MSNBC: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (Vaulted)

[Padma]

Is there anyone else at all troubled. about the way the embedded campaign reporters come off very biased and protective of the candidate that they are embedded with?  Just one more insight of the problems with corporate media I guess.

Yes, I'm glad to see someone mention it. It bothers me a lot to get the feeling their reporting is so inhibited in order to not tick off their assigned candidate and staff.  At first I thought they were trying not to slant their coverage even if they had been verbally attacked by the candidate (as with Katie Tur).  Now I think they just don't want to antagonize anyone. It's -very- annoying because the only things I actually learn about the candidates are what I read in the paper. MSNBC could remove all their embeds and just show the footage and just have their anchors read the daily campaign press release with the schedule and excerpts from the speeches and save themselves a lot of money. 

[NextIteration]

I thought it was just Katy Tur at first as well - but I think it's most of them.  Interestingly Kristen Welker was sort of mean about Clinton until the March 15th primaries when the delegate math got really good for her.

[ktwo]

Though not her fault, I can't watch Mitchell without remembering that she's married to that toad Greenspan.

I was shocked to see Andrea hold up her MTA card during the discussion of Sanders thinking that you could still use tokens on the NYC subway. I can't imagine her traveling anywhere without, at minimum, a Town Car and driver. Maybe it was an intern's card that she borrowed?

Edited April 7, 2016 by ktwo

[pennben]

Everyone, both the GOP and Clinton are holding their powder, a lot. Google is your friend. because this is not the forum to cover this.

 

I agree with that.  In addition, I think the media, and this network in particular, is holding their powder for the most part (until something like the NYDN interview), because they also want this to be a horse race they can talk about.

[vb68]

 

I thought it was just Katy Tur at first as well - but I think it's most of them.  Interestingly Kristen Welker was sort of mean about Clinton until the March 15th primaries when the delegate math got really good for her.

My Mom just brought up tonight how Kasie Hunt comes off more like an advocate for Sanders than actual reporter.

 

I agree about Kristen Welker.  I always think she comes off rather snotty toward Clinton. 

[shok]

Saw both Kasie Hunt and Kristen Welker on together today talking about the Sanders kerfuffle and couldn't get over how sympathetic they both were to Bernie and about how his precious fee fees had been hurt because Hillary didn't rave about how wonderful he was in her interview and therefore it's all her fault that Bernie got pissed off and said some nasty things. Give me a break! Bernie has been impugning Hillary's integrity for months now with his rants about her taking money from evil Wall St and being bought and paid for which is just about the harshest insult you can make about a fellow politician. Then HE gives an interview to the Daily News that showed how unprepared he is and yes, unqualified, but instead of his responses to the interviewer coming under fire it's Hillary who gets blasted because of what she said, or rather what she didn't say???!!!!??

 

Then he doubles down again this morning while she graciously laughed off his insults and all the pundits say both Hillary and Bernie are acting out????!!!!??? I just can't.

[Padma]

Saw both Kasie Hunt and Kristen Welker on together today talking about the Sanders kerfuffle and couldn't get over how sympathetic they both were to Bernie and about how his precious fee fees had been hurt because Hillary didn't rave about how wonderful he was in her interview and therefore it's all her fault that Bernie got pissed off and said some nasty things. Give me a break! Bernie has been impugning Hillary's integrity for months now with his rants about her taking money from evil Wall St and being bought and paid for which is just about the harshest insult you can make about a fellow politician. Then HE gives an interview to the Daily News that showed how unprepared he is and yes, unqualified, but instead of his responses to the interviewer coming under fire it's Hillary who gets blasted because of what she said, or rather what she didn't say???!!!!??

 

Then he doubles down again this morning while she graciously laughed off his insults and all the pundits say both Hillary and Bernie are acting out????!!!!??? I just can't.

Just watched the Andrea Mitchell discussion of "qualified". She had on all the embeds but Tur. I made it through Welker, who babbled a non-response to the question, then went on and on in a long "spin" the purpose of which just seemed to be sounding negative about all things Hillary Clinton. Mitchell showed this a.m.'s clip from "The View" where Sanders walked back the "not qualified" thing, but still defended himself on "hitting back when I'm attacked and she said I was unqualified". Then Kasie Hunt gave HER pro-Bernie spin on the whole thing.

 

Not one of them bothered to point out that Sanders "hitting back" made him look like a complete idiot, since Hillary hadn't said he was "unqualified" at all. Even today, he apparently hadn't actually read the WaPost interview with her and was still just responding to the misleading headline for it. 

 

It seems whenever I watch MSNBC their embeds bring zero news value to the table about anyone they're covering. And I'm so over the "pro-Sanders" and/or "pro-Trump" spin that pretty much goes on all day long.  CNN's no better in its own way because every time I've tried them, they have on so many guests with different political allegiances that there's no sense that anything is really true or false.  I don't know how anyone who depended for information on television reporters would have facts about anything. Occasionally, good points are made and experts come on--but it's pretty "catch as catch can".

 

Most of the time what's on display is really lousy journalism.

[maraleia]

Seriously everyone stop watching this channel because they are a joke now.

[stormy]

Yes. The revamped version of MSNBC has become someone, usually Steve Kornacki, sitting in front of the camera reading the news.

[shok]

Yes. The revamped version of MSNBC has become someone, usually Steve Kornacki, sitting in front of the camera reading the news.

 

News? MSNBC hasn't covered any news for months now except for one brief stint trying to terrify everyone about terrorists coming for you after Belgium. Otherwise it's just Trump nonsense 24/7.

[xaxat]

The problem is that the All Trump strategy is working. MSNBC  RATINGS Q1 2016 Ratings: MSNBC Regains Its Footing After Poor 2015

 

But this election is not going to last forever, so we'll see how long those numbers hold up.

 

It's kind of like smoking meth. Sure, it feels good the first couple of times. But after a while, you start losing weight, your teeth start rotting, and you wind up burning down your house trying to make more.

Edited April 9, 2016 by xaxat

[NextIteration]

The sad part is that MSNBC's ratings would have gone up anyways, just because it's an election year.

[NewDigs]

The sad part is that MSNBC's ratings would have gone up anyways, just because it's an election year.

And I have to wonder what the fallout will be after the elections. That's the only reasn I'm putting up with this crap.

I'm hoping that their core viewership will drop.

And I hope no one has the balls to decry and blame the Liberal Media for anything!

If there ever was a liberal bent to the news it is now gone.

[NextIteration]

And now Al Jazeera English is gone as well.  I won't watch Russia Today - there is real propaganda going on there.  More and more I guess I'll watch The Young Turks and read alternative publications.

[BennyB]

 

I won't watch Russia Today

And yet, Ed Schultz now has a show on RT.  Imagine my surprise when he showed up on CNN a few weeks ago, full of Hilary-hate, to find out he was on RT.  He used to be must-watch on MSNBC, and we were disappointed when he was canned.  But now....SMH :(

[Lexx]

But this election is not going to last forever, so we'll see how long those numbers hold up.

 

I'm morbidly excited about this.  MSNBC made a deal with the devil when they decided to go all Trump, all the time.  Their sidelining, then canning, of Melissa Harris-Perry, followed by their hiring of Rick Tyler (who is pretty awful as a talking head in and of itself.  he just sits there looking uncomfortable) was the perfect encapsulation of the new MSNBC.  I can't wait to watch it all far apart on them.

[stormy]

Aack Ed!

Ed was on the Bernie train before there was a Bernie train. 

I loved him on the radio and on MSNBC but he certainly has become a disappointment for me.

[NewDigs]

I'm pretty sure I heard Al Sharpton interview Anthony Weiner this morning.

About Hillary!

Anthony Weiner!

I don't think that's an endorsement she's been waiting for.

[xaxat]

Ed's on RT? That's disappointing.

 

RT is a straight up tool of the Putin propaganda machine. And not in a vague "The MSM is a tool of capitalism" sense. American reporters have quit because of their editorial interference and when one reporter criticized the Crimean invasion they sent her to the war zone in apparent retaliation.

[NextIteration]

Ed's on RT? That's disappointing.

 

RT is a straight up tool of the Putin propaganda machine. And not in a vague "The MSM is a tool of capitalism" sense. American reporters have quit because of their editorial interference and when one reporter criticized the Crimean invasion they sent her to the war zone in apparent retaliation.

 

Which is why I won't watch it.  it doesn't surprise me that Ed landed there, Thom Hartmann's show re-airs there as well, I guess soon we'll see all the "Ring of Fire" folks on RT eventually.  It's pretty nonsensical to me but I guess if RT gives them space?  (Ventura and Larry King both have shows there as well.)

 

Rick Tyler was okay as an interviewee on a show like With All Due Respect - or in a panel with a group of the other GOP campaign guys - but all by himself he adds nothing except a little insight into Ted Cruz. 

[33kaitykaity]

Saw both Kasie Hunt and Kristen Welker on together today talking about the Sanders kerfuffle and couldn't get over how sympathetic they both were to Bernie and about how his precious fee fees had been hurt because Hillary didn't rave about how wonderful he was in her interview and therefore it's all her fault that Bernie got pissed off and said some nasty things. Give me a break! Bernie has been impugning Hillary's integrity for months now with his rants about her taking money from evil Wall St and being bought and paid for which is just about the harshest insult you can make about a fellow politician. Then HE gives an interview to the Daily News that showed how unprepared he is and yes, unqualified, but instead of his responses to the interviewer coming under fire it's Hillary who gets blasted because of what she said, or rather what she didn't say???!!!!??

 

Then he doubles down again this morning while she graciously laughed off his insults and all the pundits say both Hillary and Bernie are acting out????!!!!??? I just can't.

The MSM's interpretation of the NYDN interview with Bernie is the thing that has been skewed to favor Secretary Clinton, not the other way around.  

 

Then right after Clinton got so soundly thumped in Wisconsin, the campaign put out word that it intends to "disqualify and defeat" Senator Sanders during the run-up to the NY primary.  

http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/04/07/disqualify-and-defeat-clinton-campaign-attacks-intensify-halt-sanders-win-streak

 

Then Clinton goes on Morning Joe and still won't say Bernie's qualified despite being asked three separate times.  She ducked every single time.  

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/apr/07/bernie-s/bernie-sanders-not-qualified-be-president-hillary-/

 

Which then finally led to Bernie's outburst about Secretary Clinton not being qualified.  

 

I'm sorry, but your post is so fact-free that I thought maybe I could help you.  

 

IMHO, I am so freaking sick and freaking tired of hearing about Paul Ryan riding in on his white horse after tRump doesn't the 1,237 on the first ballot and everything goes to complete hell.  Yes, he's cut.  Yes, he's tall.  Yes, he's easy on the eyes.  But for crying out loud, every MSNBC show has to ask will it be Paul Ryan?  GMAFB.  

Edited April 10, 2016 by 33kaitykaity

[Padma]

 

I'm sorry, but your post is so fact-free that I thought maybe I could help you.  

Well, here's a different take on it from the Washington Post fact-checker:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/04/07/sanderss-incorrect-claim-that-clinton-called-him-not-qualified-for-the-presidency/

[Ohwell]

Well, here's a different take on it from the Washington Post fact-checker:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/04/07/sanderss-incorrect-claim-that-clinton-called-him-not-qualified-for-the-presidency/

Forget about Glenn Kessler.  You ought to read the comments section to get a clearer picture of what people--not the media--really think of the candidates.

Edited April 10, 2016 by Ohwell

[slensam]

This is off-topic, but heck I voted for Hillary so I'm not the people? Millions others too.

[NextIteration]

The way that Scarborough posed the question was whether Sanders was not qualified due to the NYDN editorial board interview - he wasn't asking if Sanders was qualified.  Clinton has no responsibility to campaign for Sanders - but both Sanders and Clinton had a responsibility not to serve up clips for the GOP.  Only one of the candidates has failed that test.

 

Comment sections on teh interwebz are notoriously pro-Sanders, it's a shame they don't show up at the polls (or maybe they are just over-represented on the 'net because Clinton supporters have busier lives?)

[WendyCR72]

Every candidate has pros and cons. There. Done. As is this discussion, I hope. As I said before, I get MSNBC and all the other news stations get by on politics and this race.

 

But this is an example as to why PTV is against political talk as a rule. I try to give it leeway because of the stations, but it's time to go back to discussing the talking heads and keeping the actual content in general terms here.

 

Please be respectful of each other, no matter what political affiliation floats your boat. Accept some will not agree and some will. Then move on and agree to disagree.

 

This is not to say I will not allow discussion, since - as pointed out - this is what comprises MSNBC, CNN, and Fox News. But the line straddling can only go so far here. So, again, keep it to the personalities and the observations general so as to avoid the political wars. I'd like to have a full head of hair by election time!

 

Thanks for cooperating! Any questions, please feel free to send me a PM!

[33kaitykaity]

Well, here's a different take on it from the Washington Post fact-checker:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/04/07/sanderss-incorrect-claim-that-clinton-called-him-not-qualified-for-the-presidency/

Clinton questions whether Sanders is qualified to be president

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/04/06/clinton-questions-whether-sanders-is-qualified-to-be-president/

 

This was the final step that I failed to include in my step-by-step post.  

 

This step totally helped to make sure Bernie went postal on Hillary not being qualified.  

[shok]

 

This step totally helped to make sure Bernie went postal on Hillary not being qualified.

 

Going postal. Definitely a quality anyone would want in their president, especially ones that just read misleading headlines instead of finding out what the facts are.

[33kaitykaity]

Going postal. Definitely a quality anyone would want in their president, especially ones that just read misleading headlines instead of finding out what the facts are.

But nothing in your post defends the way that the Clinton campaign helped gin up the entire kerfuffle about her campaign's planned attack on the Sanders campaign to "disqualify" him and to take him out of everything related to the NY State primary.  

 

Game.  Set.  Match.  

[NextIteration]

Game.  Set.  Match.  

 

The only game set match that occurred was Sanders serving up clips for the GOP should Clinton end up the nominee, which is a failure.

 

Now of course, without question Joe Scarborough actively meant to make news for his failing show with his shenanigans (and WaPo had a misleading headline) - but the only candidate that fell headlong into it was Sanders,.  And then Sanders doubled down all over the Sunday morning shows saying that Clinton had bad judgment or lacked judgment - further serving up clips for the GOP.

 

I think that the goal should always be to make contrasts focusing on the issues, not personally attack your opponent.  This might be one of the only things I'll ever agree with Reagan about.

[shok]

But nothing in your post defends the way that the Clinton campaign helped gin up the entire kerfuffle about her campaign's planned attack on the Sanders campaign to "disqualify" him and to take him out of everything related to the NY State primary. 

 

I'm not here to defend anyone's campaign. I enjoy discussing how they work and how they are covered on cable news. And again, just like the Sanders campaign, you are outraged over a headline or a soundbite. This so called 'planned attack' never came from the Clinton campaign. It was a CNN reporter blathering about his own interpretation of some comment that someone may or may not have said. The Clinton campaign certainly never ginned up anything of the sort and in fact have gone out of their way to downplay such talk and Hillary has straight out said that she won't say anything negative about Sanders. The latest polls show him losing ground in NY and PA and other northeastern states and it is very likely because of Sanders irrational reactions to situations like this. He's not looking very presidential at all. I'll be interested to hear what other MSNBC pundits have to say today about his latest negativity. It didn't go over too well on Morning Joe and they hate Hillary.

[Padma]

Clinton questions whether Sanders is qualified to be president

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/04/06/clinton-questions-whether-sanders-is-qualified-to-be-president/

 

This was the final step that I failed to include in my step-by-step post.  

 

This step totally helped to make sure Bernie went postal on Hillary not being qualified.  

Again, as Kessler pointed out, Sanders responded to the headline--which was something that Hillary did not actually say. Yes, she told the interviewer there were questions about his knowledge base (and particularly his "interest base" which is arguably narrower than one would look for in a president). And told Scarborough that the fact he had not been a Democrat (did he ever register as one to this day? I don't know, but I don't think so) raised questions, too.  I don't see anything unfactual about what she said.

 

People may say, "Well, she walked close to the line of saying he wasn't qualified", etc. But the fact remained, Hillary DIDN'T say he was unqualified. Bernie responded to what a headline writer had claimed. And what bothers me was he was still doing it the next day, more than enough time to have actually read the article for himself.

[WendyCR72]

What part of mutually respecting fellow posters and leaving politics in general terms was I not clear on?

 

I'd like to think we are all adults here, but the dismissal of the last note is making me believe otherwise. I don't want to treat this as a kindergarten class, but if my request is not heeded, I'll be glad to lock this thread until it is - and deal with posters who continue to break the rules personally.

 

Now please, let's get back to the talking heads and the channel as a whole. If you want to talk politics, there are many other forums outside of PTV (CNN's site, etc.) that would be more suited to it.

 

Thank you.

[xaxat]

When I'm driving around, I'll occasionally tune into MSNBC on Siruis.

 

Whenever I hear that Luke Russert is going to be participating in the conversation, it's an automatic channel changer. I don't think I will ever be able to take him seriously. 

[Padma]

Another special news event (Paul Ryan announcement "Not interested") and another Brian Williams rush to the studio to be the one overseeing it all for viewers.

 

Does he have it written into his contract that he has to do all the lead-ins for the guests and all the intros-into and out of commercials? Just so we know he's more important than anyone else? He does it with Rachel on all the election coverage, did it during the Reagan funeral, and in the Brussels coverage, and again today. I'm guessing the answer is "Yes" and eagerly awaiting some leaked disgruntled MSNBC staffers fed up with him shoving everyone else aside so he can try to reestablish his importance at NBC.

 

He's so annoying, but apparently is here--shoving his mug into the camera while pushing everyone else aside (and then trying to be fake-flattering/charming to them all on camera)--to stay. Ugh.

[nowandlater]

Another special news event (Paul Ryan announcement "Not interested") and another Brian Williams rush to the studio to be the one overseeing it all for viewers.

 

Does he have it written into his contract that he has to do all the lead-ins for the guests and all the intros-into and out of commercials? Just so we know he's more important than anyone else? He does it with Rachel on all the election coverage, did it during the Reagan funeral, and in the Brussels coverage, and again today. I'm guessing the answer is "Yes" and eagerly awaiting some leaked disgruntled MSNBC staffers fed up with him shoving everyone else aside so he can try to reestablish his importance at NBC.

 

He's so annoying, but apparently is here--shoving his mug into the camera while pushing everyone else aside (and then trying to be fake-flattering/charming to them all on camera)--to stay. Ugh.

 

 

He is, technically, "lead breaking news anchor."

 

So he's doing what his job calls on to do on all breaking news stories, which include election results.

 

I have  no idea if the MSNBC people are pissed, but they knew what he was going to be doing.

[NewDigs]

I wonder what the parameters are for Breaking News. Way too broad, I guess. Paul Ryan?

I was badly amazed to hear Larry King interviewed by I'm not sure who. I think it was The Place for Politics around 4 this afternoon.

First, what the f is he doing on MSNBC? And why does the interviewer feel the need to almost breathlessly ask him if Trump sounded tired or anything when they conversed 2 weeks ago? It was awful.

Larry King.

[nowandlater]

I wonder what the parameters are for Breaking News. Way too broad, I guess. Paul Ryan?

I was badly amazed to hear Larry King interviewed by I'm not sure who. I think it was The Place for Politics around 4 this afternoon.

First, what the f is he doing on MSNBC? And why does the interviewer feel the need to almost breathlessly ask him if Trump sounded tired or anything when they conversed 2 weeks ago? It was awful.

Larry King.

 

It was Steve Kornacki....https://twitter.com/SteveKornacki/status/719998650169049088

 

Kornacki filled in for Rachel on Monday night, then he hosted another hour (I believe) 12 hours later, then another hour (or a segment?) in the afternoon.

 

Kornacki, as we know, is a geek when it comes to past presidential campaigns.

 

And what do past presidential campaigns involve? Larry King, of course. (See: Ross Perot.1992.)

 

So having King in was a huge moment for Steve.

 

Yes, Larry King is terrible with his political analysis. But he's a legend! And he's still alive! (See: Tom Brokaw or Dan Rather every time they appear on MSNBC.)

 

Edited April 13, 2016 by nowandlater

[NewDigs]

Ew.

Thanks for the info, nowandlater.

I was listening on Sirius and surprised I didn't recognize Kornacki's voice. It's quite distinctive. I guess that was his super-fanboy voice. I really think he could have asked King about somehing other than Trump, unless I missed that part. I didn't think that SK had drunk the kool-aid.

Though now I do remember King taking some credit (?) for Perot's popularity and bingo bango, Let's compare and contrast with Trump. Got it!

It was awful. I thought Kornacki was better than that.

[Jaded]

The mention of bingo bango makes think of  Montel Williams. 

[NewDigs]

The mention of bingo bango makes think of  Montel Williams.

Oh my.

I don't know where I found that expression.

Now I'm hoping it means something like "quick like a bunny"?

(Not a Montel watcher)

[Padma]

Just saw "All In" with several clips of Kasich with Yeshiva students. Could he be more ignorant, rude, dismissive and condescending? (Much like his efforts to talk with women or African Americans.)  He seems so studk in the (early) 1950s to me.

 

This isn't from All In, but a clip of his visit. Like Hayes said, "At least he didn't say 'How about Jesus? Do you like Jesus? I really like Jesus." Seemed like just a matter of time for that one, though.) Also? You don't turn your back on someone and walk away when he's talking to you, especially with the disdainful expression and dismissive tone of voice.  Glad Hayes showed the clips, even though it's so cringe-worthy.

 

http://www.timesofisrael.com/kasich-tries-to-school-yeshiva-students-on-bible/

Edited April 14, 2016 by Padma

[alias1]

I continue to be impressed by the coverage Lawrence does.  Not only did he have a very subdued Nina Turner on with Howard Dean, but he highlighted the plight of public housing.  What an extraordinary, eye opening segment.  

[shok]

Wow, Jane Sanders doesn't play nicely with others, does she? She was on Hardball today and Chris let her blather on about Bernie's wonderfulness by giving her a bunch of puff questions about him  growing up and how he got to Vermont and how his socialist beliefs developed. Then I guess he was going to switch to campaign issues and he ran a short clip of Hillary speaking at Sharpton's event today and where Bernie is scheduled to be tomorrow. When they came back, Tweety was all red faced and flustered because Jane had stomped off the set! Matthews was all 'I let her talk about her husband and everything' and you could tell he was pretty upset although he handled it pretty well and went on to his next guest.

 

MSNBC, when they haven't been blathering on (and on and on and on and on) about Trump and delegates today, has been Sanders Central with Jane on several shows as well as his odious campaign manager Weaver and the one senator who has finally declared for Sanders. Wonder if they'll be so Sanders friendly tomorrow after Jane's unprofessional behaviour today.

[NextIteration]

I continue to be impressed by the coverage Lawrence does.  Not only did he have a very subdued Nina Turner on with Howard Dean, but he highlighted the plight of public housing.  What an extraordinary, eye opening segment.  

 

That was a sight to see, I was flabbergasted.  Clearly, pointing out that Bernie hadn't accepted the invitation to visit a public housing facility either, subdued her.  O'Donnell's whole show was very moving - both Dean and Turner were left looking like babbling idiots.

 

@shok - I was listening and not watching, I knew something awkward had happened but not that!

 

Did anyone else notice that in Sanders' speech in Washington Square Park when he was thanking people he called Linda Sarsour, Linda Sansour?  Embarrassing.

Edited April 14, 2016 by NextIteration

[33kaitykaity]

If you need help to induce in involuntary protein spillage, James Rosebush on Morning Joe flacking for his new book about Reagan and how religious Reagan was and how much he was loved and on and on and on.  The fellating was really quite professional.  

 

Nary something like this was heard, so now for the mandatory brain cleanse...

[ktwo]

MSNBC, when they haven't been blathering on (and on and on and on and on) about Trump and delegates today, has been Sanders Central with Jane on several shows as well as his odious campaign manager Weaver and the one senator who has finally declared for Sanders. Wonder if they'll be so Sanders friendly tomorrow after Jane's unprofessional behaviour today.

Never fear, Andrea Mitchell had Mrs. Sanders on today!

[NextIteration]

Never fear, Andrea Mitchell had Mrs. Sanders on today!

 

Mrs Sanders appeared on Morning Joe as well.  

[potatoradio]

 

Kornacki, as we know, is a geek....

 

who also can't stay away from his freaking map and drawing random numbers. I saw his coverage of the RM show. The man could not bear to sit behind the desk. I glanced up, saw his intro, glanced up again, and he'd already sprung over to the map with rolled up sleeves and was scribbling "possible delegate totals" everywhere. Uh....yeah, I can see how the numbers "might" add up "if so and so gets this many here and this many there." I took math; I can add.

 

But maybe you could tap the map and see if you have some actual basis for these numbers that "might" materialize? Meanwhile, though, he continues to make me laugh. Geeks are my weakness, though.

 

I did not understand why RM was having kittens regarding interviewing Jane Sanders. Interviewing a spouse of a candidate is difficult and challenging? Why? And then I saw the interview and understood. RM was having a really hard time getting JS going. Goddess bless JS for not being a cliched and fake speaker, but RM really had zero solid footholds with her to build her interview on. 

Edited April 14, 2016 by potatoradio

[stormy]

Kornacki showed up on Lawrence O'Donnell's show last night with his freakin map and magic finger.

Lawrence devoted the whole show to Inside the Stop Trump campaign.

It was very depressing to me because I don't think they will ever be able to stop the Big Baboon.

It's scary that he acts like he's running for student council president and if, God forbid, he ever became president, he will not only never figure out how the government works, he will just run around calling everybody names, playing the victim and tarnishing the whole United States.

Edited April 15, 2016 by stormy