Future Co-Hosts Talk and Speculation: Musical Chairs

[Haleth]

Nope. Not going to watch that. 

[WinnieWinkle]

Thinking it over if ABC hires her not only will I not be watching The View I won't be watching ABC.  Over-reacting?  No, I don't think so!

[ForumLou]

3 minutes ago, WinnieWinkle said:

Thinking it over if ABC hires her not only will I not be watching The View I won't be watching ABC.  Over-reacting?  No, I don't think so!

There is no way that would ever happen.  She's to close to the *family*.  She would be bringing DJTJ To every office function and Xmas party.  Running home spilling all the secrets.  Noooooooo wayaaaa

 

[RealHousewife]

You know someone's bad news when all of us would rather deal with Meghan's hysterics, goofy hairdos, nonstop MyFathers, the eye rolls, all of it. 

[Gemma Violet]

2 hours ago, RealHousewife said:

You know someone's bad news when all of us would rather deal with Meghan's hysterics, goofy hairdos, nonstop MyFathers, the eye rolls, all of it. 

I'm wondering if this might be one of those "be careful what you wish for" scenarios.  Yikes.

[TheGreenKnight]

I wouldn't rather deal with McCain.... I'm not worried though. While I think they may hire an open Trump supporter (Candace and Paula were open Trump supporters), I don't think they would hire her. Or Ivanka either for that matter.

[gatopretoNYC]

Guilfoyle got kicked off Fox for sexual harassment. There's no way ABC would hire her.

Plus, ya know, she's batshit crazy. 😵

[bannana]

4 hours ago, TheGreenKnight said:

Paula were open Trump supporter

Paula supported Trump? How did I not know that. That is very surprising.

[RealHousewife]

3 hours ago, gatopretoNYC said:

Guilfoyle got kicked off Fox for sexual harassment. There's no way ABC would hire her.

Plus, ya know, she's batshit crazy. 😵

Good point. Meghan's cray, but she's never been accused of harassment, well, not sexual harassment. 

[Spartan Girl]

17 hours ago, WinnieWinkle said:

Thinking it over if ABC hires her not only will I not be watching The View I won't be watching ABC.  Over-reacting?  No, I don't think so!

Neither do I. In fact, if that happens, I’ll join you. She’s not just worse than Meg, she’s Meg on steroids. She’s the Delta Variant of Meg.

[deirdra]

6 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

Neither do I. In fact, if that happens, I’ll join you. She’s not just worse than Meg, she’s Meg on steroids. She’s the Delta Variant of Meg.

I also think Joy would throw in the towel early and The View would fold. Life is too short to put up with Guilfoyle after 3 years of MeAgain.  Though Joy might stay one day to ask Guilfoyle what Gavin Newsom ever saw in her.

[GHScorpiosRule]

1 hour ago, deirdra said:

Life is too short to put up with Guilfoyle after 3 years of MeAgain

Not three. Five. Five long, tortuous years.

[deirdra]

1 hour ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

Not three. Five. Five long, tortuous years.

3 yrs & 5 mos since Oct 9, 2017 if you subtract her mat leave, grievance leave and Aug & Sept 2021, but it certainly seems like five long, tortuous years.  

Edited July 24, 2021 by deirdra

[Back Atcha]

 

On 7/23/2021 at 11:10 PM, bannana said:

On 7/23/2021 at 7:02 PM, TheGreenKnight said:

Paula were open Trump supporter

Paula supported Trump? How did I not know that. That is very surprising.

• Paula Faris @paulafaris  Replying to @GenePereira1
• I do not support anyone in the campaign. But I do try and ensure all views are represented.
• 4:58 PM · Mar 7, 2016·Twitter for iPhone

Does ABC really want this...for even ONE DAY??

 

[TheGreenKnight]

https://radaronline.com/p/candace-owens-not-replacing-meghan-mccain-the-view/

I think a lot of the talk about people like Owens and Guilfoyle is just scaremongering from McCain’s media friends that Viewers should’ve been grateful to her because we might be about to end up with someone worse than her. That’s not possible, lol… Anyway, I believe Whoopi would block Guilfoyle just like she would Pirro even if those two were honestly even entertained as possibilities which I doubt, just because of how horrible they were for her to deal with when they guested on the show, and we know Whoopi has that kind of pull.

[TheView]

Do you think they'd get Tomi Lahren? 

[ifionlyknew]

48 minutes ago, TheView said:

Do you think they'd get Tomi Lahren? 

Only if they want to drive away viewers.

[TheGreenKnight]

6 hours ago, TheView said:

Do you think they'd get Tomi Lahren? 

Possible. I could imagine them picking someone in that vein anyway.

[Haleth]

7 minutes ago, TheGreenKnight said:

Possible. I could imagine them picking someone in that vein anyway.

Nope. Not going to watch that. 

[JayD83]

If they get another Trump Republican to replace McCain, I'm done with this show for good.  I refuse to be subjected to lies and attempted gaslighting again!

[tableau vivant]

We're going to go through a long period of rotating guest hosts. ABC is not in a hurry to replace McCain for next season. 

 

https://pagesix.com/2021/07/22/the-view-is-in-no-rush-to-replace-meghan-mccain/

[maggiemae]

Oh Man...revolving guest co-hosts are so tiresome to me. Takes way too long to welcome them and then try to explain who they are and their history.

Yuck...otoh...it is pagesix.

[Haleth]

Otoh, not Meghan.

[deirdra]

Why not stick with 4 hosts at a time with a couple of guest-hosts available for days when Whoopi or others are off?  Discussions can be more in-depth rather than Whoopi asking "X, what do you think?" four times in a row.  On days when only 4 hosts were available in the past, the show always seemed more calm, since nobody needed to rant or fast-talk to get their views in. And the fewer hosts/guests, the less chance of talking over someone else.  It was always awkward when only 3 of 5 hosts would appear on some segments - viewers spent most of the time wondering why those 2 hosts were excluded.

Edited July 27, 2021 by deirdra

[TheGreenKnight]

That’s true. When I told my mother about McCain getting fired a few weeks ago and was talking about who they might have on there instead, she was like, “Why do they need five anyway?” It’s true they often only had four when Elisabeth was there. The fifth seat would be Barbara, but she rarely showed up then. They could do the same thing here with Ana showing up once in a while or some other conservative try-out.

But I just think they’ll probably want some kind of feisty conservative there. It’s smart to test them out first—especially to avoid repeating a McCain situation—but they could test people behind the scenes like they did ahead of O’Donnell’s second season. They’re probably too lazy to do that though.

[WinnieWinkle]

15 minutes ago, deirdra said:

Why not stick with 4 hosts at a time with a couple of guest-hosts available for days when Whoopi or others are off?

If I got to decide things this is the way I'd go.  If they insist they have to have 5 hosts all the time I'd still prefer it if the 5th host wasn't a permanent one.  Try people out for awhile and see how they fit. 

My fear is that ABC wants the clicks and the attention that someone toxic can bring to the show.  If that's the case "my" show is gone for good.

[GHScorpiosRule]

30 minutes ago, WinnieWinkle said:

My fear is that ABC wants the clicks and the attention that someone toxic can bring to the show.  If that's the case "my" show is gone for good.

If that were the case, Her Twatness would not be exiting the show.

[WinnieWinkle]

1 minute ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

If that were the case, Her Twatness would not be exiting the show.

I read speculation here that ABC wanted her to stay and tried to 'sweeten' the deal.  If that's true then I guess it's possible ABC does want to go with toxic.  If not then hopefully I am worrying for nothing!

[ifionlyknew]

I don't know if ABC wants someone who is toxic.  But I have no doubt they want to hire someone that will get them attention. And unfortunately we live in a time when negativity and ignorance seem to what people will tune in for. Call it the dumbing down of daytime TV.  

[WinnieWinkle]

24 minutes ago, ifionlyknew said:

I don't know if ABC wants someone who is toxic.  But I have no doubt they want to hire someone that will get them attention. And unfortunately we live in a time when negativity and ignorance seem to what people will tune in for. Call it the dumbing down of daytime TV.  

Sadly I have to agree with you - I guess I can cope if they go with negativity but I do draw the line at ignorance,  And if we're going to be facing yet another purveyor of lies, lies and more lies then I am officially out.

[tableau vivant]

I think the odd-numbered panel for any show is ideal because that way if there is a disagreement about something (usually a controversial topic) and it's split down the middle, the fifth host kind of 'breaks the tie'.  If they're going to split it politically (2 liberals, 2 conservatives) then the fifth should be an 'independent' to balance it out. 

 

However, it has never worked that way on this show, as McCain has pointed out over and over. It's always been four liberals and one conservative. If ever there was another conservative on the panel  as the fifth host, it's usually a passive Conservative (Nicole, Candace, Abby, Jed) or a RINO (Ana). Aside from Meghan, the only true outspoken / aggressive republican they've ever had was Hasslebeck. 

 

It would be more dynamic if they did it the right way - 2, 2, and 1. 

[ifionlyknew]

41 minutes ago, tableau vivant said:

However, it has never worked that way on this show, as McCain has pointed out over and over. It's always been four liberals and one conservative. If ever there was another conservative on the panel  as the fifth host, it's usually a passive Conservative (Nicole, Candace, Abby, Jed) or a RINO (Ana). Aside from Meghan, the only true outspoken / aggressive republican they've ever had was Hasslebeck. 

Since the Fairness Act was repealed by the Reagan administration ABC and the View in particular are under no obligation to have an equal number of liberals and conservatives as cohosts.

I always think the View makes a mistake when it hires a cohost specifically for their political views.  This show isn't Crossfire.  It's fine for cohosts to have differing opinions but it should not be so predictable.  

[Haleth]

59 minutes ago, tableau vivant said:

Aside from Meghan, the only true outspoken / aggressive republican they've ever had was Hasslebeck Bill Geddie. 

Fixed that for you.

[WinnieWinkle]

5 minutes ago, ifionlyknew said:

I always think the View makes a mistake when it hires a cohost specifically for their political views.  This show isn't Crossfire.  It's fine for cohosts to have differing opinions but it should not be so predictable.  

I'd be fine with a conservative who isn't a hater.  They are out there and if The View could just find a well spoken conservative who isn't doing her research on Fox news I think that could add to the show.  But I agree completely that politics as politics should only be a small part of the show in the first place. 

[ifionlyknew]

6 minutes ago, Haleth said:

1 hour ago, tableau vivant said:

Aside from Meghan, the only true outspoken / aggressive republican they've ever had was Hasslebeck Bill Geddie. 

Fixed that for you.

And when she was hired she was not known for her political views.

[tinkerbell]

57 minutes ago, ifionlyknew said:

Since the Fairness Act was repealed by the Reagan administration ABC and the View in particular are under no obligation to have an equal number of liberals and conservatives as cohosts.

I always think the View makes a mistake when it hires a cohost specifically for their political views.  This show isn't Crossfire.  It's fine for cohosts to have differing opinions but it should not be so predictable.  

thank you for posting this, saved me the time. 

Why not stick with 4 hosts for now, and leave the option open for hiring a smart woman who is informed, pleasant, and good at discussing a variety of topics?  (Regardless of her political affiliation.)

[statsgirl]

I saw this on twitter (I don't know who the person who tweeted it is) and it expresses how I feel.

Quote

I’m a conservative and I will trust a liberal journalist over a right-wing shitlord any day. Why? Because even if the journalist is biased, they are at least trying to tell the truth as they see it, while the shitlord thinks it’s fun to lie and see if you believe them.

I am confident of my ability to hear, evaluate, and filter through the former. The latter is just poison.

That's my problem with someone like Owens or Tomi Lahren. They're not true conservatives like Ana because they either don't understand the concepts or they don't care about them, they're just there to disturb and get cheers from their crew. I want a real exchange of ideas and views, not a scripted wrestling match.

[ifionlyknew]

16 minutes ago, statsgirl said:

I saw this on twitter (I don't know who the person who tweeted it is) and it expresses how I feel.

That's my problem with someone like Owens or Tomi Lahren. They're not true conservatives like Ana because they either don't understand the concepts or they don't care about them, they're just there to disturb and get cheers from their crew. I want a real exchange of ideas and views, not a scripted wrestling match.

I think we can add Meghan to that category.  She purposely says things to be antagonistic.  The View does not need to hire a flame thrower.  They  need to hire someone who can articulate their views without denigrating other people's views.

[After7Only]

2 hours ago, tableau vivant said:

It would be more dynamic if they did it the right way - 2, 2, and 1. 

As other have said the View is not a political show.   It's a talk show that includes political topics.   I'd watch a cable news network or a Sunday morning news program if I was interested in strong political debate (which I do).   And I don't want to see the people on those shows discuss The Roc's latest movie, or the Real Housewives.   The View would do better to not cast based on political affiliation at all.   I rather see different types of diversity.  Cast a single mother with young kids,  A business owner, someone from an immigrant family.   Just focusing on political affiliation isn't working.  As most people's beliefs are not just republican or just democrat.   

[tableau vivant]

On 7/27/2021 at 1:47 PM, ifionlyknew said:

Since the Fairness Act was repealed by the Reagan administration ABC and the View in particular are under no obligation to have an equal number of liberals and conservatives as cohosts.

I always think the View makes a mistake when it hires a cohost specifically for their political views.  This show isn't Crossfire.  It's fine for cohosts to have differing opinions but it should not be so predictable.  

Has nothing to do with the Fairness Act. It has everything to do with dynamic conversation with opposing views. It gets tiresome to watch everyone agree with each other - that's what 'The Talk' is for on TV.  

[JAYJAY1979]

On 7/27/2021 at 3:10 PM, After7Only said:

As other have said the View is not a political show.   It's a talk show that includes political topics.   I'd watch a cable news network or a Sunday morning news program if I was interested in strong political debate (which I do).   And I don't want to see the people on those shows discuss The Roc's latest movie, or the Real Housewives.   The View would do better to not cast based on political affiliation at all.   I rather see different types of diversity.  Cast a single mother with young kids,  A business owner, someone from an immigrant family.   Just focusing on political affiliation isn't working.  As most people's beliefs are not just republican or just democrat.   

I think that is partly why most viewers liked Sara Haines..because she didn't have just liberal or conservative views.  Her views were more diverse...same with Sunny (who is religious, traditional family values, but has some social liberal views).

 

[deirdra]

54 minutes ago, JAYJAY1979 said:

Her views were more diverse...same with Sunny (who is religious, traditional family values, but has some social liberal views).

Or Ana, who is fiscally conservative because she and her parents worked hard for everything they've got. But socially liberal on some issues, moderate on others and can tell you her evidence and rationale for each belief. This is how most thinking people are; they don't spout one-party's radical talking points, never backing down even in light of new data and rational arguments.

[ifionlyknew]

10 hours ago, tableau vivant said:

Has nothing to do with the Fairness Act. It has everything to do with dynamic conversation with opposing views. It gets tiresome to watch everyone agree with each other - that's what 'The Talk' is for on TV.  

When the original cohosts were there and then with Lisa Ling and then with Elisabeth Hasselbeck they didn't always agree with each other. It was much more fun to watch to watch Meredith dress up as a hot dog than watch Meghan McCain spew dangerous disinformation.

Whoopi, Joy, Sunny and Sara (and Ana) all have different beliefs.  They might agree on some things but their views are more nuanced than all fill in the blank are bad which is what Meghan believes.  

[General Days]

On 7/23/2021 at 3:16 PM, tinkerbell said:

I've read in 2 different places a rumor that Kimberly Guilfoyle is being considered as a host.

The one person who would actually be worse than meghan.

 

I'd say they'd never do that, but I also said DJT would never be POTUS, so I ain't playing with fire. I would not watch the show. KG is both horrible and batshit insane.

 

 

On 7/27/2021 at 12:52 PM, tableau vivant said:

However, it has never worked that way on this show, as McCain has pointed out over and over. It's always been four liberals and one conservative. If ever there was another conservative on the panel  as the fifth host, it's usually a passive Conservative (Nicole, Candace, Abby, Jed) or a RINO (Ana). Aside from Meghan, the only true outspoken / aggressive republican they've ever had was Hasslebeck. 

 

It would be more dynamic if they did it the right way - 2, 2, and 1. 

 

Jed was pretty outspoken. She had that rat-a-tat-tat machine gun delivery. She also had her own opinions she actually held (in contrast to Meghan, who just spews some mixture of what she thinks her tribe wants to hear and what gets whispered in her ear at night). 

It's difficult to judge anything since November 2016 -- even conservative and liberal. We're in a different world, now.

[Pearson80]

On 7/27/2021 at 12:52 PM, tableau vivant said:

I think the odd-numbered panel for any show is ideal because that way if there is a disagreement about something (usually a controversial topic) and it's split down the middle, the fifth host kind of 'breaks the tie'.  If they're going to split it politically (2 liberals, 2 conservatives) then the fifth should be an 'independent' to balance it out. 

 

However, it has never worked that way on this show, as McCain has pointed out over and over. It's always been four liberals and one conservative. If ever there was another conservative on the panel  as the fifth host, it's usually a passive Conservative (Nicole, Candace, Abby, Jed) or a RINO (Ana). Aside from Meghan, the only true outspoken / aggressive republican they've ever had was Hasslebeck. 

 

It would be more dynamic if they did it the right way - 2, 2, and 1. 

Why do you keep calling Ana a RINO, she is not at all.  Being a conservative does not mean you are hateful and disrespectful. You have no idea what a conservative is and I have plenty in my family and they are not like Megan.. Megan is a vile nasty ill-informed woman who has never earned anything in her privileged life.   

Also, Megan had her bff Abby a fellow conservative on there and she treated her so bad that she left the show.  If you are sure in your beliefs, you don't need a partner to defend them.  Plenty of Democrats are on panels as the sole liberal voice on Foxnews and they are able to articulate their views without acting like Megan. They don't play the victim and derail the conversations because people don't agree with them.

This show was  not supposed to be a political show, it is supposed to be about women talking about topics that affect women and yes politics will come up but it is not the main thing. 

Edited July 31, 2021 by Pearson80

[raven]

Remember to keep the substance of your post about possible new co-hosts.  It is OK to mention their background - i.e. "so and so said they voted for politician x".  You have all been pretty much sticking to that, which we appreciate.

However, some posts are very close to political generalizing and opinionating, which is not allowed.  This is not the place to debate the different political parties.  Any questions, PM your mods @statsgirl @helenamonster @raven.

[ifionlyknew]

12 hours ago, Pearson80 said:

 

This show was  not supposed to be a political show, it is supposed to be about women talking about topics that affect women and yes politics will come up but it is not the main thing. 

All ABC has to do is hire someone who can hold their own during political discussions.   It doesn't have to be a political analyst.  It doesn't have to be someone who has been in politics their whole life.  Joy doesn't have a political background and she has been talking about them on this show forever.  Just hire someone who is not going to be antagonistic to the cohosts who have differing views.

[TheView]

I'm dreading who it could be. If it's Candace Owens or Tomi Lahren, I'm out! 

[deirdra]

11 hours ago, ifionlyknew said:

Joy doesn't have a political background and she has been talking about them on this show forever.  Just hire someone who is not going to be antagonistic to the cohosts who have differing views.

Hire a professional who does their own homework rather than someone who yells talking points and then changes the subject when they cannot rationally explain their evidence.

Or hire a female comedian fashioned after Stephen Colbert in the Colbert Report.

Edited August 1, 2021 by deirdra

[TheGreenKnight]

12 hours ago, TheView said:

I'm dreading who it could be. If it's Candace Owens or Tomi Lahren, I'm out! 

I'm surprised so many current viewers have a threshold at this point. I mean, I understand it for those who stopped watching because of McCain and are finally looking forward to the chance to watch again, why someone like Lahren would be a deal breaker. I realize I passed my threshold with McCain a long time ago, I was merely waiting her out because I liked Joy too much to stop watching altogether. After that, I'd be grateful simply to have an argumentative conservative in the Hasselbeck vein. That alone would be improvement enough for me.

It's not that I wouldn't prefer a more serious show like what O'Donnell attempted in her second season (and Whoopi imploded). It's just I don't have much confidence in the people currently in charge of The View after how much they coddled McCain. I understand they were probably put in a bad position just like the co-hosts of having executives telling them to give McCain whatever she wanted and all that though, so maybe that lack of confidence is undeserved. Still, I have a feeling they'll pick another argumentative conservative, so I'm just hoping for someone who can speak their turn, occasionally take a little back-and-forth and stay on-topic without all the toxicity and making everything personal that McCain brought to the show. But make no mistake that I'd absolutely be up for better than that, a show where someone like Ana or Yvette Nicole Brown took the fifth seat.