Morning Joe: All Episodes Talk

[NextIteration]

Joe let his opinion be known.  This was after the Twitter kerfuffle.

[stormy]

This morning Halperin said liberals are telling him Hillary will loose.

Why are liberals always talking to the people on this show and no one else?

[Eliot]

1 hour ago, NextIteration said:

Joe let his opinion be known.  This was after the Twitter kerfuffle.

Oh, man, the revisionist history going on in this article made my eyes roll so far back in my head they almost got stuck.

Late in that campaign, Mika Brzezinski and I went to a Manchester, N.H., rally to interview the president. What we saw on the ground was a crowd more inspired by James Taylor’s songs than by President Obama’s speech. Walking away, we both noted just how flat the crowd’s response had been to the president.

Audience reactions to Mitt Romney late in that race seemed to be just the opposite. During the campaign’s final weekend, I received frenzied calls from Romney staffers telling me about massive crowds of 30,000 people cheering feverishly for the Republican nominee.

“It feels like 1980! We are going to win this thing!” they shouted rapturously into their cellphones.

I balanced these anecdotal reports against the steady insights of David Axelrod. The Obama guru would hear my reports and then calmly brush away any doubts about the election’s outcome. The data showed Axelrod that Obama would win reelection without breaking a sweat. But I kept pushing.

That is complete, unmitigated, utter bullshit. I vividly remember Joe and Mika relating their PERSONAL OBSERVATIONS of those 30,000+ crowds and how much enthusiasm there was, and Joe in particular buying into the hype.

[Mumbles]

In 2012, Romney made a bet in a debate with his fellow GOP candidates about whether something appeared in his biography. Romney's bet was for $50,000. People - including his rivals for the nomination - pointed out that someone who would make a $50,000 bet must be leading a pretty privileged life.

I feel the same way when these clowns joke about the pick-up truck that Barnicle now owes Mika as a result of a bet they had about Trump. What easy lives they must have.

[ktwo]

3 hours ago, NextIteration said:

Joe let his opinion be known.  This was after the Twitter kerfuffle.

Interesting analysis, and @Eliot is correct that Joe and Mika were both surprised by the result and by the margin. But if Trump is the Bills as in Joe's analogy, I don't think Hillary is the Giants, who needed a "wide right" field goal  to beat them. I think Hillary is the Redskins, who gave the Bills a solid thumping the following year.

[oakville]

Joe forgot about when he bet Nate Silver that the election would be a "toss up". Nate Silver was convinced that Obama would be re elected. I do recall Peggy Noonan being on the show talking about Romney's big crowds.

http://www.ibtimes.com/joe-scarborough-nate-silver-dispute-closeness-2012-election-silver-bets-morning-joe-host-1k-obama

8 hours ago, Eliot said:

Oh, man, the revisionist history going on in this article made my eyes roll so far back in my head they almost got stuck.

Late in that campaign, Mika Brzezinski and I went to a Manchester, N.H., rally to interview the president. What we saw on the ground was a crowd more inspired by James Taylor’s songs than by President Obama’s speech. Walking away, we both noted just how flat the crowd’s response had been to the president.

Audience reactions to Mitt Romney late in that race seemed to be just the opposite. During the campaign’s final weekend, I received frenzied calls from Romney staffers telling me about massive crowds of 30,000 people cheering feverishly for the Republican nominee.

“It feels like 1980! We are going to win this thing!” they shouted rapturously into their cellphones.

I balanced these anecdotal reports against the steady insights of David Axelrod. The Obama guru would hear my reports and then calmly brush away any doubts about the election’s outcome. The data showed Axelrod that Obama would win reelection without breaking a sweat. But I kept pushing.

That is complete, unmitigated, utter bullshit. I vividly remember Joe and Mika relating their PERSONAL OBSERVATIONS of those 30,000+ crowds and how much enthusiasm there was, and Joe in particular buying into the hype.

Joe is driving me bonkers with his re imagination of his opinions at the time. I wish I could access my TWOP posts from that time.

[NewDigs]

Bet against Nate?

Way to go, Joe!

I didn't think he could be more stupider than I thought.

Way to go, Joe!

[Maire]

All I heard this morning was that HRC was doomed because Surveymonkey had trump up by a few points over HRC. Surveymonkey!! Well that's it then. We can all go home.

[represent]

Yeah, I'm going with the survey Rachel Maddow reported on, which has hair lice polling higher than Trump. Seriously, they actually polled people and asked them would they rather deal with a case of lice, rather than have Trump for president. I could not stop laughing.

Lice won. 

A case of hemorrhoids and a roach infestation won out when only the female electorate was polled. 

 Now we can all go home.

Bye, pathetic Joe and your play bunny Meeka, just bye.

Edited May 10, 2016 by represent

[oakville]

Here is the transcript from today's show. Mika wants Hillary to be honest about the effect that Bill's affairs had on her. I don't agree.

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/matthew-balan/2016/05/10/msnbcs-mika-hillary-should-be-herself-ignore-media-staffers

[Medicine Crow]

2 minutes ago, oakville said:

Here is the transcript from today's show. Mika wants Hillary to be honest about the effect that Bill's affairs had on her. I don't agree.

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/matthew-balan/2016/05/10/msnbcs-mika-hillary-should-be-herself-ignore-media-staffers

Neither do I!!  What woman wants to re-hash crap from more than ten years ago?  Mika can suck it!!

[oakville]

8 hours ago, Maire said:

All I heard this morning was that HRC was doomed because Surveymonkey had trump up by a few points over HRC. Surveymonkey!! Well that's it then. We can all go home.

They also showed a Quinnepac poll with Trump leading in Ohio by 4 pts & within 1 pt in Florida & Penn. It's early to predict November's results by using polls in May.

[Ohwell]

I think Mika's point was to "humanize" Hillary and, thus, make her more likable.  Not saying this approach would work, but...    

[oakville]

4 minutes ago, Medicine Crow said:

Neither do I!!  What woman wants to re-hash crap from more than ten years ago?  Mika can suck it!!

Frankly, it was a horrible time for Hillary since Bill was running for President.  I was in college when Bill & Hillary had to go on 60 minutes to defend his affair with Gennifer Flowers in early 1992. She said she would not bake cookies like Tammy Wynette.

[Ohwell]

Actually, I think she said something like she wasn't "standing by her man" like Tammy Wynette.

Tammy might bake cookies too though. :)

Edited May 11, 2016 by Ohwell

[represent]

Quote

Neither do I!!  What woman wants to re-hash crap from more than ten years ago?  Mika can suck it!!

 

Please, like the bitch cares. Why does she want to know how Hillary really feels about her husband's affairs? What a loser, this woman is, I have absolutely no respect for her. The point is, her personal life and marriage do not define her. I don't give a shit about her marriage, except as a fellow woman to wish her well. The rest is her damn business. What I care about and admire is her trudging through it and focusing on her goals. What I care about is her unapologetic quest for power Meeka, you fucking sell out.  Meeka is just another one of those women that Madeleine Albright was referring to? Cause she's what comes to my mind, when I think of a "special place in hell for women" like her... One of those women who loves to see their fellow woman being humiliated. One of those women who at the end of the day, no matter what you accomplish in life, actually thinks if you can't "keep a man" or "have babies" then what's your worth?  She's full of shit as always. The woman is vying to be the most powerful human being of the free world and you want her to focus on the history on how she felt about where Slick Willy was putting his "Willy?!" Bitch please.

I can't stand Meeka.

Edited May 11, 2016 by represent

[tenativelyyours]

Hillary, well a staffer or campaign volunteer with nothing to do should simply tell Mika to first pony up on how it feels to be told she is stupid on air simply doing her job and then she is the one to apologize to the very person who told her she was stupid in the first place.  In a work versus marriage parallel I think that is a fair enough "share" in regards to a woman who claims to "know her worth".  So you first Mika.  Tell us how it feels to have to professionally apologize for "being stupid".  Oh don't worry.  We can then roll the clip of that statement you dare utter?  The "stupid one"?  That actually proved to be right.  How rich.  How "Worth"-y.  Then Clinton can tell you how she is now the front runner and possible first woman President despite her husband cheating on her.  Unlike the guy who called you stupid, stomped off set and then had you apologize.  Oh wait.  Maybe you could practice that Clinton exchange by first asking the 'stupid' shouter himself.  How does he think it felt when he cheated on at least one of his own wives while still married?  How did it change their lives when the beady eyed villain that foams at the mouth next to you five days a week stuck his dick in someone he wasn't married to, while married?

 

Oh Quinnipiac?  You devils you.  Remember when you told us we all wanted Romney by a slight edge right up to the actual election.  Or wanted Romney to run to a most likely strong win in, this, 2016 election.  Oh you rascal with the numbers you.  Sorry oakville don't mean to hijack that topic, but unless it is a true numbers cruncher like Nate Silver, the job to provide numbers as a narrative to in turn raise revenue is a joke.  Ask any who get their email on Comcast's server and got the months and months of almost daily "new" Quinnipiac poll that claimed stunning new results that spoke all kinds of different news for whoever was in the lead (rhymes with dump).  None of their new polling results said shit. 

[Medicine Crow]

37 minutes ago, tenativelyyours said:

Hillary, well a staffer or campaign volunteer with nothing to do should simply tell Mika to first pony up on how it feels to be told she is stupid on air simply doing her job and then she is the one to apologize to the very person who told her she was stupid in the first place.  In a work versus marriage parallel I think that is a fair enough "share" in regards to a woman who claims to "know her worth".  So you first Mika.  Tell us how it feels to have to professionally apologize for "being stupid".  Oh don't worry.  We can then roll the clip of that statement you dare utter?  The "stupid one"?  That actually proved to be right.  How rich.  How "Worth"-y.  Then Clinton can tell you how she is now the front runner and possible first woman President despite her husband cheating on her.  Unlike the guy who called you stupid, stomped off set and then had you apologize.  Oh wait.  Maybe you could practice that Clinton exchange by first asking the 'stupid' shouter himself.  How does he think it felt when he cheated on at least one of his own wives while still married?  How did it change their lives when the beady eyed villain that foams at the mouth next to you five days a week stuck his dick in someone he wasn't married to, while married?

 

Oh Quinnipiac?  You devils you.  Remember when you told us we all wanted Romney by a slight edge right up to the actual election.  Or wanted Romney to run to a most likely strong win in, this, 2016 election.  Oh you rascal with the numbers you.  Sorry oakville don't mean to hijack that topic, but unless it is a true numbers cruncher like Nate Silver, the job to provide numbers as a narrative to in turn raise revenue is a joke.  Ask any who get their email on Comcast's server and got the months and months of almost daily "new" Quinnipiac poll that claimed stunning new results that spoke all kinds of different news for whoever was in the lead (rhymes with dump).  None of their new polling results said shit. 

^^^ Clap Clap Clap ^^^ On blast!!!  (Couldn't have said it better myself.)

[oakville]

Tuesday recap. Joe is back wearing a navy blue sweater. Mika is wearing a lovely red farm girl shirt. Mika is happy that Bernie won west Virginia. Joe was exited about the quinnepac polls showing Trump tied in the battleground states. Eugene said there were too many white voters sampled. Cackles is on the set . She made fun of Palin trying to cantor Ryan.

 

Mika brought up Hillary response to Trump. She said that Bill will pay for this. Joe said Hillary has to control Bill from exploding at Trump.

They showed Trump's Instagram video. Hillary told the relatives of the vitims of Benghazi that they would arrest the filmmaker who made the you tube video. The victims said Hillary lied to them. They showed Hillary laughing.

Mika said that Instagram would be effective. The panel didn't get to comment & they went to commercial.

Something is weird about Mika when she talks about Bill Clinton's affairs. She gets very quiet & halts her words. Did Bill harass Mika while she was with CBS?

The panel was upset that Jeb Bush or Rubio didn't stay in the race till the end to attack Trump. They were too worried about their reputations.

Edited May 11, 2016 by oakville

[suomi]

Mike had a lousy morning. I think she was still amped by running things in Joe's absence yesterday, to the point that she more or less stated her opinion on four or five topics and attempted to steer the conversation. The panel slapped her down each time, with varying degrees of civility. At one point Cackles said to her "You can squirm and laugh but that doesn't make it so." Joe got loud and overbearing and sarcastic (of course) while belittling her opinion. The display of opposition began as the drip drip drip variety but gained ugly momentum by the last half of the second hour.

[suomi]

1 hour ago, oakville said:

Something is weird about Mika when she talks about Bill Clinton's affairs. She gets very quiet & halts her words. Did Bill harass Mika while she was with CBS?

I agree. She makes a point of mentioning it and then stumbles like she has stage fright, or dementia. Like someone who is under pressure. Does she want someone to reassure her or drag some knowledge from her? It's an odd and noticeable tic.

[Dagny]

Quote

Actually, I think she said something like she wasn't "standing by her man" like Tammy Wynette.

I also remember how much shiit she got for saying that and there was eventually a stupid cookie recipe contest in a Women's magazine.

Thank you oakville for recapping for us. I can't stand listening to the group talk about how great Trump is going to do.

[NextIteration]

I just can't.  Did y'all see Joe ramping up to take down Clinton today?  Woo hoo, except not.

And Mika with her crap on Monday about Hillary needing to expose herself and "speak the truth", blech.  Does Mika speak for all the women that decided to stay?  That calculated the cost of leaving when they caught their spouse cheating?  Is she channeling that she got cheated on?  What a bunch of nonsense.  I tire of the idea that Hillary only stayed for her career, Hillary had a bright future, so much so that she had to think about marrying BIll and whether that might diminish her future.

[oakville]

11 hours ago, Dagny said:

I also remember how much shiit she got for saying that and there was eventually a stupid cookie recipe contest in a Women's magazine.

Thank you oakville for recapping for us. I can't stand listening to the group talk about how great Trump is going to do.

I hope Hillary doesn't use "Stand by Your Man " as a campaign song. I would like to do longerrecaps, but I have to leave work earlier due to traffic congestion. On the show they played a clip of Manafort saying that have more to say about Hillary.

Is it possible that any of Bill's mistresses could endorse Trump & trash Hillary? What a mess. Ivanka & Marla Maples could retaliate & endorse Hillary.

3 hours ago, NextIteration said:

I just can't.  Did y'all see Joe ramping up to take down Clinton today?  Woo hoo, except not.

And Mika with her crap on Monday about Hillary needing to expose herself and "speak the truth", blech.  Does Mika speak for all the women that decided to stay?  That calculated the cost of leaving when they caught their spouse cheating?  Is she channeling that she got cheated on?  What a bunch of nonsense.  I tire of the idea that Hillary only stayed for her career, Hillary had a bright future, so much so that she had to think about marrying BIll and whether that might diminish her future.

Agreed. I don't think it makes sense for Hillary to discuss Bill's affairs.

[oakville]

Thursday recap. Mika is off. Joe is in an undisclosed studio. Cackles & Willie took over. Joe said that Trump & Ryan have to get along. Joe liked Trump's plan to have Giuliani deal with immigration issues. Joe said Giuliani will come up with amendments to Trump's muslim ban. The panel wants Trump to do micro targeting of voters. Trump wants to use his gut instinct. Cackles said Trump's success makes people with her skill set unemployable . cackles said the GOP is better off not using her. Heileman said Trump doesn't have enough time or money to build a proper campaign organization.

[Rickster]

22 hours ago, suomi said:

I agree. She makes a point of mentioning it and then stumbles like she has stage fright, or dementia. Like someone who is under pressure. Does she want someone to reassure her or drag some knowledge from her? It's an odd and noticeable tic.

There seems to be something going on where there are rumors circulating among political insiders about nasty incidents in Bill's past that are going to come to light in the campaign. And Mika and the others on the show know the rumors but don't want to be the first to bring them into the open. I think Mika is like the little girl who knows a secret and is dying to tell everyone and wants us to know she knows.

I'm finding all the innuendo about this on the show in the last few days really annoying.

[sugarbaker design]

Quote

There seems to be something going on where there are rumors circulating among political insiders about nasty incidents in Bill's past that are going to come to light in the campaign. 

Of course there are, but Bill's not running, Hillary is.  

Quote

And Mika and the others on the show know the rumors but don't want to be the first to bring them into the open. I think Mika is like the little girl who knows a secret and is dying to tell everyone and wants us to know she knows.

Now that I believe.  I can't wait til January 2017 rolls around and Mika is forced to say President Clinton through clenched teeth.

[Ohwell]

19 minutes ago, sugarbaker design said:

Of course there are, but Bill's not running, Hillary is.  

Now that I believe.  I can't wait til January 2017 rolls around and Mika is forced to say President Clinton through clenched teeth.

But the problem for Hillary is that, as much as she would deny it, they are regarded as a package deal.  So any shit on him would rub off on her.  It's not fair, but it is what it is. 

[Mumbles]

They were treating Trump's meeting today with party leadership at the RNC like a visit by a head of state. Overhead views, maps, graphics etc. Barnicle goofed on it a bit but it didn't detract from the fact that it was happening. Then we cut to doofuses Luke Russert and Katy Tur with their on-the-scenes action news reporting. Gag.

Quote

28 minutes ago, Ohwell said:

 

46 minutes ago, sugarbaker design said:

Of course there are, but Bill's not running, Hillary is.  

Now that I believe.  I can't wait til January 2017 rolls around and Mika is forced to say President Clinton through clenched teeth.

But the problem for Hillary is that, as much as she would deny it, they are regarded as a package deal.  So any shit on him would rub off on her.  It's not fair, but it is what it is. 

 

Eh. It's not that unfair. Early in her campaign there was definitely an element of "Remember how great your life was from 1993-2000? Booming economy? No war? Well we're a-coming back!"  She's since backed away from that as people have pointed out that that economy was a bit of a paper tiger, but when it was working for her, she was more than happy to invoke Clinton I. It cuts both ways.

[AnnaMayWong]

I don't understand Big TV Media[i.e. JOE + mika]. Trump is fêted by these 'journalists/reporters' and political analysts at every turn rather than  legitimately investigate, question,... You know the things that journalists and analysts should do.

Why are they standing around like groupies and issuing repetitive shallow faux analyses and critiques ? What about Trump's arrogant adamant refusal to proffer his tax returns,...(?)                     No matter if one supports Trump, surely his platform and planks  need dissemination, analysis, and discussion. 

 

 

*Aaand, if Trump❕❗ and T.V. MEDIA can delve into Clinton's personal life ( to no apparent end ), why is the T.V. MEDIA not doing the same about Trump ?*

Edited May 12, 2016 by BookElitist

[Medicine Crow]

50 minutes ago, BookElitist said:

I don't understand Big TV Media[i.e. JOE + mika]. Trump is fêted by these 'journalists/reporters' and political analysts at every turn rather than  legitimately investigate, question,... You know the things that journalists and analysts should do.

Why are they standing around like groupies and issuing repetitive shallow faux analyses and critiques ? What about Trump's arrogant adamant refusal to proffer his tax returns,...(?)                     No matter if one supports Trump, surely his platform and planks  need dissemination, analysis, and discussion. 

 

 

*Aaand, if Trump❕❗ and T.V. MEDIA can delve into Clinton's personal life ( to no apparent end ), why is the T.V. MEDIA not doing the same about Trump ?*

My bold.  Two words ... Megyn Kelly!!!  I think they're all afraid of incurring his wrath & filthy tweets.

[Mumbles]

I'm not sure that I'd say Trump was feted - he has his detractors too - but I do agree with you that the coverage of this election by broadcast media is incredibly surface. And this show - that has the luxury of three hours every day - has an opportunity to change that but they're too lazy and silly to do so.

I have seen a decent number of news stories on news websites that explore Trump's personal life. Chris Matthews did a one-hour special on Trump's background a few months ago that included a lot of personal stuff. There's no way to quantify whether Clinton's life is more scrutinized.

[Ohwell]

8 hours ago, Mumbles said:

Eh. It's not that unfair. Early in her campaign there was definitely an element of "Remember how great your life was from 1993-2000? Booming economy? No war? Well we're a-coming back!"  She's since backed away from that as people have pointed out that that economy was a bit of a paper tiger, but when it was working for her, she was more than happy to invoke Clinton I. It cuts both ways.

Oh I'm not talking about the economy, I'm only referring to his affairs and how Trump is using that against her, calling her an enabler.  I just think it's unfair to slam her for what her husband did, like Trump is doing.  But my point is that she's going to get slammed anyway because they do come as a package.  

Edited May 12, 2016 by Ohwell

[NewDigs]

What a ridiculous press/media display this morning. 

Was it Katy Tur who was all proud of herself for being in a back "alley" 'cuz she thought Trump would exit there? Then had to step aside to get out of the way of a local resident's car? Good grief.

I figured she was there because her shots didn't show any protesters. Points with The Donald, doncha' know?

I'm not really seeing Trump scrutinized by the tv people at all. Either his past or his present. Not everyone googles or stays on top of print media but most catch the tv adulation.

And I still wish one of them would have asked why, during a streamed town hall, he referred to his mother as his "fathers's wife". That right there seems very odd and perhaps telling.

 

Sorry! Thought I was in MSNBC thread. Copied to that.

Edited May 12, 2016 by NewDigs
OT

[oakville]

Friday Recap. Joe has added Red Bull to his coffee. He is wearing a navy blue fleece. Joe was shouting at the other panelists about the Trump-Ryan meeting. Joe bragged about how Conservative he was in Congress & that Ryan shouldn't cave in to Trump's liberal positions. Joe said when he was in Congress , the rules committee of the House was powerful. Joe said he told Clinton & George W how conservative he was. Joe said his bill to shut down the federal department of education wasn't brought up for a vote & that George W promised him he would sign Joe's bill. Joe is mad that George W wasn't as conservative as him.

 

Joe likes Trump's new plan to ban muslims from Syria from coming to the USA. Joe said Angela Merkel regrets accepting 1 million refugees. There is violence in Germany & attacks on Germans by young Syrian men. Joe wants the Syrians to stay in a safe zone in Syria patrolled by the Nato armies & the UN. Joe mocked Obama for allowing Assad to use nerve gas after the deal with Russia. Joe wants to liquify ISIS & ASSAD if they get close to Joe's safe zone. Why doesn't everyone listen to Joe? The panel seems to be laughing at Joe's early morning rant.

Joe said the House is more powerful than any President. They need the house to pass legislation.

Katty Kay said Obama failed to enforce his red line. Katty is wearing one of Mika's sleeveless dresses. Mika is dressing down today. I think they are in Washington.

[MulletorHater]

On 5/10/2016 at 7:49 PM, oakville said:

Here is the transcript from today's show. Mika wants Hillary to be honest about the effect that Bill's affairs had on her. I don't agree.

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/matthew-balan/2016/05/10/msnbcs-mika-hillary-should-be-herself-ignore-media-staffers

I'm sorry, but this woman is such an ass!  How about being honest about the effect of being browbeaten by one's co-host while you're fraudulently running some kind of "Know Your Worth" scam?

 

I just can't with this woman...

[Ladyrain]

7 hours ago, MulletorHater said:

I'm sorry, but this woman is such an ass!  How about being honest about the effect of being browbeaten by one's co-host while you're fraudulently running some kind of "Know Your Worth" scam?

 

I just can't with this woman...

I LOVE WHAT YOU SAID!  So True!!  Is she actually that clueless, or is it a case of her being addicted to the money so she has to humiliate herself to get her $$-fix-$$, like any other addict?  I can't imagine what other legit news organization (if there even is such a thing anymore) would hire her after she posed with her legs up in the air with Joe and submits herself to these daily public degradations.  Her daughters must be soooo proud.  Let's hope those apples fall far, far from the tree.  That sure was't the case with Meek-a and her heritage; she didn't even land in the orchard.

Edited May 13, 2016 by Ladyrain
Had to correct grammar so it made sense :)

[Rhetorica]

Muppet's and Galavant get cancelled but this show is still in the air. What's wrong with these people!?

[Landsnark]

49 minutes ago, Rhetorica said:

Muppet's and Galavant get cancelled but this show is still in the air. What's wrong with these people!?

I think that MSNBC views "Morning Joe" as their vanity news program.  Sort of a loss-leader that provides the network with hard insider pundit street cred.  I think MSNBC believes that this show is the official morning political discussion on American television that sets the day's topics.  That's partially true, in some respects, but the show isn't "journalism" in any capacity.
Since the show can't be easily defined.  What is it, really?  Limbaugh-esque?  ok.  A magazine more than newspaper?  ok.  Politics with banter?  ok.  Led by a strong personality with a strident voice?  ok.  Is it free form that flows with the news of the day?  ok.  It's all of those things and none of those things.  I think the executives believe that since the show can't be easily described or fit into a niche, that it's a trend setter or important.  It's not.  It's not the future of anything.  It's simply a sloppy disaster.  When Trump loses, the show will have to demonize Mrs Clinton more than they do now in order to sustain attention-generating friction, which really should relegate it to a side show.   Because screeching anything in the hopes of gaining ratings or coverage, regardless if the message is relevant, sane, correct, or what anyone actually believes, isn't news or journalism.
I think Mika's not long for the show.  I think post-election there will be significant changes, and the network will begin tinkering with other co-hosts, mixing and matching personalities.  The Williams who left network news in disgrace would be great in the role if he had just a little more wiggle to his step.  He's dry as toast, but he's a pro's pro at hosting a political show w/out making it about himself.  Mika would be easy to replace.  Get a woman in there who can bat aside Joe's bloviating, bullying horseshit.. and this show becomes dynamic.  Or a man.  Don't know why it has to be a woman... other than Joe appears to feel that he can bully women with impunity, as he naturally ascribes more respect to men in general.
I think Barnicle should be let go.  I think the show should up its edge.  Willie should only be on to slow the pace and talk about the softest of softest topics, and never weigh in with opinions.  The point of the show should be to hold Joe's feet to the fire and cause him to either prepare cogent, sustainable arguments that have more to do with reality than the effects of caffeine on a hangover (which is the fuel now for his rants).  If he can't prepare and bring it every day, then he'll be embarrassed.   Hire equivalently salesy, charismatic assholes who tell folksy lies to bolster their opinions, but who hold counter arguments to Joe.

There's a lot to be done to improve the show.  I'm guessing MSNBC wants to ride the Trump ratings boost to November, then reconfigure.

[MulletorHater]

Well, they can keep riding Trump's rump until Doomsday as far as I'm concerned.  Other than Rachel and sometimes Lawrence, I'm done with MSNBC.  Done!

The show is nothing more than infotainment as far as I'm concerned.  But, this is an overall issue I've had with the media overall during this terrifying election season:  the Fourth Estate--even the "newspaper of record," the New York Times--has failed the American public.  I would even say they committed malpractice to put it mildly.  The saturation of round-the-clock Trump coverage has been disgraceful!  See Trump alight from his limo!  Trump Goes to Capitol Hill!  Wow--watch Trump take a dump!  Yet hardly anyone is asking the hard questions with the exception of a notable few. For instance, when Trump goes after Hillary for enabling Bill's infidelities, why do they remain mum about Trump's own loose zipper, including the abortion he wanted then-girlfriend, Marla Maples, to get while he was still married to Ivana?  On what planet is a wife expected to be kind to her husband's side piece(s)?  The press excoriated Secretary Kerry for being a flip-flopper.  Yet, Trump lies with impunity, takes outlandish positions and then does a complete 180 (i.e., release of tax returns, taking donations from billionaires, etc.) and the media remain mum.

Every time I turn the television on or pick up a newspaper, there is that bloated, orange face with heavily concealed under eyes with the bird pout.  MSNBC is flirting with disaster as it continues to disregard its core audience just for a few more clicks and an uptick in viewership.  Evidently, they don't get it that eventually people will turn away from a train wreck and go on about their business.

I've made my choice clear numerous times regarding a potential co-host for Joe:  Former Ohio state senator, Nina Turner.  That woman is no joke and is no shrinking violet and I would dare--no, I would D-double-dog-dare!--Joe to stick his finger in her face!

[Mumbles]

I think this show prides itself as the show that the Beltway insiders and NY media types watch in the morning. And the reason why those constituencies watch it is because it's an incestuous cluster-f and they get to see their friends yuk it up on TV. It's like Politico TV and I don't mean that in a good way.

I was first attracted to the show because it was one of the few shows other than Colbert. Daily Show, and Letterman to regularly have authors on it. Nowawdays the only authors are tools like Ariana Huffington telling us all that we should sleep more. And it had smart people on like New Yorker writers and Robert Reich and Nora Ephron.

Their 'regulars' are unimaginative hacks. Harold Ford inherited a Congressional seat and then revolving-doored his way to a vague investment bank job. Barnicle is a plagiarist. Donny Deutsch is a fameball who starred in a sitcom about himself. Smirky Halperin is a know-it-all who doesn't (his 2007 book "The Way to Win" was basically disproved by Obama, who won doing practically the opposite of what Halperin wrote.) Nicole Wallace worked to get an ignoramus elected vice president.

I only watch the first hour or so and then switch over to CBS Morning News. I don't miss much because they repeat the first half hour at 8, anyway.

[oakville]

1 hour ago, Landsnark said:

I think that MSNBC views "Morning Joe" as their vanity news program.  Sort of a loss-leader that provides the network with hard insider pundit street cred.  I think MSNBC believes that this show is the official morning political discussion on American television that sets the day's topics.  That's partially true, in some respects, but the show isn't "journalism" in any capacity.
Since the show can't be easily defined.  What is it, really?  Limbaugh-esque?  ok.  A magazine more than newspaper?  ok.  Politics with banter?  ok.  Led by a strong personality with a strident voice?  ok.  Is it free form that flows with the news of the day?  ok.  It's all of those things and none of those things.  I think the executives believe that since the show can't be easily described or fit into a niche, that it's a trend setter or important.  It's not.  It's not the future of anything.  It's simply a sloppy disaster.  When Trump loses, the show will have to demonize Mrs Clinton more than they do now in order to sustain attention-generating friction, which really should relegate it to a side show.   Because screeching anything in the hopes of gaining ratings or coverage, regardless if the message is relevant, sane, correct, or what anyone actually believes, isn't news or journalism.
I think Mika's not long for the show.  I think post-election there will be significant changes, and the network will begin tinkering with other co-hosts, mixing and matching personalities.  The Williams who left network news in disgrace would be great in the role if he had just a little more wiggle to his step.  He's dry as toast, but he's a pro's pro at hosting a political show w/out making it about himself.  Mika would be easy to replace.  Get a woman in there who can bat aside Joe's bloviating, bullying horseshit.. and this show becomes dynamic.  Or a man.  Don't know why it has to be a woman... other than Joe appears to feel that he can bully women with impunity, as he naturally ascribes more respect to men in general.
I think Barnicle should be let go.  I think the show should up its edge.  Willie should only be on to slow the pace and talk about the softest of softest topics, and never weigh in with opinions.  The point of the show should be to hold Joe's feet to the fire and cause him to either prepare cogent, sustainable arguments that have more to do with reality than the effects of caffeine on a hangover (which is the fuel now for his rants).  If he can't prepare and bring it every day, then he'll be embarrassed.   Hire equivalently salesy, charismatic assholes who tell folksy lies to bolster their opinions, but who hold counter arguments to Joe.

There's a lot to be done to improve the show.  I'm guessing MSNBC wants to ride the Trump ratings boost to November, then reconfigure.

I do think that Morning TV is very profitable. It's more profitable for the networks that Evening TV news. Joe gets paid $5m per year for 400k viewers. A few years ago, I thought that Norah O'Donnell & Willie Geist would have made an excellent pairing. Norah went to CBS.

 

45 minutes ago, MulletorHater said:

Well, they can keep riding Trump's rump until Doomsday as far as I'm concerned.  Other than Rachel and sometimes Lawrence, I'm done with MSNBC.  Done!

The show is nothing more than infotainment as far as I'm concerned.  But, this is an overall issue I've had with the media overall during this terrifying election season:  the Fourth Estate--even the "newspaper of record," the New York Times--has failed the American public.  I would even say they committed malpractice to put it mildly.  The saturation of round-the-clock Trump coverage has been disgraceful!  See Trump alight from his limo!  Trump Goes to Capitol Hill!  Wow--watch Trump take a dump!  Yet hardly anyone is asking the hard questions with the exception of a notable few. For instance, when Trump goes after Hillary for enabling Bill's infidelities, why do they remain mum about Trump's own loose zipper, including the abortion he wanted then-girlfriend, Marla Maples, to get while he was still married to Ivana?  On what planet is a wife expected to be kind to her husband's side piece(s)?  The press excoriated Secretary Kerry for being a flip-flopper.  Yet, Trump lies with impunity, takes outlandish positions and then does a complete 180 (i.e., release of tax returns, taking donations from billionaires, etc.) and the media remain mum.

Every time I turn the television on or pick up a newspaper, there is that bloated, orange face with heavily concealed under eyes with the bird pout.  MSNBC is flirting with disaster as it continues to disregard its core audience just for a few more clicks and an uptick in viewership.  Evidently, they don't get it that eventually people will turn away from a train wreck and go on about their business.

I've made my choice clear numerous times regarding a potential co-host for Joe:  Former Ohio state senator, Nina Turner.  That woman is no joke and is no shrinking violet and I would dare--no, I would D-double-dog-dare!--Joe to stick his finger in her face!

I don't think Joe wants a co host that will fight back against him. This isn't Crossfire.

[Landsnark]

3 hours ago, Mumbles said:

I was first attracted to the show because it was one of the few shows other than Colbert. Daily Show, and Letterman to regularly have authors on it.

Holy smokes, I feel exactly, precisely the same way.  That is truly what drew my interest.  They had SMART people on the show who were free to be smart.  I actually wrote a business plan for MJ where they would have a "kiosk" on MSNBC or Amazon or somewhere where a person could easily see who the authors were that had been on the show, and you could click click click and buy the book.  (I had connections and coulda gotten a meeting, but.. meh) I bet I have purchased 20 or so books from  having been blown away by the authors and their discussion on their show.  That ended a long long time ago.

Quote

I don't think Joe wants a co host that will fight back against him. This isn't Crossfire.

It's barely anything.  It gets viewers because it's on TV.  Anything else would get the same audience.  More people would watch if Joe got challenged and we could root for other characters.  I have stopped watching.  I just swing by here to get the updates, hoping things may change back.  That will never happen.  The show needs to be scrapped and re-worked.  MSNBC could improve ratings with changes.

[oakville]

On ‎5‎/‎13‎/‎2016 at 7:01 PM, Landsnark said:

Holy smokes, I feel exactly, precisely the same way.  That is truly what drew my interest.  They had SMART people on the show who were free to be smart.  I actually wrote a business plan for MJ where they would have a "kiosk" on MSNBC or Amazon or somewhere where a person could easily see who the authors were that had been on the show, and you could click click click and buy the book.  (I had connections and coulda gotten a meeting, but.. meh) I bet I have purchased 20 or so books from  having been blown away by the authors and their discussion on their show.  That ended a long long time ago.

It's barely anything.  It gets viewers because it's on TV.  Anything else would get the same audience.  More people would watch if Joe got challenged and we could root for other characters.  I have stopped watching.  I just swing by here to get the updates, hoping things may change back.  That will never happen.  The show needs to be scrapped and re-worked.  MSNBC could improve ratings with changes.

[oakville]

Morning Joe used to have great guests. I also bought a few books from watching the show.The panel needs some new members.

[oakville]

Monday recap. Joe is in a suit! Mika & Joe will be flying to Boston after the show to become honored members of the Cable Hall of Fame. Donnie,Barnicle & Halperin are on the panel. Joe is upset about the NY Times article about Trump & his beauty pagents. The article said Trump didn't treat women well & made comments about their bodies while surveying them at the pagent. Mika said she didn't like pagents. Joe said they went too far. Donnie said Trump treats women better than 99% of CEO's. Donnie said that Trump will bring up Bill's close friendship with a convicted child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Halperin said Bill will be involved in the campaign but that Hillary might take him off the trail if the attacks continue by Trump. Mika got upset that Trump called Elizabeth Warren Pocahantas. Joe said she got a job at Harvard due to her native heritage. Donnie said it will be tough to make Hillary likeable.

The focus of the NY Times piece said that Trump treated her like a gentleman. Joe blasted the NY Times for writing fake stories about Trump & McCain in 2008.

[Eliot]

On 5/10/2016 at 7:59 PM, oakville said:

Frankly, it was a horrible time for Hillary since Bill was running for President.  I was in college when Bill & Hillary had to go on 60 minutes to defend his affair with Gennifer Flowers in early 1992. She said she would not bake cookies like Tammy Wynette.

You're combiing two different statements Hillary made (and was criticized for) when Bill was first running. She said she was "not some Tammy Wynette just standing by her man" on the 60 Minutes interview. Later, during a campaign stop, she was challenged for staying employed as an attorney while her husband was governor, and she said, "Well, I supposed I could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas, but I chose to fulfill my career instead."

Something is weird about Mika when she talks about Bill Clinton's affairs. She gets very quiet & halts her words. Did Bill harass Mika while she was with CBS?

Maybe she's sensitive to the fact that it would be severely hypocritical to condemn a politician for having affairs while in office given who's sitting across the table from her.

Nah. Since when has hypocrisy troubled any of that crew?

Edited May 16, 2016 by Eliot

[teddysmom]

Quote

Morning Joe used to have great guests. I also bought a few books from watching the show.The panel needs some new members.

I think they're down to the people who are either fame whores and don't care, have to appear due to contractual obligations,  or have just become numb to Joe's ego and hypocrisy and Mika's vapid stupidity. 

Quote

The focus of the NY Times piece said that Trump treated her like a gentleman. Joe blasted the NY Times for writing fake stories about Trump & McCain in 2008.

Apparently Joe & Trump kissed and made up?    If the NYT article is so ridiculous, why talk about it for 30 minutes? 

[Mumbles]

Quote

Maybe she's sensitive to the fact that it would be severely hypocritical to condemn a politician for having affairs while in office given who's sitting across the table from her.

This morning when they were comparing Trump's creepiness with women to Bill Clinton's, Joe started bloviating about "interns", and maybe it's because I know the story about the poor young woman who was found dead in his office, but I sensed a little tension and uncomfortableness at that moment.

[oakville]

6 hours ago, Eliot said:

You're combiing two different statements Hillary made (and was criticized for) when Bill was first running. She said she was "not some Tammy Wynette just standing by her man" on the 60 Minutes interview. Later, during a campaign stop, she was challenged for staying employed as an attorney while her husband was governor, and she said, "Well, I supposed I could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas, but I chose to fulfill my career instead."

 

 

Maybe she's sensitive to the fact that it would be severely hypocritical to condemn a politician for having affairs while in office given who's sitting across the table from her.

Nah. Since when has hypocrisy troubled any of that crew?

You are correct, Eliot. Tammy Wynette was a singer who had a song about "Standing by Your Man". Someone else was mad at her career as an attorney. I mixed up the references.

Joe has never acknowledged being unfaithful to his second wife. In fact, I recall that the divorce settlement with Susan, ( wife #2) , mentioned that Joe was faithful to her. That was weird, but I suppose he didn't want viewers to think he was having an affair with Mika.

I do find it unusual that Mika mentions her kids, her parents & brothers on a regular basis but never talks about her husband Jim.

Mika said she survived Prom this weekend. I think her youngest daughter is graduating from high school.

4 hours ago, Mumbles said:

This morning when they were comparing Trump's creepiness with women to Bill Clinton's, Joe started bloviating about "interns", and maybe it's because I know the story about the poor young woman who was found dead in his office, but I sensed a little tension and uncomfortableness at that moment.

Has Joe ever discussed on the show what happened to the intern who was found dead in his office? Joe said Bill's behavior with Monica Lewinsky was wrong.

The panel discussed having Newt Gingrich as VP. Donnie said it was a horrible idea. I agree.