozes "it" out whenever you're in their presence. I love it LOL!  He is most definitely a bull, attack dog is right.  He always looked like he was ready to explode.

I thought the barbershop with Mike Pence came off cute because of the barber. She didn't show the entire clip, which isn't exactly fair. At the end when the barber finds out that Pence is running for VP with Trump, he more focuses on Pence, he asks to shake Pence's hand again and then says well this is history and chuckles. It would have been charming overall if Pence wasn't on the wrong team and I didn't know he signed some law giving businesses the right to refuse service to LGBTQ citizens in Indiana... oh well.

Edited by represent
  • Love 3
jjj

jjj

4 minutes ago, nowandlater said:

I knew it!

I knew Trump wasn't going to be on Maddow...she teased something, something big. Then she teased how Trump does all these other interviews...but try as I might, I could not see Trump subjecting himself to a Maddow interview. No way!

That was way more tease time than it merited.  That said, I look forward to the interview.

The barber segment was charming, and thank you for letting us know there is more footage to view!

34 minutes ago, represent said:

I thought the barbershop with Mike Pence came off cute because of the barber. She didn't show the entire clip, which isn't exactly fair. At the end when the barber finds out that Pence is running for VP with Trump, he more focuses on Pence, he asks to shake Pence's hand again and then says well this is history and chuckles. It would have been charming overall if Pence wasn't on the wrong team and I didn't know he signed some law giving businesses the right to refuse service to LGBTQ citizens in Indiana... oh well.

  • Love 1
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...