Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
saoirse

All Episodes Talk: TRMS 2019 Season

Recommended Posts

So Rachel really thought it was “mean” of someone to “mislead” Trump into thinking he could buy Greenland?  Really?  Wish I could laugh at any of his moron shit like Rachel.  I just can’t.  Rachel was trying to make light of it, but it didn’t work for me.  He never ceases to make me nauseous & Rachel’s cutesy bit didn’t stop me from feeling queasy.

Idk, between the sinister Russian investments in Kentucky & McConnell’s shady ties to it, and the vast Repub stacking of horrifyingly unqualified high-level federal justices . . . watching Rachel is becoming deeply depressing, if supremely informative.

Er, did Rach seem to get a particular joy from making a Dem Prez candidate go poof?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I'm glad that Rachel covers obscure stories that no one else does. But again last night when she is introduced us to the newest Federal judge pick (while reminding us several times that this is just one step below the Supreme Court) it gets to be, I don't know if I can take much more of this kind of news.

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post

WTF New Hampshire?  That's like the part of sex education in high school when they are trying to scare you from ever having sex.  

  • Laugh 2

Share this post


Link to post

The handoff from Chris last night made me smile. Clearly, Rachel does not enjoy the concept of Live in Front of a Studio Audience. Which is weird, because she's done that kind of thing before, but maybe it's a thing she does with gritted teeth.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Can you spell "excruciatingly long windup to get to the point" of the A-block?  16, count 'em, 16 painfully meaningless minutes before there was the slightest clue where Rachel was going.  

That dude who was talking about 9/11 "survivors" living underground...has to be an incel.  Just has to be.

Why hasn't Joe Biden gone on TRMS as a candidate?  Seems like just about everyone else has, some of them multiple times.  Who's avoiding whom?

That was weird with Karine.  Thought she was having a moment but then it was a technical glitch.  (Which reminds me, why has Rachel never had Auntie Maxine back after their technical glitch?)   I disagree with Karine on the strategy of targeting moderate Democrats who are holding down seats that are vulnerable to Republicans.  It's very Tea-Partyish.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I was very glad that both Rachel and Chris talked about the Falun Gong/Epoch Times story, and even happier that Rachel’s guest mentioned the Shen Yun connection. My family and I saw that last year and I had no idea that was Falun Gong until they had a dance about their persecution by the Chinese government for being Christian, which is as familiar as I had been with the group, mostly through protests like the one Rachel talked about. 

Now, after this story about the QAnon/Trump connection, I just feel dirty for having seen that troupe. Ick.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

Since Rachel and Chris Hayes (although he did only a brief story) both covered  the Epoch/Falun Gong/Facebook story last night, what are we to make of it?  Do we just stash it  away and forget about it?  I mean no one's going to do a damn thing about it.

And BTW the story on Tuesday night about Planned Parenthood and the Title X funds was so disheartening.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

When I saw Jay Inslee was there as the first guest with "an announcement," I went, oh, he's dropping out; and how did I miss this?  In our (his) state, news like this always leaks, and I went to the capitol reporters' twitter accounts -- nothing.  They were not even watching the show.  You could see that one after another got an alert and tuned in -- but Rachel really did get a scoop on this.  No one outside his inner circle leaked anything.  And as Rachel pointed out a segment or two later, the other candidates also had no idea, and were scrambling to get out messages.  Side note:  Elizabeth Warren is doing a town hall here this weekend, and I would expect Inslee to be invited to say something; we shall see if he does.  We are all waiting now to see if he announced for a third term on Thursday (I work with legislators; they are lined up like dominoes, ready to click into new elected offices if he does not run again, and sets off a chain of new candidates).  

I just realized she did not “poof” him!  Either she was too caught up in this, or she thought it would undercut the dignity he was displaying.  Wow, the handoff again covered him in accolades for his well-played effort and departure. 

Edited by freddi
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I think? maybe? she thought that 'poof!'-ing him while he was there might be rude. I don't think she'll pass the opportunity to do it in some upcoming segment on the race.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

After the "breaking news" announcement, I turned to CNN to see how long it would take them to catch up. It was quite a few minutes.  Good work Rachel!

Share this post


Link to post

I also liked at the end, where she thanked him for making the announcement on her show, and that it was good to see him again, although obviously it was not a happy day for him.  He said “Hey, this is the best place to come with the worst news,” and Rachel said she would put that on a T-shirt.  Then she put her head down and laughed as they cut away.  He seemed to say that spontaneously, and she really seemed tickled by it.  

  • Like 3
  • Laugh 2

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, Rachel loves her scoops.  I don’t see the big freakin’ deal on getting scoops.  She spent way too much time on Inslee.  OK, so he’s gone & he never had any chance anyway.  Big woo.  Rach, please prioritize!  Ya got plenty of way more important stuff to discuss.  

Well, at least she didn’t play the zillions of Trump clips that Matthews, Hayes & Melber play.  They have all become unwatchable because at least a quarter of their shows are dispersed, endlessly long & unbearable Trump clips.  Despite Rachel saying she’s not comfy with her mantra of “Watch what they do, not what they say”, she still has mostly (thankfully) held back from playing Trump clips.  But she is the ONLY one on MSNBC to do that.  

I just hope her declaration of being uncomfortable with watching what they do & not what they say doesn’t mean she’ll now be showing endless Trump clips too.  Eek, no!

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I think it's hilarious that she aired a commercial and pretended it was a scoop. Free airtime! I support the mission of the ad, but it was the kind of exposure the group would pay for if they could afford it, so airing it during the show and pretending it was an exclusive cracked me up. She told us it's a national ad campaign! So... it's not a scoop and it's not an exclusive. But... still-- good for them.

Also, I don't understand at all why it's such a big deal that Chris is doing a live show. She acts like he's never done one before. He's hosted Town Halls and live events and he does a live show at the desk every night. I genuinely don't get why Rachel is making such a big deal about it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Hayes is just so excruciatingly dull, Rachel’s exchanges with him seem so forced compared to those with LOD, which always seem rather sweet.

OK, Rach, so you did kindly wait a respectful one night to do your poof on Inslee.  Honestly, I think the poofing worked better for me with the 2016 Republicans.  Altho I will definitely enjoy the poofing of some of these Dem characters (cough, de Blasio, cough).

Lately, when I hear Rachel over-dramatically set up her “one-on-one” interviews, I’m prepared to be bored silly or tune out.  But when she mentioned Letitia James, I knew this was gonna be good.  Boy, AG James did not disappoint!  Is this woman fearless & awesome or what?  She makes Schumer & Nadler look like do-nothing wimps in comparison.

Psst, hey, Rach, get Letitia James back — often & soon!

Edited by ScoobieDoobs
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

It bugs me that TRMS is now adding the word “POOF!” to the chart in a cartoon font—just the puff of cloud made the point fine! Plus, with the exclamation point, the final letter looks like “P”.  I don’t want to see 21 “POOF!”s—way too cartoonish.  

For those who didn’t hear, Friday is a “special” show on the 2020 race.  But she says she will be there.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Hmmm, will she sneak in a special poof for Moulton tonite (along with a gleefully knowing snicker)?  Or will she wait till Monday?  She was right that the poofs are starting to come fast & furious . . .

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

12 hours ago, ScoobieDoobs said:

OK, Rach, so you did kindly wait a respectful one night to do your poof on Inslee.  Honestly, I think the poofing worked better for me with the 2016 Republicans.

She did such a big lead-in with the discussion of the 2016 Republicans, I thought she was going to say she had decided it was not suitably respectful to the process of selecting a president.  Instead, she doubles down on it with cartoon effects. 

But then, everything she does seems to start with a massive wind-up before the pitch.  If she were on a baseball mound, the manager would pull her in the third inning for a sore arm.

12 hours ago, ScoobieDoobs said:

Lately, when I hear Rachel over-dramatically set up her “one-on-one” interviews, I’m prepared to be bored silly or tune out.  But when she mentioned Letitia James, I knew this was gonna be good.

Another one with overblown hype from the opening sentence of the A block but then quietly slipped in at the end.  Letitia James is good enough and interesting enough and important enough for at least one "The Interview." 

What is that makes one of Rachel's interviews The Interview, anyway?  I thought at least the guest had to be sitting across the desk, but no, last week Stacey Abrams was The Interview remotely.

I don't believe she didn't know ahead of time that Jay Inslee was dropping out Wednesday night.  No way would he have been The Interview that early in the show.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

I don't find Hayes boring, but I do think her show transition chats with him seem very forced. I feel that way about the one she does with LOD, too, though.

I don't like the poofs. I think they're a waste of time and pointless. Tell  us who dropped out, talk about substance, but don't waste a lot of time with the cartoon drama.

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, possibilities said:

I feel that way about the one she does with LOD, too, though.

The one the other night about LOD's "second favorite Rachel" was absolutely cringeworthy.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Look, it’s lovely that Rachel decided to show up on a summer Friday nite, when most of the MSNBC lineup is MIA.  But Rachel going on & on endlessly about the “wonders” of the debates?  Meh.  Total waste of time to me.  There’s way more important stuff for her to discuss.

You know, as the NY Times today prominently features a big scoop on the Newark water story, I’m pretty shocked & disappointed in Rachel that she has given this awful story so little attention — especially given the way she was so all over what happened in Flint.  C’mon Rach, get on this!

Edited by ScoobieDoobs
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

The forest that produces 20% of the world's oxygen is on fire. The American president is becoming more and more erratic. The stock market is plunging. And Maddow brings us . . . another clip show?  There is a lot of actual news, Rachel, and I need you to help me make sense of it!

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Sesquipedalia said:

The forest that produces 20% of the world's oxygen is on fire. The American president is becoming more and more erratic. The stock market is plunging. And Maddow brings us . . . another clip show?  There is a lot of actual news, Rachel, and I need you to help me make sense of it!

Totally.  She made a point of saying in advance that Friday’s show “is live, and I’ll be here,” but she might as well have recorded it two weeks ago.  All those stories are so important.  Politics are huge right now, but there is other significant news! 

3 hours ago, ScoobieDoobs said:

Look, it’s lovely that Rachel decided to show up on a summer Friday nite, when most of the MSNBC lineup is MIA.  But Rachel going on & on endlessly about the “wonders” of the debates?  Meh.  Total waste of time to me.  There’s way more important stuff for her to discuss.

You know, as the NY Times today prominently features a big scoop on the Newark water story, I’m pretty shocked & disappointed in Rachel that she has given this awful story so little attention — especially given the way she was so all over what happened in Flint.  C’mon Rach, get on this!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

4 hours ago, ScoobieDoobs said:

You know, as the NY Times today prominently features a big scoop on the Newark water story, I’m pretty shocked & disappointed in Rachel that she has given this awful story so little attention

Probably two things:  one, that she can't get a NYT reporter to talk about their story since they've banned themselves from appearing, and two, she didn't want to have to put in a full day of work--just recite her pre-canned lines and go home.  I also don't believe, as I didn't with the first show she did in this format, that the names she drew were at random.  She was too quick with the analysis and the crew was too quick with the footage.

It'll be interesting to see if Rachel is on all the Fridays that Chris is doing his live show.  Maybe they thought it would be awkward to follow a live show with a guest host.  But then LOD took off.  (I felt bad for Ali, who not only did his own show, then had to come back six hours later and do someone else's show, but also got pulled in to work as a guest on Deadline:  White House.  Might as well have just given him Rachel's hour while they were at it.)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, but I think what annoyed me most was how repetitive this debate stuff was.  She said most of this before.  Ho-hum, Rach.  Sorry, but I think the debates are mostly uninformative of who the candidates are & what exactly they’re for.  Please move on from this, Rach.

And as her pal Booker has tried to avoid talking about the Newark water story, it’s likely to quickly sink his already hopeless campaign.  So her promoting whatever moment she thought he had at the debates looked wildly out of touch — and even more so, given all the crazy news happening.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Anything on Rachel's show is fair game but what other topics she should be covering, not so much.  Please keep discussion focused on the show itself. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I think Rachel should highlight one video a week from abroad -- the clip from the Danish member of Parliament was wonderful.  "The North Sea is the one on *top* of Europe."  And her pause after she said,  "Now grab...………"  ".....your pen".  

Ellen Weintraub, Chair of the FEC Commission, is the best bureaucrat I have seen in ages!  And Rachel really should bring back "Talk Me Down" segments.  

Edited by freddi
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Oh Rachel, Rachel, Rachel, that was a painful, painful show tonite!  What happened to “Watch they do, not what they say”?  

Examining every word Trump said & his every behavior at the G-7 was awful to watch.  If you’re gonna do this, Rach, then I might as well watch Cuomo on CNN (uh, I won't).  Oh Rach, please don’t make me run for the remote to mute your show with those horrible Trump clips!  I really hope this is not an indication of a major shift in Rachel’s show.  Ugh.

As much as Rachel was so blown away by Trump suggesting the G-7 next year should be held at a Trump property, it could happen.  I guess it’s good to see Rach call out something like this as being outrageous & crazy, even as I shrugged about it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

The story about the sick kids who are being kicked out killed me. And then came billions in damage from opioid manufacturers... What a depressing night. The Dem debate story isn't necessarily uplifting, but as Rachel said, at least it’s news we can predict?

Share this post


Link to post

8 hours ago, ahisma said:

The story about the sick kids who are being kicked out killed me. 

Sadly, my first thought was maybe Canada can help them because I know this Administration will not do the right thing and I'm not sure if Congress or the Courts can help.  

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Why did I listen to the Deutsche Bank story and feel like, uh oh, here we go again, a big fat nothing burger?

Although I appreciate Rachel's covering it the way she did.

Share this post


Link to post

The full Deutsche Bank story is not a nothingburger.  Unfortunately, there is so much that is hidden, redacted, unreported, unrevealed yet that it doesn't seem like much.  Deutsche Bank launders money for the Russians and I don't understand how they haven't been shut down long ago.  The POTUS also has received much money from Russians, and from Deutsche Bank.  It's difficult to believe those things - Russian money being laundered through Deutsche Bank, and Deutsche Bank loans to 45 when no one else would loan him money are not one and the same.  But we don't have all the information yet, thanks to stonewalling by Deutsche Bank and everyone else of subpoenas.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/26/2019 at 10:10 PM, ScoobieDoobs said:

 I really hope this is not an indication of a major shift in Rachel’s show.

Something's different, that's for sure.   It really was odd to hear Rachel talking about 45's bizarre comments; while not wrong or inappropriate, it's a better fit for Chris Hayes or LOD.  And I feel like she's doing a lot more naked editorializing, whereas before she would just present the facts and let us draw our own conclusions.

Where is our dream team of lawyers?  Haven't seen Chuck or Joyce or Barb on the show in ages!  I know Congress is out of session, but where are the usual, reliable Congresscritters to weigh in on the topics of the day?  

Tonight she gets to poof Kirsten Gillibrand, and that I will enjoy.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

That handoff she had with Lawrence O'D last night has led to a retraction of the story he was describing to her -- that Russian oligarchs had co-signed loans.  Rachel's astonished reaction in the handoff was splayed across social media and news today, but then L O'D has to retract it.  

I really hate the cartoon "POOF!"s and that she has to slow-walk through each "POOF" to get to the current one.  The screen is going to look like a comic strip long before she runs out of candidates.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I think tonight was the shortest Rachel-to-LOD handoff in history.  She clearly didn't want to be within ten miles of his network-mandated (which is what I believe it was) apology.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

It was kind of a relief to be spared the extended banter, though. I find it squicky how much he flatters her and how obviously uncomfortable she is with it. I wish they would do away with the whole business.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

At the start of the show Rachel covered the children with catastrophic diseases being deported story again.  She said she might be the only one on TV covering the story.  I don't doubt it.

It's heartbreaking.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, possibilities said:

It was kind of a relief to be spared the extended banter, though. I find it squicky how much he flatters her and how obviously uncomfortable she is with it. I wish they would do away with the whole business.

I agree - I don't mind when they talk about the big issue of the day, but otherwise it's a waste of air time IMO.  I think Rachel went to bat for him when he and MSNBC were in contract negotiations and he shows his gratitude this way, but hey, a bottle of wine or a nice box of chocolates would be sufficient. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

It was kind of a relief to be spared the extended banter, though. I find it squicky how much he flatters her and how obviously uncomfortable she is with it. I wish they would do away with the whole business.

Seriously.  Those hand off transitions between shows are just a waste of time, and always seem like totally forced banter that detracts from both shows.  I watched the Daily Show and The Colbert Report. The Daily Show and the Colbert Report were friends of mine.  Rachel and Lawrence are no Jon and Stephen.  So stop trying to be.

Share this post


Link to post

It was surprising how she kept going on about Chris Hayes's pants. I was relieved when he finally shut that down.

The story about the deportation orders of medically critical children is yet another atrocity I don't know how we can ever come back from.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

1 hour ago, Hooper said:

  I watched the Daily Show and The Colbert Report. The Daily Show and the Colbert Report were friends of mine.  Rachel and Lawrence are no Jon and Stephen. 

Nice Quayle reference on a segment that had an actual quail and another Vice President in it.  Meta. 

  • Like 1
  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post

The possible deportation of sick migrant children story is finally getting attention. Even on the campaign trail.

I don't if it's because Rachel kept talking about it for the past three days, but,  I know that she gave it the attention that no one else did.

Thank you Rachel.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

I'm glad Rachel talked about Trump's intentions to clear-cut a critical portion of Alaska.  Those people should be up on their hind legs, screaming their guts out!!!  Just sayin'!!!

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

I wouldn’t be worried about Rach being stained by LOD’s stupid mistake.  First off, she seems super reserved in her sign-offs with him lately.  And Rach has always been extremely careful about what she reports & makes sure to state who it’s been verified by.  I still like the sign-offs with LOD.  There may be a somewhat uncomfortable feel, but it does occasionally bring a welcome warmth.

I loved how Rach apologized profusely about interrupting the climate change expert from Alaska.  Ah, that’s so Rach!  Think Matthews would do that?  Yeah, right.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
35 minutes ago, Medicine Crow said:

I'm glad Rachel talked about Trump's intentions to clear-cut a critical portion of Alaska.  Those people should be up on their hind legs, screaming their guts out!!!  Just sayin'!!!

ITA but the governor and Senator Lisa Murkowski are all for it. It means jobs and they have a high unemployment rate. So ☹️

  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
38 minutes ago, Medicine Crow said:

I'm glad Rachel talked about Trump's intentions to clear-cut a critical portion of Alaska.  Those people should be up on their hind legs, screaming their guts out!!!  Just sayin'!!!

We all should be, since the damage will be to all of us in terms of carbon dioxide levels in the air and water.

  • Like 3
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post

Did I hear Rachel tell Chris Hayes in the Thursday handoff that Friday was her night off?  If I heard right I was so surprised that she said it.  Thought I’d wait until tonight to see if it were true, and yes.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Oh, why did Joy trade in her beautiful hairstyle from last weekend and go back to that ugly-ass wig?  I know I was thinking that having her hair pulled back so severely might be stressful to the scalp, but doggone it, she looked fantastic.  Tonight she looks like the Church Lady.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
saoirse

Reminder; keep discussion to the current episodes of Rachel's show. Failure to follow the forum guidelines can result in removed posts and warnings being doled out. In some cases, suspensions and even banning may occur. Thank you. 

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Customize font-size