Rhodes Scholar Reporting the News Show Discussion

[BTScriviner]

On 11/16/2016 at 9:55 PM, Quilt Fairy said:

 

On 11/16/2016 at 3:52 AM, Padma said:

Jerod's father sounds like a low life creep (albeit a real estate billionaire).

I think we've plenty of evidence that those 2 things are not incompatible.

 

I thought those were requirements.

[alias1]

On 11/18/2016 at 2:58 AM, Padma said:

So glad to know that--I really appreciated hearing about him from Rachel and seeing the interview. It would be fantastic if he would win and make it 49:51. That extra vote would SO help.

This is what makes me so mad about Wisconsin (my home state).  Russ Feingold was ahead in all the polls.  If Hillary or Bernie had just gone there a few times (especially Bernie) I think they could have pulled it out.  Russ Feingold could have been #49 for sure.  And Foster Campbell from Louisiana would probably be #50.  It's so sad, what could have been. 

[alias1]

Well, bringing this back to Rachel, I'm so glad she's exposing those Hitler people.  And to be fair, so did Ari Melber in his LOD segment.  I hope they keep it up and keep showing how abnormal these people are.  I don't know which one had the quote, "The Holocaust didn't start with Killing.  It started with Words."  This is so relevant to today.        

[Sesquipedalia]

I really enjoyed tonight's show. Rachel is putting a spotlight on some of the most disturbing aspects of Trump's behavior, though there are so many it's hard for her to cover it all. The only comment I did not like was the guy who said Elizabeth Warren is too old to run for president. She's younger than both Trump and Clinton, and I'm no doctor, but she seems extremely fit. I get the idea that we need more young Dems on the bench ready to step into key roles, but we're also an aging population, so I don't see why having older leaders is an issue. Also the person who appealed the most to youth this election was by far the oldest candidate. I just don't think age has much relevance at this point.

[M. Darcy]

Quote

Well, bringing this back to Rachel, I'm so glad she's exposing those Hitler people.  And to be fair, so did Ari Melber in his LOD segment.

She actually put in to words what happened here in DC last weekend.  We had a Nazi convention. 

I feel bad but I actually laughed a little at the Kanye West moment - just because of the look on Mike Myers face.

There's something about SNL that Rachel did not mention and I think she should have.  They had Trump on as a host during the election campaign and helped to normalize him to the American public. 

[Calvada]

I enjoyed the bit on comedians targeting POTUS over the years.  Rachel didn't mention, however, what happened to Vaughn Meader after JFK's assassination.  His career as a comedian was over, for the most part. 

I blame David Letterman too - had Trump on his show regularly, giving him an audience.  I always recorded DL to watch the next day, but couldn't stand Trump from the first time he was on and always fast-forwarded through his appearances.  I thought for the beginning he was a con man and nothing has changed my mind since then. 

[jjj]

I am thankful that Rachel hosted her show this evening -- after a night off, I was expecting a pre-recorded show, maybe on the election.  It was a relief to see her, and I hope she has a very happy Thanksgiving.  I do hope that there will be some Constitutional light shining on the Trump apparently selective mis-interpretation of avoiding conflict of interest on the part of the POTUS.  I appreciate the time she spent on this.  It will surely be uphill.

Edited November 24, 2016 by jjj

[potatoradio]

I've been unable to watch MSNBC post-election, so tonight was my first time tuning in to the TRMS since that heartbreak. 

Oh, man, am I glad I did. The resistance is on. I mean, it sucks that the country is in such a state that she'll be pushed aside as librull fringe now more than ever, but damn, she's still got it as a far left commentator and researcher. 

Assuming we survive any nuclear war and are still able to have some form of elections as of 2020 - I might survive these next few years by hunkering down with hard liquor and TRMS. I'm sorry the circumstances are so dire, but welcome back.

[suomi]

Rachel covered this tonight.

Historically, "libraries like ours are susceptible to different fault lines," he wrote — including natural disasters, changes in the law and internal failures.

Thus the need for a backup for the Internet's ultimate backup: the Internet Archive of Canada.

"For us, it means keeping our cultural materials safe, private and perpetually accessible," Kahle wrote. "It means preparing for a Web that may face greater restrictions."

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/internet-archive-web-s-warehouse-creating-trump-era-copy-canada-n689916

[Grommet]

I still haven't gotten back to watching Rachel but I've been recording it, so I'm going to try to watch last night's show. I wish I drank, though.

[teddysmom]

Poor Rachel. Having to cover all this bullshit and get into the weeds to find out the details of all the nonsense going on.  

She really should start her Friday Cocktail  thing again.  God love her. 

[ScoobieDoobs]

Ari Melber?  Meh & ew.  Why not get Joy Reid to sub for ya, Rachel?  She's awesome.  Look, I need some reason & a helluva lotta motivation to watch MSNBC now.  Otherwise it's just more reports of daily horrible Trump news.  And I really don't need to look at Ari Melber's mug & his snotty delivery.

[slensam]

6 minutes ago, ScoobieDoobs said:

Ari Melber?  Meh & ew.  Why not get Joy Reid to sub for ya, Rachel?  She's awesome.  Look, I need some reason & a helluva lotta motivation to watch MSNBC now.  Otherwise it's just more reports of daily horrible Trump news.  And I really don't need to look at Ari Melber's mug & his snotty delivery.

Snotty and mug...smug. It fits.

[ScoobieDoobs]

I wonder if MSNBC's (and CNN's) ratings have plummeted since the election.  Hey, Rach & MSNBC, throwing icky Ari Melber out there ain't gonna help your ratings -- at all.

[shok]

Awww, I like Ari.

[M. Darcy]

I think Joy was busy.  She's doing some event - maybe in DC.  And she had a busy weekend with her show and attending the KC Honors.

Heh, I wasn't too upset since I could then take a break from the news and return to watching the Simpsons marathon.

[alias1]

I like Ari Melber, but he isn't Rachel.  I had it on in the background but I can't remember a thing about the show.

[jjj]

6 hours ago, SierraMist said:

I like Ari Melber, but he isn't Rachel.  I had it on in the background but I can't remember a thing about the show.

Oh, *I* remember one thing very clearly from the show:  "Rachel will be back tomorrow".  Otherwise, I agree, I have no memory of the parts I had on in the background. 

[alias1]

Well Rachel was back, and she managed to scare the crap out of me. 

[Hanahope]

I really wish that some enterprising attorney would file defamation claims against these people, Alex Jones, Flynn's son, etc.  Certainly the pizza shop was damaged and I think you can establish damages to Hillary as well, even as a public figure.  

[nowandlater]

I'm tired of the Kurt Eichenwald scoops that Rachel touts as huge news that nobody really cares about the next day.

[alias1]

I wish people would start paying more attention to the Eichenwald scoops.  Why aren't they more of a big deal with people?  They continually show how corrupt Trump is.  But I am tired of Rachel saying we have an exclusive that you'll only see here.  It's right up there with their constant "breaking news."

[BabyVegas]

I'm starting to get really annoyed that Rachel talks about how much money the candidates spent but never mentions that the number she's citing doesn't contain any earned media. Shows, on MSNBC even, gave Trump plenty of free airtime to spew his slogans. When you compare money spent+earned media, Clinton and Trump get a whole lot closer in spending. Usually Rachel does such a great job giving context and history but this time she just seems to be completely tripping over her feet. It's seriously frustrating.

[Padma]

I'd like to see how much Trump spent on social media advertising. I read somewhere that Bannon said it was a lot more than conventional ads (maybe $58 million? Maybe more, I can't find it now.) I'd also like to know if any of the fake news stories (and the disinformation on social media aimed at millennials and African Americans giving them the wrong voting information--"Text!" "Use a hashtag!") actually was generated by the Trump campaign, via Bannon's team. I don't think it was just coincidence that there was so much anti-Hillary fake news spread so much through the medium Bannon most relied on in getting out their "message".

Eichenwald deserves tons of support and thanks. Like Washington Post's David Fahrenthold, he did everything you hope a good journalist would to bring well researched, potentially devastating stories out about Trump. There's something wrong with the media, the Democrats and the public that they didn't get the traction they deserved. I thian him for still trying to fight this guy--including on Twitter as well as at Newsweek.

[MulletorHater]

14 hours ago, BabyVegas said:

I'm starting to get really annoyed that Rachel talks about how much money the candidates spent but never mentions that the number she's citing doesn't contain any earned media. Shows, on MSNBC even, gave Trump plenty of free airtime to spew his slogans. When you compare money spent+earned media, Clinton and Trump get a whole lot closer in spending. Usually Rachel does such a great job giving context and history but this time she just seems to be completely tripping over her feet. It's seriously frustrating.

Not to mention airing his rallies in full, including interrupting their own shows to do so.  Of course, none of the other candidates were afforded that "courtesy."  Although Hillary reportedly raised more money than Drumpf did, it should also be noted at every opportunity how much of that money went into Drumpf's pockets via his bidnezzes.  

[nowandlater]

20 hours ago, SierraMist said:

I wish people would start paying more attention to the Eichenwald scoops.  Why aren't they more of a big deal with people?  They continually show how corrupt Trump is.  But I am tired of Rachel saying we have an exclusive that you'll only see here.  It's right up there with their constant "breaking news."

I wish most people would pay attention to Trump's corruption in general. But it's a sea of corruption, so people don't care. That's why the new Secretary of State being friends with Putin and the CIA thing doesn't matter. Nobody cares anymore.

[Medicine Crow]

Rachel's "history lesson" about the country of Chad, it's Dictator, oil & Exxon.  Verrrrry interesting!!!

[Hanahope]

I guess this country needs another lesson into why corruption in government, blackmail via business interests, etc. is important to stop, because most people have forgotten/don't care about it happening.  I guess the Great Recession wasn't enough, maybe this country really does need to fall into a depression, where the rich are fine, but the rest of us really have nothing, before the idiot white working class get their heads out of their butts and realize that Trump is not the great white savior.

[teddysmom]

Quote

Not to mention airing his rallies in full, including interrupting their own shows to do so.  

I agree and I think the reason could be two fold - he is, (unfortunately) the President-Elect so when he addresses a large group, it's news, and I think in its own way, MSNBC wants to be sure viewers are reminded what an egomaniacal lunatic he is. 

Quote

Rachel's "history lesson" about the country of Chad, it's Dictator, oil & Exxon.  Verrrrry interesting!!!

Very important stuff!!  I'm recording Rachel every evening and watching while I get ready for work. If I watched at night I'd be too wound up to sleep. 

[attica]

On 12/14/2016 at 10:25 AM, teddysmom said:

when he addresses a large group, it's news

Except it was never news when Obama did so. Maybe they'd show the highlights, mostly not. This guy is irresistible to cable news; I hate it.

I've been embargoing myself from teevee news since the 21st Century's Day of Infamy (but I've been following the threads here, because I trust you guys!), and whenever I surf by or peek in, I still see The Donald Show. And I just can't. I can't even. Even if the coverage is critical or incredulous or snarky, it's still all DJT, all  the time. Back in the W days, I depended upon Keith and Jon et al to reassure me that I wasn't nuts, but now, it doesn't even matter if I'm nuts or not. I feel about it the way I feel about Ongoing Disaster Coverage: all noise, no actual help.

[teddysmom]

I'm surprised that MSNBC shows all those idiot rallies. They must know the majority of their viewers aren't Trump supporters.   

It does seem there is a lot more push back from everyone at the network (except Joe & Mika) on Trump's shenanigans. I swear one of these nights Rachel is going to just open a bottle of gin, and start taking big swigs of it.

 

[Hanahope]

11 minutes ago, attica said:

Except it was never news when Obama did so. Maybe they'd show the highlights, mostly not. This guy is irresistible to cable news; I hate it.

I am hoping that while maybe we'll have to suffer through this for the first year (because its so different and horrifyingly 'entertaining'), afterwards it'll become so "normal" that the news will go back to just showing highlights.

[car54]

I hope the government makes Trump pay if he keeps doing these foolish rallies two or three nights a week.  I think I read that he's using campaign money now, not transition money for them but it must cost a fortune to haul the plane and his entourage and security all over the place just so he can hear people cheer for him.

[nowandlater]

Here's a good thread on Kurt Eichenwald's past:

[Keepitmoving]

4 hours ago, nowandlater said:

Here's a good thread on Kurt Eichenwald's past:

No, WE can't talk, but you can while I ignore you Sebastian Jones, his face look like shit.

LOL, I was wondering what was taking them so long.  I'll still be tuning in for Kurt's reporting thank you very much. I can't wait till they do their best to take down Rachel, good luck to them. I'll continue to listen/watch her when the uncover their made up underground child pornography ring that she'll supposedly be running. I wonder if here's will be out of a pizzeria as well, whatever.

Keep it coming Eichenwald, I'm still paying attention.

People still kneel at the altar to kiss the pussy grabber's feet on the far right no matter what the fucking pervert does. So I'll continue to kneel at the altar and follow the perverts on the left if I find them credible and that's for me to decide for myself.

Edited December 16, 2016 by Keepitmoving

[Medicine Crow]

Another great "history lesson" from Rachel about Russia & Putin & Trump's new Secretary of State.

[ktwo]

14 minutes ago, Medicine Crow said:

Another great "history lesson" from Rachel about Russia & Putin & Trump's new Secretary of State.

Tonight's show was great. I particularly appreciated finding out about the days-long packed protests at the North Carolina state house. I knew what the legislature was trying to do but I didn't know how many people were there trying to stop them.

[Grommet]

Like attica, I still can't watch the news.  I record the MSNBC lineup every night but then delete them all on Friday and watch Poldark instead. I'm glad someone is paying attention, though. Please let me know if anything good happens.

[teddysmom]

Glad to hear last night was good. I recorded it but didn't get a chance to watch this morning. 

[navelgazer]

Rachel did an interesting and nonrepetitive lead-in to the thenew fact that FAUX Noise aired a report confirming that Russia did indeed hack the election and threw it to Twitler.  But then Rachel's question was [paraphrased] now that FAUX says it's true, will [Twitler] believe it?  My spontaneous, audible reaction was a near shriek -- NOBODY GIVES A SHIT!!!

[Sesquipedalia]

I just listened to the podcasts from Thursday and Friday. I love the history lessons at the beginning of both. At some point in time I knew those things, but I feel so much smarter being taught them again. 

Was it just me, or did the reporter from North Carolina not appreciate Rachel calling his state a banana republic? I felt like he was trying to be neutral toward what the Republicans are doing in NC right now, but Rachel was having none of it.

[ScoobieDoobs]

The HUGE prob for me is EVERYONE in the MSNBC lineup shows too much Trump.  I can't listen to the orange clown, let alone do I wanna look at him -- which I do NOT.  

Look, I get it.  They wanna make a point & show that he did actually say whatever idiocy & lunacy he said that day.  But I still can't listen to it -- or the Orange Ass . . . EVER!  It's impossible for me to watch the MSNBC nightly lineup now without the remote nearby & constant access to the mute button.

Rachel does this as much as others.  I love Joy Reid, but she did this to a maddening degree this weekend.  I feel like I muted half her shows to avoid hearing Trump speak & keeping my sanity intact.  Ugh.

Btw, Rach made such a big deal about the Loretta Lynch interview, and for the life of me I did not get why.  She said absolutely nothing interesting.  Other than holding it in Stonewall, there was nothing interesting about it.  If you missed it, you missed nothing.

[izabella]

12 minutes ago, ScoobieDoobs said:

The HUGE prob for me is EVERYONE in the MSNBC lineup shows too much Trump.  I can't listen to the orange clown, let alone do I wanna look at him -- which I do NOT.  

I agree!  I especially wish Rachel and the others would stop showing Trumputin at his pep rallies.  Or if they do, I wish they would show that these places are half empty.  Instead, they have the camera only focused on the podium, which of course, is carefully staged to make it seem as though there are lots and lots of people there (except for this last one where Trumputin wrapped himself in Christmas trees).  I know the press is herded into one spot and one spot only at these pep rallies, but are they incapable of turning their cameras a few inches?

[ScoobieDoobs]

There has gotta be plenty of us around . . . I mean those of us who are nauseated & sickened by the sight & sound of the Orange Ass.  His voters made up what?  Maybe a quarter of the eligible voters?  

Please, I beg you, Rachel.  STOP showing so much Trump!  I hate watching him.  Maybe if Rachel limits the time he's shown, the others will follow suit?  

Honestly, it's getting to the point for me, I'm just about ready to give up on MSNBC because of how much Trump is shown on EVERY show.  I've already given up on CNN because of how much they show the orange clown -- and also because of that moron Kayleigh woman, who's on there ALL the time.

[kassygreene]

Transcripts!  Theoretically posted within 48 hours, sometimes up to 10 days, but you can read, and skim, and also skip rallies.  Sure, I'm days behind, but I can't watch live yet, and fast forwarding online isn't as neat as fast-forwarding a dvr is.

[steelyis]

5 hours ago, ScoobieDoobs said:

The HUGE prob for me is EVERYONE in the MSNBC lineup shows too much Trump.  I can't listen to the orange clown, let alone do I wanna look at him -- which I do NOT.  

Look, I get it.  They wanna make a point & show that he did actually say whatever idiocy & lunacy he said that day.  But I still can't listen to it -- or the Orange Ass . . . EVER!  It's impossible for me to watch the MSNBC nightly lineup now without the remote nearby & constant access to the mute button.

Rachel does this as much as others.  I love Joy Reid, but she did this to a maddening degree this weekend.  I feel like I muted half her shows to avoid hearing Trump speak & keeping my sanity intact.  Ugh.

 

I don't want to see Trump everyday, either, but I still need to hear about what he plans to do to me and this country. I don't ever want to be uninformed or caught off guard by anything he does. Me and so many people I care about will be more vulnerable than ever under his racist kleptocracy and I can't afford to ignore the disaster him and his cronies will bring.

[ScoobieDoobs]

ITA the reporting of him building his house of horrors & whatever daily atrocities he commits is vitally important to follow.  But I don't think it's necessary to show those overly long clips of him spewing his daily idiocy & hatred & nonsensical egotistical babble & outright lies.  Then MSNBC (& Rach) goes mostly on mute for me -- or I'll stop watching.  Too nauseating for me to take.

[sum]

It may be less effective and doesn't help their ratings, but I wish they'd just read the transcripts or a summary of what was said to the audience instead of forcing us to watch the actual video.

That said,

1 hour ago, kassygreene said:

Transcripts!  Theoretically posted within 48 hours, sometimes up to 10 days, but you can read, and skim, and also skip rallies.  Sure, I'm days behind, but I can't watch live yet, and fast forwarding online isn't as neat as fast-forwarding a dvr is.

+1 I'm still as bitter as hell, and in denial foolishly.

[steelyis]

5 minutes ago, ScoobieDoobs said:

But I don't think it's necessary to show those overly long clips of him spewing his daily idiocy & hatred & nonsensical egotistical babble & outright lies.  Then MSNBC (& Rach) goes mostly on mute for me -- or I'll stop watching.  Too nauseating for me to take.

Trump's verbal diarrhea can't be ignored.

Ignoring him, and people like him, is why we're still fighting battles we thought we won decades ago. It's why so many states were unprepared for laws republicans concocted to effectively ban abortion in states all over the U.S. Why they got away with, and are still getting away with, dismantling voting rights. They have always been vocal about wanting to do those things. They said it on Fox Entertainment "News" and on their talk radio everyday, but so many of us acted like it was irritating noise we didn't have to take seriously or pay attention to.

I hope The Rachel Maddow Show keeps reporting every detail of Trump's rise to the presidency--because if I'm going to be crushed by his regime I want to see it coming and give myself every chance to fight back.

[Medicine Crow]

Another very interesting "history lesson" tonight.  Go Rachel!!!