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

[alias1]

4 hours ago, NextIteration said:

The booing on the floor over some of the icons of the Democratic party was shitty and rude, and I bet half of the BoBs didn't even know who they were booing or what those people have fought for and accomplished in their best interest.  It was beyond disrespectful and I for one think think that Sarah Silverman was spot on.  Booing Marcia Fudge and Elijah Cummings was despicable.

This times a thousand.  Disrespect doesn't even begin to cover it.  The BoB people are so blinded by their zeal they can't see the forest for the trees.  They'd rather see a Trump presidency than believe Bernie when he says that voting for Hillary is the only way to further their cause now.  They don't seem to believe Bernie when he lays out all the progressive changes to the Democratic Platform that they achieved.  I think they were being beyond ridiculous for continuing to boo people.

[Padma]

1 hour ago, Ohwell said:

I don't care if Sarah Silverman was sick three weeks ago, or almost died.  Obviously, she's still alive and anyway, that's beside the point. It's not up to her to decide who's being "ridiculous."  Even though she said she's a Sanders supporter, I doubt seriously that she was knocking on doors and making phone calls and basically working her butt off for Sanders, like the delegates did.  So I don't begrudge them for letting off steam, knowing this was their last gasp before the crowning of HRC.

She didn't "decide" who's being ridiculous. She expressed her opinion (one I obviously agree with and which I feel was said much more politely than the people booing those incredible speakers who'd done nothing wrong to Bernie at all. I agree that was heartbreaking).  Elizabeth Warren, whose speech you'd think, would be so important to Sanders' people for the nation to hear, could barely be heard over that guy who kept shouting.

I switched to CSPAN for most of the speeches and, to my surprise, the audio was fine. It made me wonder if MSNBC had actually mic'd the California delegation. Certainly, they are milking that CA delegate who hates Hillary for all its worth. I saw the original interview (Jacob couldn't wait), Franken was asked about her, and as soon as I turned it on this a.m. someone--Chris J?--was asking the Clinton communication director and showing her the same darned clip!  Clinton CD was really good--as Biden was earlier when the media was prodding him to say negatives about Bernie's people and he wouldn't.

Day One of the DNC was about a million times better than Day One of the RNC with its plagiarism scandal and how no "big names" would show their faces for Trump. And yet the media keeps hammering this "conflict" into the ground. I wish by Thursday that the BoB people go all in for Hillary and demonstrate in a way that drives the conflict-driven media wild with frustration. But I'm not holding my breath.

(Meanwhile, Trump is showing how little he's thought of/understood Bernie's campaign all along. Has anyone on MSNBC been sharing his tweets? It's no surprise he doesn't "get" it, but it might set the media straight since they (maddeningly) keep equating Bernie's and Trump's populist appeals. 

[represent]

I just find it peculiar that they have pretty much yet to find a Hillary Clinton supporter to interview, not a surrogate. They keep talking to people in her campaign and her surrogates, but where is the perspective of an average Hillary Clinton supporter like the three Bernie supporters they interviewed last night. They only interviewed the unhappy folks last night, but neglected to put on screen the people who were elated by the fact that Hillary is going to be the party's official nominee. They are absolutely disgusting.

They still don't get it, while they talk about all the rigged systems, MSNBC and CNN need to interview themselves on the matter. Talk about being rigged in any direction that will give them the best soundbites that show shit is hitting the fan. I wish HBO would cover the convention. I need to check out public television, I keep forgetting. I have to find C-Span too.

Edited July 26, 2016 by represent

[jjj]

7 minutes ago, represent said:

I just find it peculiar that they have pretty much yet to find a Hillary Clinton supporter to interview, not a surrogate. They keep talking to people in her campaign and her surrogates, but where is the perspective of an average Hillary Clinton supporter like the three Bernie supporters they interviewed last night. 

They still don't get it, while they talk about all the rigged systems, MSNBC and CNN need to interview themselves on the matter. Talk about being rigged in any direction that will give them the best soundbites that show shit is hitting the fan. I wish HBO would cover the convention. I need to check out public television, I keep forgetting. I have to find C-Span too.

Thank you -- I just came here to say the same thing, after watching MSNBC interview protesters outside who basically said they would never vote for Hillary Clinton.  I want to ship everyone saying that to a territory governed by Trump after this election is over.  I'm just hoping that territory is not the USA.  But your point is exactly right -- they are focusing on what appears to be a very small  number of people who are holding on.  And who are getting a lot of national camera time because they are holding on to their Bernie dreams, instead of making sure their Bernie dreams stay alive in a Democratic presidency.  If they stop protesting, they stop getting attention -- and how much of this is about getting attention at this point?

By the way, the protesters are at City Hall, nowhere near the convention site several miles away, so I am not sure what constituency they are trying to influence, other than the cameras. 

Shallow note -- Chris Jansing has an impressive summer wardrobe of sleeveless sheath dresses (also favored by the Trump women), and today had a beautiful floral sleeveless dress that was perfect for broadcasting, but could have gone straight to a formal summer party.  I'm so glad she is turning up as anchor of hours this summer, and continues to be a great interviewer. 

[Queena]

Ok MSNBC, I get that you're going to milk this disgruntle Bernie supporters angle for all that it's worth, but this morning, even the anchor was kind of fed up with them. There were two on who were complaining about the fact that the convention was all about Hillary Clinton. The anchor was like, you do realize that you're here to nominate Hillary Clinton, right? They said, but couldn't we just talk about Bernie for a day or two before we got to Hillary? I'm paraphrasing, but it was quite baffling. I think that they read/watched the headlines and think that the DNC/Hillary Clinton stole the election from Bernie Sanders. 

 

I think that tonight, I'm going to switch between c-span and MSNBC. I'm very good at ignoring Brian Williams. I don't want to deal with any heckling tonight, but I can't miss my Chris Hayes. 

[SusieQ]

11 minutes ago, represent said:

I just find it peculiar that they have pretty much yet to find a Hillary Clinton supporter to interview, not a surrogate. They keep talking to people in her campaign and her surrogates, but where is the perspective of an average Hillary Clinton supporter like the three Bernie supporters they interviewed last night. They only interviewed the unhappy folks last night, but neglected to put on screen the people who were elated by the fact that Hillary is going to be the party's official nominee. They are absolutely disgusting.

They still don't get it, while they talk about all the rigged systems, MSNBC and CNN need to interview themselves on the matter. Talk about being rigged in any direction that will give them the best soundbites that show shit is hitting the fan. I wish HBO would cover the convention. I need to check out public television, I keep forgetting. I have to find C-Span too.

I've been watching PBS Newshour and they too only have been interviewing Bernie delegates. Also Judy and Gwen keep saying all they hear are boos, but their headphones don't seem to be picking up what is actually coming across on the broadcast (I'm hearing cheers). It's making me crazy!

[jjj]

6 hours ago, NextIteration said:

     15 hours ago, jjj said:

Steve Schmidt: "Michelle Obama gave a speech for the ages. Maybe we will see it at the next Republican convention."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Best line of the night, and of course Joe Scarbourough cribbed from it this morning.  Barf.

.

Andrea Mitchell also said it on the "Road Warrior" segment last night, but I think Steve Schmidt said it first.

[represent]

LOL, the democratic party is a trip, they are too soft because they believe in democracy.

Let this be the republican convention, those hecklers would be escorted out. They cut the mike off on the never Trump folks, and left the stage, I died laughing. Then years back they kicked out the Rand Paul delegates. So they held a mock vote outside in the parking lot for Rand, LOL. That's "the law and order party" for you, no way could you heckle people who they would consider elder icons in their party like Elijah Cummings is in ours, no way.

Then they kept shouting "we trusted you" at Warren, I had to hold one of my ears closed just so I could drown them out to hear her speech, ugh. It was a small group and the voices sounded like male voices, they just wouldn't stop.

Edited July 26, 2016 by represent

[Padma]

I'm also surprised at how, per MSNBC coverage, Hillary won the nomination without having a single delegate at the convention who supports her--much less who has worked hard, completely believes in her candidacy and is thrilled to be there.

I thought Kerry Simon had almost found one this morning when he interviewed a Bernie supporter who told him, "I voted for Nader in 2000 and have never forgiven myself. I'm definitely voting for Hillary this time. She..." (you could tell it was going to be positive about Hillary, but Simon's responses were too quick for her!  "Okay. I'm stopping you there," he said. "Let's talk to your sister."

Guess what? The sister was also a Bernie supporter. But she HATES Hillary and launched into "I'm sick of her corruption, and the support for TPP and ..."   Well, there was more, but I gave up again and went back to C-SPAN.

(I did get to see Chris J's lovely dress though. The one highlight of their coverage--other than seeing Jeff Weaver looking like the cat who ate the canary. I guess, behind the scenes, the Bernie people are being so catered to by Hillary people that it feels very gratifying--while every Hillary surrogate remains flattering and positive about Bernie and his supporters on-air.  I -did- READ something nice a Bernie supporter said about how the Clinton people had helped them understand and deal with the procedures needed to make the changes they wanted to the platform. Other than that, the media ban on pro Hillary comments from grass roots Democrats continues.....

[NextIteration]

Grrrrrrrr, I thought it was safe to have MSNBC on this early but they just yammered over Tom Harkin's speech, a much earlier retreat to C-Span today.

[Milburn Stone]

Echoing the many who had to switch from MSNBC because they couldn't take it anymore...I went to PBS, not C-SPAN, mainly because C-SPAN is in SD on DirecTV and my delicate eyes can't watch SD. :) PBS is OK; they have a panel, but the panel doesn't consist of complete idiots.

[Moose135]

2 hours ago, SusieQ said:

I've been watching PBS Newshour and they too only have been interviewing Bernie delegates. Also Judy and Gwen keep saying all they hear are boos, but their headphones don't seem to be picking up what is actually coming across on the broadcast (I'm hearing cheers). It's making me crazy!

I watched PBS for a while last night - what made me crazy was in the middle of Corey Booker's speech, first cutting to the booth to discuss it, then to a floor reporter who kept saying "What Booker is saying..."  Just shut up and let me listen to what he's saying himself!  I don't know how much better they might be compared to MSNBC.

[nowandlater]

4 hours ago, Ohwell said:

I don't care if Sarah Silverman was sick three weeks ago, or almost died.  Obviously, she's still alive and anyway, that's beside the point. It's not up to her to decide who's being "ridiculous."  Even though she said she's a Sanders supporter, I doubt seriously that she was knocking on doors and making phone calls and basically working her butt off for Sanders, like the delegates did.  So I don't begrudge them for letting off steam, knowing this was their last gasp before the crowning of HRC.

I don't know if Silverman actually did all that door-knocking and phone calls. But as a Hillary fan who's followed her on Twitter for years, she annoyed the hell out of me with her passion for Bernie over the past year.

[Milburn Stone]

40 minutes ago, Moose135 said:

I watched PBS for a while last night - what made me crazy was in the middle of Corey Booker's speech, first cutting to the booth to discuss it, then to a floor reporter who kept saying "What Booker is saying..."  Just shut up and let me listen to what he's saying himself! 

I agree, that was bad. Also, here in Chicago, the local affiliate WTTW cuts away from the convention right at the end of the final prime time speech to feature their local news panel, as if the Chicago take on the happenings is of any particular importance.

[Rhetorica]

Brian Wms & Rachel just reported that Sanders demanded his votes be counted for the "history books". So the motion of acclimation meant nothing, unlike when Clinton nominated Obama. 

[Padma]

They really oversold the negativity there. It was a great moment of unity--he just wants to keep a record of his 1800 votes (esp. important as a Jewish democratic socialist...the first to ever get so close to the nomination).

I can count on MSNBC to emphasize the negative.

Speaking of...this snippet immediately followed the moving gesture from Bernie:

Lawrence:  "Who would have thought in 2016 that we would have the first woman nominee for President?"

Brian: "Who would have thought in 2016 we'd have the first call for a Muslim ban? It's that kind of year."

Please. Shut. Up!!!

For some reason, my PBS station decided to show "Curious George" cartoons all day so it was back to C-Span . I tried MSNBC once in a while,but they were even talking over the "all women in the House" speech led by Pelosi. Not sure why they think  we'd rather hear the commentators rehashing political conflicts. I remember the good old days where there'd be someone like a Michael Beschloss to throw to  for some insight and historical background.  Now....we have Brian Williams who does no prep at al, still thinks he's clever, and looks like he wishes he were anywhere else..

Edited July 27, 2016 by Padma

[Grommet]

Brian Williams needs to go away now. That response to Lawrence was just bizarre.

[represent]

Oh shit, someone from the Hillary camp must be watching MSNBC, heard Rachel advertise that Elizabeth Warren would be on for an interview, and therefore proceeded to stop said interview by inviting Warren to sit in the Clinton box with Chelsea, LOL. Gotta love it, love it. They probably figured that there was no way there would be an interview with Warren that wouldn't touch on Bernie and on Warren herself obviously and that's a no, no. They aren't having that tonight, no way.  We have now entered the this is ALL about Hillary phase of this convention. I love it.

[maraleia]

I'm only watching MSNBC when they show the speeches and nothing else because my C-SPAN isn't in HD.

[jjj]

Brian, I cannot believe you started your remarks by talking about Bill Clinton's age-related physical tics.  Shame.  Good luck with that age thing. 

Thank you, Rachel and Lawrence, for focusing on what is new in the actual content of the speech.

Is Meryl Streep getting ready to play HRC in a film? 

Edited July 27, 2016 by jjj

[represent]

13 minutes ago, jjj said:

Brian, I cannot believe you started your remarks by talking about Bill Clinton's age-related physical tics.  Shame.  Good luck with that age thing. 

Thank you, Rachel and Lawrence, for focusing on what is new in the actual content of the speech.

Geesh, aging truly bothers these folks. Every time they see Bill and he shakes, they can't let it go. He's getting old and I believe he's had some heart issues. Move on, he's still able to stand up and give a very audible speech. And I disagree with Rachel, part of his speech was talking about his then girl/girlfriend who became his wife, it was not sexist at all. The speech went back and forth between her work for communities all over this country and her life with her family. He met a girl....I don't get what's wrong with that considering when he used the word girl he was remembering seeing her but not knowing her name. 

Rachel's having trouble disconnecting philandering Bill from the husband trying to talk about his wife with admiration and respect. I get it, it's hard when it comes to Bill Clinton, but make no mistake that's the problem Rachel was having with the beginning of that speech.

Edited July 27, 2016 by represent

[jjj]

Okay, the shattering the glass ceiling of all the previous presidents' portraits was cool.

[Grommet]

4 minutes ago, represent said:

Rachel's having trouble disconnecting philandering Bill from the husband trying to talk about his wife with admiration and respect. I get it, it's hard when it comes to Bill Clinton, but make no mistake that's the problem Rachel was having with the beginning of that speech.

I completely agree. I get it, because Bill hasn't been a great husband, but he clearly loves and respects her.

[represent]

4 minutes ago, Grommet said:

I completely agree. I get it, because Bill hasn't been a great husband, but he clearly loves and respects her.

Yeah, and  Rachel is also on record saying that she thought he should have resigned due to the Lewinsky scandal. She said it in a podcast interview with Ezra Klein. Yeah, I think he creeps her out, that's the impression I get, just saying...

[memememe76]

Didn't Michelle talk about how she and Barack met? Isn't that what First Spouses do? Don't get the problem.

[jjj]

13 minutes ago, represent said:

Yeah, and  Rachel is also on record saying that she thought he should have resigned due to the Lewinsky scandal. She said it in a podcast interview with Ezra Klein. Yeah, I think he creeps her out, that's the impression I get, just saying...

Okay, I did not have this context.  I was just relieved that Rachel was not talking about how he looked. 

Nicolle Wallace was irritating.  His remarks played just fine in this living room. 

Lawrence at least is finding the college dorm story heartwarming.  I like personal stories, so I found it all heartwarming.  It was all true at the time.  When we have the privilege of hindsight, we know the wrong turns that their story will take, but it is lovely to return to the first moment of anyone's joint future when it was new and full of promise --  even when tinged with our future knowledge.  It is a moment preserved in amber for the Clintons, and I'm sure they find joy in it -- Chelsea clearly does. 

Edited July 27, 2016 by jjj

[tenativelyyours]

I'm almost more with Rachel on Billie-boy than not.  If he had the calls to tea bag Lewinsky he should have had the balls to admit to it.  But resign?  No.  I do think he took the wind out of my parents progressive sails though and helped Cheney win the Presidency but that is another issue. 

I do think their marriage is one of convenience and has been for a awhile.  He just sort of, I can't think of the right word, annoy is even too strong, offsets me I guess with a speech about a person in terms of 'love' and this weird to me disconnected romantic past.  From the Obamas I can believe pragmatism and ambition can mix with love and romance.  With these two it just seems ambition.  But don't get me wrong.  I find nothing wrong with ambition if it is tempered by intelligence, empathy and a sense of being socially responsible and engaged.  And so his speech leaves with the what I call the fatuous Bill.  It oddly makes me dislike him more and admire her more. 

In an ideal world she would not be my candidate.  Bernie wouldn't have been in the running either.  But she is.  And MSNBC as a whole is being so stupid and willful trying to pretend she somehow snuck into the position while no one was looking.   If this is the sign of how MSNBC has shifted just since 2012 and how the upcoming general election is going to go,  I have no idea where I'm going to get general news on election matters via television.

 

4 hours ago, Padma said:

Speaking of...this snippet immediately followed the moving gesture from Bernie:

Lawrence:  "Who would have thought in 2016 that we would have the first woman nominee for President?"

Brian: "Who would have thought in 2016 we'd have the first call for a Muslim ban? It's that kind of year."

In my fantasy:

Lawrence wrapping this exchange up with : "Who would have thought in 2016 NBC news would have brought your lying ass back to television?"

[Padma]

Wasn't the Monica thing 20 years ago? Unlike Trump cheating on his wife with Marla Maples, the Clintons stayed together and worked it out. If we hadn't seen their personal issue played out on television (with Republican instigation), we'd all think they had a strong relationship.  Personally, I think it seems to work for them and he brought that out.

I liked LOD and Joy's spin on Bill's speech. I thought it was good and, as they said, particularly as it put him in a little different role than the last time he spoke at a convention. Loved the end, with the "real Hillary v. made up Hillary". Plus, the GOP's been "creating" her image for 25 years ("murdering Vince Foster" etc.) so its no wonder her negatives are high after decades of that. I hope people will rethink some of the mythology.

Ah, so I got to see Michael Beschloss after all!  Too bad he was asked to respond to two idiotic questions (one from BriWi and one, I'm sorry to say, from Rachel.) Glad he was there and he always tries to step up, whatever he's asked. But they'd be better off -- since he only gets  one or two responses--to open end it, "What's struck you so far today?"  He'll come up with something far more interesting than wasting time answering whether we've "ever seen a president have to deal with one ex president living in Washington and another sharing the White House and how will that work."  

I can never see enough of John Lewis.  And kudos to the secretary who went through the roll call. She looked like a movie star herself--wonder if that "telegenic" quality went into selecting someone for that part. Just a lot of great speakers today. Yesterday too. Keep it up, Dems! You're doing great!   

Edited July 27, 2016 by Padma

[Lexx]

I'm torn watching this coverage.  I actually watch CSPAN during the convention hours because I want to hear what's happening without interruptions.  Then I tune in to MSNBC after the recess gavel.  I enjoy Rachel and Lawrence, and I appreciate Steve Schmidt and Nicole Wallace.  Brian Williams alone nearly ruins it though.  God in heaven, he is such a smarmy little shit.

The "road warriors" I can take or leave.

Afterward, I really enjoy Chris Hayes, Joy Reid and Michael Steele.  But fucking Tweety drives me up a wall.  I'm watching right now and he's so obnoxious with his insider love.  Also, as someone who lives ten minutes outside of Philly, I cannot take his constant videos of getting people to do "Philly things".

Alright, rant over.

[tenativelyyours]

It galls me to say this, but what drumpf did in his marital life was not something that affected the nation and in my belief still does.  Should it?  No.  But it did.  And Bill Clinton made choices well past his marital indiscretions that affected his administration his party and his nation after the fact no matter how the Clintons worked it out (quite frankly I think it worked out for them because they both decided to have their own lives pretty much except when it furthered their career).  And I get hypocrisy in regards to drumpf being the candidate for the whole family values and sanctity of marriage party.  That plays well here.  I have that track on pretty much my whole day.  But as a compare it doesn't work for me because it isn't a compare.  Clintons marriage as public officials and politicians I weigh on its own (granted hugely biased perceived) 'merits'.  And again, it does not affect how I view Hillary in any way.  One of my greatest fantasies is still for her to give her acceptance speech and as she steps down from the stage she hands Billie Boy divorce papers.  Not going to happen I know.  But I would so love her keeping that self-involved douchebag with, granted, decent national and foreign policy from ever letting his ego run amuck in the White House ever again. 

Even without divorce maybe she could make him some kind of legate to American Samoa?  Somewhere pleasant but really out of the way.

I think his speech is nice in an affectionate way that recalls what they have been through but it did not convince me that they are in love with each or have been for some time.  Again, that's okay.  but then I am also the person laughing hysterically when love is asserted as completely and utterly present by outside commentators.  William and Kate being the true fairy tale and sooo different from Charles and Diana -- shit giggles.  Pretty much every celebrity marriage I count the days weeks, months or years and then look at friends in disbelief when they utter their shock at it not working out. 

Edited July 27, 2016 by tenativelyyours

[Padma]

Oddly enough, Trump was on Bill's side back in the 1990s, didn't think he should resign, didn't think he should have been hounded over Monica by Republicans. Trump joked with Howard Stern, "If Bill Clinton's getting all this trouble about women, just imagine what would happen to me if I ran for president?" There are some pretty unpleasant stories about Trump out there--in divorce papers and in memoirs of Miss Universe contestants.

Bill -seems- to have been under control for 2 decades--or at least has learned how to be discrete. I hope he doesn't ruin things for Hillary--I'll be worrying about that until  Nov. 9th, because I think he's still so capable of doing that.

Matthews on the after show? Methinks you protest too much about being so shocked that elected officials can be asses to their staffs. Who doesn't know credible stories about that? I can't believe he, too, doesn't have a million of them. Not sure why he was giving Hayes such a hard time over it.  (And enjoyed Joy and Michael double-teaming him on a more feminist perspective on Hillary).

[brgjoe]

BriWi just needs to go away.  Ugh.  To think I actually used to like him.  I remember him going on talk shows and yacking it up with the hosts.  And I thought he was pretty funny back then. 

Later I come to realize he just seems as dumb as a box of rocks.  They should just keep him in that carbonite chamber and never let him out again.  :)

[WendyCR72]

Bill Clinton is a first-class hound. Full stop.

With that said, I personally don't believe Clinton's inability to keep it zipped had any impact on our country. Bill may be a horndog, but he was a shrewd horndog who had actually balanced the budget (!) and had America working again. And like Kennedy before him, Clinton has the "Cult of Personality" down cold. And, right or not, fair or not, it's something Hillary struggles with. So I get why she used Bill as a secret weapon tonight. The man is still a Democratic rock star. And while this part doesn't have any relevance to Hillary as president, they both did something right with their daughter, so it isn't all show or smoke and mirrors. I can see where a shred of something remains if only in the parental capacity

I doubt the Clinton marriage is a love for the ages and is more symbiotic now than anything. But in an odd way, despite Lewinsky and all the other women on the side, I think there is a respect from Bill for Hillary's intellect and her aforementioned mothering if not much else. And with a job like leader of the free world, intellect and being shrewd goes a long way in the end.

So in that vein, I think Bill Clinton's speech tonight did have a ring of sincerity to it, fidelity issues notwithstanding.

[jenrising]

Watching actual speeches on CSPAN last night was so much better. Flipped over to MSNBC occasionally, regretted it every time. Everyone on the panels trying so hard to wring drama out of nothing. Switched over for postgame and almost threw my tv out the window within 10 minutes. They're so terrible this week. 

The worst was the hand-wringing about Bill talking about the early years of their relationship. Rachel especially made me roll my eyes. It's not risky for a man to talk about falling in love with his life partner just because he was a shitty husband. They were married for almost 20 years before the Lewinsky etc stuff and have been married for 20 years since. Did you really think he never fell in love with Hillary? Their entire marriage is a lie? Whatever the private nature of the relationship, they're together. Get over it. 

And on top of that, this shock that Bill wasn't going hard on policy. He's the spouse. That's not his job, people. I was expecting a discussion of how we've never seen a man in that role, not this fake (I hope) bafflement.

 All of this is frustrating because in most cases, the panel members are too smart to be saying things this dumb (BriWi excluded, of course). Acting like fools all week is not going to get MSNBC the ratings it so desperately desires. 

[cynicat]

16 hours ago, jjj said:

Andrea Mitchell also said it on the "Road Warrior" segment last night, but I think Steve Schmidt said it first.

Everybody said that line.

[Queena]

1 hour ago, jenrising said:

Watching actual speeches on CSPAN last night was so much better. Flipped over to MSNBC occasionally, regretted it every time. Everyone on the panels trying so hard to wring drama out of nothing. Switched over for postgame and almost threw my tv out the window within 10 minutes. They're so terrible this week. 

The worst was the hand-wringing about Bill talking about the early years of their relationship. Rachel especially made me roll my eyes. It's not risky for a man to talk about falling in love with his life partner just because he was a shitty husband. They were married for almost 20 years before the Lewinsky etc stuff and have been married for 20 years since. Did you really think he never fell in love with Hillary? Their entire marriage is a lie? Whatever the private nature of the relationship, they're together. Get over it. 

And on top of that, this shock that Bill wasn't going hard on policy. He's the spouse. That's not his job, people. I was expecting a discussion of how we've never seen a man in that role, not this fake (I hope) bafflement.

 All of this is frustrating because in most cases, the panel members are too smart to be saying things this dumb (BriWi excluded, of course). Acting like fools all week is not going to get MSNBC the ratings it so desperately desires. 

I second everything single thing that you've said! 

 

I too watched it on C-Span and enjoyed it much more than I did watching it on MSNBC. I also couldn't stomach the commentary afterwards. I watched the roll call, so I missed Chris Hayes yesterday.

I did catch the exchange with the sisters. It's so strange how MSNBC seems to be going out of their way to find people who don't support Hillary Clinton. 

[stormy]

For the short time I left PBS and tuned into MSNBC, I was rewarded with Nicole Wallace reporting live form the convention floor and saying "I may have to switch parties, the music's so good".  What? The show business atmosphere, big name celebraties and sports figures that spoke at the RNC wasn't good enough for you?  Hell, they couldn't even get crazy Clint Eastwood to talk to a vacant chair this time around.

Nicole did agree with Gene Robinson that the atmosphere at the RNC was "weird".  Weird?  The brief moment I caught of a couple of thousand white people with their hands in fists, screaming "lock her up" was terrifying.

And Nicole didn't like Bill's speech.  Guess she liked Mrs. Mail Order bride's better because it was authentic (even though it wasn't her own story).

Nicole is never voting for the Two Trolls from hell ticket.  She couldn't even vote for McCain/Palin.

I wish she'd just say it.

[ruby24]

I don't know how you can think Bill's speech wasn't "authentic."

That was a speech from a man who KNOWS this woman and has lived an entire life with her, unlike Melania, who had zero personal anecdotes about her own husband. It was as if they'd never met. Bill stood on that stage and told us who Hillary is. He played he role of First Spouse, which yes, is NEW for a man and from him. It was new for us to see him like that, but that's the role he's going to be playing in the White House. I thought it was great, especially as he drew a contrast between the real her and the cartoon evil version of her we heard last week.

For Rachel to say the stuff she was saying she'd have to believe there isn't and has never been any personal relationship between them whatsoever, so everything personal she hears from Bill about Hillary sounds immediately suspect to her. Well, I don't think other people think that. I've always thought that if anything, Hillary was a liability to Bill's aspirations as a politician in a state like AS. He could have found a typical politician's wife. But he obviously admired her for her intelligence and who she was from the very beginning, even if she wasn't his "type" so to speak. It was about more than that, clearly.

And that came across to me in that speech. I can't understand where she was coming from in her criticisms because it's obvious she sees him/their relationship so differently than I do. But I bet she's in the minority. MSNBC just keeps wanting to play to whatever conflict they can.

My other favorite moment of the day was the roll call. This is history in the making again, and watching it unfold is pretty cool.

[Milburn Stone]

MSNBC chyron: BREAKING NEWS. BILL CLINTON TO SPEAK TONIGHT.

Yeah, if something that's been on the announced schedule for the last week or more is "breaking news."

[vb68]

Quote

For Rachel to say the stuff she was saying she'd have to believe there isn't and has never been any personal relationship between them whatsoever, so everything personal she hears from Bill about Hillary sounds immediately suspect to her.

Last night was probably the first time that I really didn't care for Rachel at all.  Whatever the Clinons' marriage is, it is their marriage. Yes, obviously they have had to work through a lot, but it's also obvious there is affection there.  And I don't believe for a second that she knows either one well enough to have some grand insight into it.  In short, I found her comments mean-spirited, harsh, and off-putting.  I expect much better coming from her.

[ruby24]

I also want to note that they would never expect any other candidate's spouse (always wife before now) to speak to anything other than their husband's character. So by that tradition, isn't that exactly what Bill did last night? And what he should have been doing? Rachel seemed to want the policy wonk that defended Obama in 2012, but it seems to me she was thrown by seeing him in this role instead. And it stems from her being unable to separate her personal feelings about him and her complete rejection of the reality of their marriage. To call it sexist was just wildly off the mark, imo. I didn't hear any sexism in that speech, it was entirely about Hillary and her accomplishments, both personal and professional.

[Mumbles]

Rachel pointed out that referring to a 21+ year old female law student as a "girl" could strike someone as sexist (presumably her, if she made the point.) I thought she was great last night. 

[vb68]

I sided with Joy Reid on it being charming.  He's looking back on it now with a lot of distance.  I think he would probably say they were both kids at the time. But that's just  how I took it.

Edited July 27, 2016 by vb68

[SusieQ]

Re the "girl" statement: first off, he called himself a boy. Second, when any person close to 70 thinks back to when they were 50 years younger they think of themselves as "boys and girls". For the record I hated what he put her through with the Monica scandal. But I do believe that was a sincere and very sweet speech.

[jjj]

Bill Clinton had to make the case for two candidates last night; well, one candidate for President and a "candidate" for First Gentleman.  We have not seen someone do this for a national ticket previously (that is, a man provide a testimonial for his wife the nominee), and I thought he did a great job of capturing what was true about the foundations of their very long marriage.  Anyone who can still relate the story of "how we met" and "how we joined together" and still feel the joy in that is very fortunate.  And I was getting that from his remarks.  And Chelsea must have heard these stories so many times, but like a fairy tale at bedtime, appears to get comfort from the sheer repetition of it as well as the truth of the origins of that marriage.

Chris Hayes said in the late, late panel that the Clinton marriage "is a confounding and  mysterious thing."  And it is a mistake to think we understand any part of it except the mythic parts they choose to reveal, like last night. 

And it is interesting that there is unease about having a "First Gentleman," especially this former President of a First Gentleman -- but Bill showed us that he is trying to create that role. 

I was a little surprised at the "girl" reference -- but it is all about context.  When Michelle Obama talked about her teenaged daughters as "young black women," that sounded right, because she was talking about who they are becoming.  When (almost) 70-year-old Bill talked about a "girl" and "boy" in their twenties, that also sounds right, because he is talking about who they were when their love was in its infancy, and the pictures from then show them so very young! 

Edited July 27, 2016 by jjj

[pennben]

So, I'm very late to the conversation, but when watching the coverage right after Hillary was nominated, even though I generally have no use for Brian Williams anymore, I had a moment of liking him.  They cut to him talking about the historic nomination of Hillary Clinton and he was asking for others to comment on it.  First up (that I saw, and, admittedly,  I was flipping channels) Andrea Mitchell was talking about what a marvel it was that Bernie ceded the nomination to Hillary.  To his credit, he didn't let her stick with that and made her talk about the historic thing that happened. 

Then, even after that, he asked what Lawrence O'Donnell thought about what had just happened. And HE just talked about Bernie.  Finally, Brian basically told Lawrence that would be in a side-column for what happened and it was left to Eugene Robinson to discuss the real story of the day.

Sheesh! If Williams knows what the headline should be, I damn well expect others to understand.

I hope all at MSNBC are finished mourning Bernie's loss and can get their heads on at least somewhat straight going forward.

Edited July 27, 2016 by pennben

[Padma]

I missed the first part of Clinton's speech, but liked the part I saw (except for the badly worded part about W. VA.) Based on Rachel's objection to how it began, I expected to find that sexist or seemingly "all about Bill".  I was surprised to agree with Lawrence, Joy, and others instead.

I liked "I met a girl" as the beginning. It would have sounded ridiculous to start, "In 1971 I met a young woman". Because, like others have said, when you're older, looking back, that's how it seemed in your youth--she was his "girl", he was her "boyfriend". He was trying to get across that idea of meeting when they were young and what his first impressions were. I thought LOD was right--after all we've read and knew, Bill managed to tell us more and make it interesting.

I thought some of the other testimonials to Hillary from people she'd helped, who knew and loved her, were more surprising (and persuasive being more credible than her husband in some ways), but I don't know if MSNBC showed them.

I was kind of blubbering when Larry Sanders cast his vote for Bernie. I think Bernie had an amazing day--and did a great job. (Glad the media largely--and surprisingly--ignored the hundred or so protesters with blue duct tape on their mouths who walked out of the convention to the media tent in protest. This a.m. Trump said there were "hundreds and hundreds". Thanks, BoB-ers for giving him that anti-Dem talking point on an otherwise great day. (Oh, and I wish they would muzzle Terry McAuliffe. He always seems the personification of sleaziness and seems to intentinally set back any Clinton momentum whenever he shows up.)

[jjj]

Chris Jansing hosting this hour out on Independence Mall, hitting hard on the Trump invitation to Russia to "hack mails" and the Terry McAuliffe interview from earlier today.  She is doing great digging into this, and the editors/producers are giving her great side-by-side clips of the involved people.  Rep. Jackie Speier to Chris J.:  "This is Donald Trump unhinged." Also on the fashion front:  beautiful white-textured version of the sleeveless sheath, more simple but as beautiful as the floral version yesterday. 

And for once, it actually is "BREAKING NEWS". 

Edited July 27, 2016 by jjj

[alias1]

2 hours ago, vb68 said:

Last night was probably the first time that I really didn't care for Rachel at all.  Whatever the Clinons' marriage is, it is their marriage. Yes, obviously they have had to work through a lot, but it's also obvious there is affection there.  And I don't believe for a second that she knows either one well enough to have some grand insight into it.  In short, I found her comments mean-spirited, harsh, and off-putting.  I expect much better coming from her.

I so agree with this.  I usually love Rachel but I think she was kind of revolting with her critique.  I loved Joy's take on it that it was a charming story.  And I loved the comments LOD made about all the things we never knew before, like the 1100 square foot house, etc.  And then he brought the whole college thing into perspective when he mentioned that there would have been a motorcade bringing Chelsea to college and there would have been bullet proof glass.  I thought Bill Clinton did a brilliant job of humanizing Hillary.

I just have to add that I still can't stand Nicole Wallace.

Edited July 27, 2016 by SierraMist

[GHScorpiosRule]

CSPAN is my new Crack.

I just come here to read all of y'all's' snark and thoughtful comments.