What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Rachel Maddow loses to Megyn Kelly in ratings. A conservatives viewpoi (1 Viewer)

Patrick Bateman

Footballguy
The president of MSNBC insisted Neilson ratings investigate their numbers saying it was not possible. Megyn was a successful lawyer before she got into broadcasting. Maddow was indoctrinated in European universities of socialism and went from academia to broadcasting. So like many Libs Maddow has nothing for work experience and only what was taught to her by socialist. When Kelly speaks, she speaks from experience in practicing law. When Maddow speaks its from liberal academia and no experience of the business world. Kelly is a class act with knowledge. Maddow is an empty suit that speaks hate. MSNBC cant compete, all their ratings are in the tank.

Kelly is an accomplished lawyer and family woman that broke into broadcast. Maddow is a liberal mouth piece strait out of liberal academia indoctrination. The numbers speak for them selves. MSLSD is in the tank just like all liberal media. Even liberals don't trust MSLSD. Like it or not Fox is the #1 name in news. Libs even trust them, don't agree with them but trust them for news. It is not all conservatives that watch Fox, its Americas most watched news because they don't edit tape to fit a narrative.

 
I flipped on Maddow the other day for about two minutes to see what she was saying about the shutdown and she was in full rant mode and sounded like a bitter, angry person. In other words, she came off like the left's equivalent of Sean Hannity: no objectivity, no real analysis and noting interesting to hear...just full-blown extreme views coming from a partisan talking head.

I won't defend Fox as a whole, but Megyn Kelly, besides being nice to look at ;) , usually brings in some good guests...from both sides. And when she does get a partisan hack like Palin, like the other day, her annoyance with such babble is more than obvious.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I flipped on Maddow the other day for about two minutes to see what she was saying about the shutdown and she was in full rant mode and sounded like a bitter, angry person. In other words, she came off like the left's equivalent of Sean Hannity: no objectivity, no real analysis and noting interesting to hear...just full-blown extreme views coming from a partisan talking head.

I won't defend Fox as a whole, but Megyn Kelly, besides being nice to look at ;) , usually brings in some good guests...from both sides. And when she does get a partisan hack like Palin, like the other day, her annoyance with such babble is more than obvious.
Agreed on the bold. She is nice to look at. She definitely is not Hannity-like. And she certainly seemed to be doing a WTF when Palin went bimbo-babble on her.

 
Maddow is only incrementally better than Hannity IMO. In a way she's worse because I expect better from liberals than nit-picking, snarky attacks.

 
I expect better from liberals than nit-picking, snarky attacks.
In defense of Maddow...All the FoxNews programs beat all the MSNBC programs head-to-head, not just Kelly over Maddow.

And nearly all the MSNBC hosts are snarky and nit-picking, not just Maddow. I think that's encouraged by MSNBC higher-ups.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
And nearly all the MSNBC hosts are snarky and not-picking, not just Maddow. I think that's encouraged by MSNBC higher-ups.
Considering how they continue to get slaughtered in the ratings, it clearly seems to be working for them. :lol:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I expect better from liberals than nit-picking, snarky attacks.
In defense of Maddow...All the FoxNews programs beat all the MSNBC programs head-to-head, not just Kelly over Maddow.
Yeah, but this was on the second day of her show and going up against their flagship program. I think that is part of the reason for MSNBC's CEO inquisition, not just the large jump overnight.
 
Don't they have totally different types of shows? I don't watch either one of them, but based on the YouTube clips my FFA brethren have linked to, I get the sense that Kelly is a more or less conventional news anchor while Maddow is a talk-radio personality except on TV. (A talk-TV personality?)

I don't know if a ratings comparison says much about Maddow versus Kelly (as opposed to their respective stations or show formats).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
FOX is terrible and MSNBC is just as bad. Only watch CNN for my cable news. The do a great job on political analysis.

 
Maddow always comes off as angry and bitter in her delivery. Maddow needs a kinder more gentle approach, like The Ed show or Lawrence O`Donnel.

 
I expect better from liberals than nit-picking, snarky attacks.
In defense of Maddow...All the FoxNews programs beat all the MSNBC programs head-to-head, not just Kelly over Maddow.

And nearly all the MSNBC hosts are snarky and nit-picking, not just Maddow. I think that's encouraged by MSNBC higher-ups.
Yeah, not sure what the news is here, or why it's surprising, interesting, or a chest-thumping thing for conservatives.

Your news network does really well h2h vs liberal news because it's one-note, and plays really well to a huge audience with no interest in alternative viewpoints. That same tactic, when hardcore liberalism employs it, is of relatively less interest to a liberal base that you can tell -- from the very definition of the word "liberal" --is going to be interested in a much wider variety of sources. :shrug:

 
And nearly all the MSNBC hosts are snarky and not-picking, not just Maddow. I think that's encouraged by MSNBC higher-ups.
Considering how they continue to get slaughtered in the ratings, it clearly seems to be working for them. :lol:
You don't need to get the best ratings in order to make tons of money. Sure, they would like to be on too, but I'm sure msnbc is doing fine
 
Maddow always comes off as angry and bitter in her delivery. Maddow needs a kinder more gentle approach, like The Ed show or Lawrence O`Donnel.
What's strange about that is liberals have been kicking conservatives butts in just about everything recently. Not sure what she is so angry and bitter about.
 
I flipped on Maddow the other day for about two minutes to see what she was saying about the shutdown and she was in full rant mode and sounded like a bitter, angry person. In other words, she came off like the left's equivalent of Sean Hannity: no objectivity, no real analysis and noting interesting to hear...just full-blown extreme views coming from a partisan talking head.

I won't defend Fox as a whole, but Megyn Kelly, besides being nice to look at ;) , usually brings in some good guests...from both sides. And when she does get a partisan hack like Palin, like the other day, her annoyance with such babble is more than obvious.
Agreed on the bold. She is nice to look at. She definitely is not Hannity-like. And she certainly seemed to be doing a WTF when Palin went bimbo-babble on her.
Like many tv news personalities do though, she does let untruths fly unchallenged when they suit the conservative story, while downplaying truths that might hurt the conservative storyline. MSNBC is just as bad. While I don't buy the "liberal" media as the conservatives do, MSNBC is definitely a liberal station, just like FOX is a conservative one.

 
I flipped on Maddow the other day for about two minutes to see what she was saying about the shutdown and she was in full rant mode and sounded like a bitter, angry person. In other words, she came off like the left's equivalent of Sean Hannity: no objectivity, no real analysis and noting interesting to hear...just full-blown extreme views coming from a partisan talking head.

I won't defend Fox as a whole, but Megyn Kelly, besides being nice to look at ;) , usually brings in some good guests...from both sides. And when she does get a partisan hack like Palin, like the other day, her annoyance with such babble is more than obvious.
Agreed on the bold. She is nice to look at. She definitely is not Hannity-like. And she certainly seemed to be doing a WTF when Palin went bimbo-babble on her.
Like many tv news personalities do though, she does let untruths fly unchallenged when they suit the conservative story, while downplaying truths that might hurt the conservative storyline. MSNBC is just as bad. While I don't buy the "liberal" media as the conservatives do, MSNBC is definitely a liberal station, just like FOX is a conservative one.
No doubt.

 
Not to pick nits. But if Megyn Kelly had been a particularly successful lawyer, she wouldn't have become a general assignment reporter for WJLA in 2004 after 9 years with Jones Day. She would have been a partner at Jones Day.

"Being educated at European socialist universities" has to be the weirdest euphemism for "graduating with honors from Stanford and then completing a Rhodes scholarship at Oxford" that I've ever heard of.

Obviously, my politics are probably closer to Maddow's, but I don't watch either Maddow's or Kelly's shows and my impression of Kelly as a broadcaster is largely favorable from the little I've seen.

 
Don't they have totally different types of shows? I don't watch either one of them, but based on the YouTube clips my FFA brethren have linked to, I get the sense that Kelly is a more or less conventional news anchor while Maddow is a talk-radio personality except on TV. (A talk-TV personality?)

I don't know if a ratings comparison says much about Maddow versus Kelly (as opposed to their respective stations or show formats).
Kelly has a separate "Hannity-style" program these days.

 
Mr. Retukes said:
Maurile Tremblay said:
Don't they have totally different types of shows? I don't watch either one of them, but based on the YouTube clips my FFA brethren have linked to, I get the sense that Kelly is a more or less conventional news anchor while Maddow is a talk-radio personality except on TV. (A talk-TV personality?)

I don't know if a ratings comparison says much about Maddow versus Kelly (as opposed to their respective stations or show formats).
Kelly has a separate "Hannity-style" program these days.
Oh. I may actually check that out.

 
No need to watch Maddow...name a topic and you know exactly what she is going to say...the next original thought she has will be her first...

 
Thought this was an interesting rebuttal to her recent popularity surge. It's from Slate and is as one sided as FoxNews, but it's an interesting perspective.

Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly was the biggest winner of election night 2012 who was not running for public office. That evening, after Fox analysts had called Ohio and the election for President Obama, Karl Rove infamously began to express doubts about the results. In what is the only bit of television theater from that night anyone will ever remember, Kelly, who was co-anchoring Fox’s coverage, was tapped to question the decision desk directly, and she gamely stalked the halls of Fox News to authoritatively question the stat wonks who had made the call. (A Fox insider told New York’s Gabe Sherman about Kelly’s walk, “This is Fox News, so anytime there’s a chance to show off Megyn Kelly’s legs they’ll go for it.”) “We are actually quite comfortable with the call in Ohio,” one of the analysts told Kelly. This was not sufficient to convince Rove, who attempted a sort of one-man filibuster on the election results, such a blatant flouting of fact that it made Kelly’s earlier question to Rove seem prescient. “Is this just math you do as a Republican to make yourself feel better,” she had asked, “or is it real?”

And thus, the dueling legends of Megyn Kelly were born: Kelly the unflappable, impeccable Fox News star, and Kelly the unflappable, impeccable Fox News star who maybe knows Fox News is crazy. While nearly everyone around her lost their senses, Kelly remained the perfectly poised adult: gracefully navigating a contentious situation, upholding the integrity of Fox News without alienating conservative powerhouses, and making captivating television all the while.

That night, Fox saw an anchor they should commit to. The Kelly File, her new nightly news program, started last week and makes her Fox’s first new host since 2003. It airs directly following The O'Reilly Factor, and after just two episodes, it’s become the most watched show in the demo on cable news.

That night last fall, liberals also saw someone to admire. Kelly’s assured handling of Rove’s temper tantrum solidified her burgeoning reputation as the Fox News anchor who, when push came to Karl Rove’s shoving, would behave like a member of the reality-based community. If she was not quite a donkey in Fox’s clothing, maybe she wasn’t a party-line ideologue in one either.

Kelly has set herself apart by doing things Fox News personalities don’t usually do: She had issued a skillful and fast correction to Fox’s missed call on the Affordable Care Act, she “destroyed” a conservative who had called her maternity leave “a racket,” and she had taken her colleagues to task for disparaging families in which women are the primary breadwinner. Writing about that last incident on The New Yorker’s website, Amy Davidson—while complimentarily calling Kelly “the brains of the Fox News operation”—noted that Kelly “does not describe herself as a feminist, which may be why it’s all the more fascinating when, every now and then, she decides to act like what others might describe as one.” Kelly, to put a spin on an old cliché, is the Fox News host liberal women would most like to have a glass of sav blanc with.

That is, until they watch an episode of The Kelly File. One week into the show’s run, it is clear that to understand Kelly as anything other than a dedicated Fox News shill is a deluded fantasy. It is, to paraphrase Kelly herself, just wishful thinking you do as a Democrat to make yourself feel better. The skills that Kelly displayed on election night are real: She really is smarter, more appealing, and more polished than any other Fox News personality—none of which obviates her totally pernicious dedication to keeping Fox viewers within the Fox bubble, facts be damned.

For instance, watching The Kelly File, you would think the Republicans were more popular than the president. Since her new show has been on air, Kelly has never willingly shared the terrible approval ratings of Republicans in Congress, though she has vociferously supplied Obama’s low approval ratings and the low approval ratings of Congress as a whole. In its first week, The Kelly Files has been fixated on how the shutdown was briefly keeping death benefits from soldiers who have died since the government closed. In the post-Benghazi era, this means determining “when” Barack Obama “knew” that families were being denied benefits, and when he decided to “do something” about it, even though the problem was brought up and addressed in a matter of days. Kelly aired a “gotcha” clip of Fox’s Ed Henry grilling Press Secretary Jay Carney that is downright Rorschachian: It looks to me like the White House dealt with the issue as quickly as possible, but looks to Fox News like a White House cover-up.

Nearly all the stories on The Kelly File turn on wedge social issues. A segment about a teenager who was returned to a house with a sex offender in it made it to air because the girl was allegedly being forced to have an abortion. There was a piece about the war on Christmas. A sequence about the 1980s killing of a DEA agent got play because the Obama administration has not protested the release of his killer from Mexican prison strongly enough. Kelly, her head, as usual, cocked slightly to the left to indicate deep listening, calmly took in a guest explaining that the Democrats don’t want to talk with Republicans because you “never have a real conversation with your adversary, it humanizes them,” before, seconds later, quoting Lenin: “Socialized medicine is the keystone to the arch of the socialist state.”

But then there are moments when Kelly exhibits her no-nonsense charm. In a segment on Las Vegas union workers hurling insults at tourists, a panelist said that Obama and Harry Reid have called people worse names in just the last few days, suggesting that such abuse and violence was typical of the left. At this, Kelly intervened, a little sarcastically. “You have maybe overstated your case. I don’t think we want to dismiss the entire left in the country as violent,” she said. Then she added, “I will say in [the union’s] defense that one time one guy parked me in and I could not get out of my car on either side, and I put a little note on his car and all I wrote on it was ‘Loser!’ And it made me feel so much better. And maybe they are experiencing the same thing. It was very cathartic for me. I cop to it.”

This may be a silly story, but I found it charming—and also terrifyingly savvy. Kelly dropped this anecdote into one of the least contentious stories she aired last week. (Even the Democrat on the panel thought cursing at tourists wasn’t a great strategy.) It burnishes her reputation as something other than a Fox automaton, without alienating any Fox partisans (it’s a cute story). Megyn Kelly has convinced both the right and the left that she’s a bold truth-teller because of her willingness to call bull#### one out of the 100 times bull#### should actually could be called.


Kelly is, in a way, like Laura Bush, a likeable woman who once evinced a leftish streak—voting Democrat before her marriage—that allowed liberals to project upon her a more palatable politics, a flight of fancy that inspired an entire novel. Every single day, Kelly demonstrates her devotion to Fox News ideology. But because the only tidbits that regularly reach non-Fox News watchers are viral videos of Kelly doing something rare for a Fox News anchor—pointing out that all liberals are not violent, say, or arguing maternity leave is good—liberals can harbor the fantasy that Megyn Kelly might be that mythical being: A Fox News anchor to disagree with only some of the time. It’s not true, but it’s a very comforting to believe, because Megyn Kelly is going to be with us for a very long while.

Willa Paskin is Slate’s television critic.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/television/2013/10/megyn_kelly_is_not_a_liberal_the_kelly_report_on_fox_news_reviewed.html

 
Ramsay Hunt Experience said:
Not to pick nits. But if Megyn Kelly had been a particularly successful lawyer, she wouldn't have become a general assignment reporter for WJLA in 2004 after 9 years with Jones Day. She would have been a partner at Jones Day.

"Being educated at European socialist universities" has to be the weirdest euphemism for "graduating with honors from Stanford and then completing a Rhodes scholarship at Oxford" that I've ever heard of.

Obviously, my politics are probably closer to Maddow's, but I don't watch either Maddow's or Kelly's shows and my impression of Kelly as a broadcaster is largely favorable from the little I've seen.
That is why I like Kelly's analysis of legal cases, as she has the background to objectively and often times accurately assess them. Her right leanings are a bit tilted more often than not, but find me a political talking head whose ideology doesn't find its way into their comments, etc.

I can't believe TGZ hasn't shown up here yet. Hope he's okay.
I thought maybe he and Maddow had a man date or something.

 
This would be news if Maddow was dominating the Kelly. FoxNews could throw anyone out there and have 25 out of the top 30 shows.

 
I watched Maddow once and couldn't stand her.

I have no idea who Kelly is.

Is Maddow a benchmark for Fox News? A very odd choice for a measuring stick imo. :shrug:

 
I have formed a logical proof from the OP:

1. Megyn Kelly's first few broadcasts got much better ratings than Rachel Maddow.

2. Therefore, the public prefers Megyn Kelly to Rachel Maddow.

3. Therefore, the public prefers conservatism to liberalism.

4. Therefore, conservatism is superior to liberalism.

 
NetnautX said:
FOX is terrible and MSNBC is just as bad. Only watch CNN for my cable news. The do a great job on political analysis.
MSNBC is like a leftist Hannity 24/7. Fox at least offers some balanced and has a few decent news reporters. CNN is marginally better than Fox as it is pretty obvious their slant on anout any issue. There are no organization who do a straight job with their analysis or news reporting. All pretty bad. Of course if you agree with CNN left of center slant, enjoy.

 
I have formed a logical proof from the OP:

1. Megyn Kelly's first few broadcasts got much better ratings than Rachel Maddow.

2. Therefore, the public prefers Megyn Kelly to Rachel Maddow.

3. Therefore, the public prefers conservatism to liberalism.

4. Therefore, conservatism is superior to liberalism.
Maddows and MSNBC is the suck. How you manage to watch that #### explains a lot about your posting.

 
NetnautX said:
FOX is terrible and MSNBC is just as bad. Only watch CNN for my cable news. The do a great job on political analysis.
MSNBC is like a leftist Hannity 24/7. Fox at least offers some balanced and has a few decent news reporters. CNN is marginally better than Fox as it is pretty obvious their slant on anout any issue. There are no organization who do a straight job with their analysis or news reporting. All pretty bad. Of course if you agree with CNN left of center slant, enjoy.
When the shutdown was being kicked down the road on that last day CNN had lots of analysis. I turned to Fox to see what their slant was and they weren't even covering it. I guess Murdoch was too embarrassed or something about the GOP capitulation.

 
NetnautX said:
FOX is terrible and MSNBC is just as bad. Only watch CNN for my cable news. The do a great job on political analysis.
MSNBC is like a leftist Hannity 24/7. Fox at least offers some balanced and has a few decent news reporters. CNN is marginally better than Fox as it is pretty obvious their slant on anout any issue. There are no organization who do a straight job with their analysis or news reporting. All pretty bad. Of course if you agree with CNN left of center slant, enjoy.
When the shutdown was being kicked down the road on that last day CNN had lots of analysis. I turned to Fox to see what their slant was and they weren't even covering it. I guess Murdoch was too embarrassed or something about the GOP capitulation.
Is that kind of how NBC and the other main news channels barely covered the story about how families of those killed in the military weren't getting money because Obama and Chuck Hagel dropped the ball?

 
NetnautX said:
FOX is terrible and MSNBC is just as bad. Only watch CNN for my cable news. The do a great job on political analysis.
MSNBC is like a leftist Hannity 24/7. Fox at least offers some balanced and has a few decent news reporters. CNN is marginally better than Fox as it is pretty obvious their slant on anout any issue. There are no organization who do a straight job with their analysis or news reporting. All pretty bad. Of course if you agree with CNN left of center slant, enjoy.
When the shutdown was being kicked down the road on that last day CNN had lots of analysis. I turned to Fox to see what their slant was and they weren't even covering it. I guess Murdoch was too embarrassed or something about the GOP capitulation.
So CNN spent their air time mocking Fox? That proves my point about their obvious slant.. :shrug:

 
NetnautX said:
FOX is terrible and MSNBC is just as bad. Only watch CNN for my cable news. The do a great job on political analysis.
MSNBC is like a leftist Hannity 24/7. Fox at least offers some balanced and has a few decent news reporters. CNN is marginally better than Fox as it is pretty obvious their slant on anout any issue. There are no organization who do a straight job with their analysis or news reporting. All pretty bad. Of course if you agree with CNN left of center slant, enjoy.
Jon Stewart would like a word with you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9uCnWpLZ4k

 
NetnautX said:
FOX is terrible and MSNBC is just as bad. Only watch CNN for my cable news. The do a great job on political analysis.
MSNBC is like a leftist Hannity 24/7. Fox at least offers some balanced and has a few decent news reporters. CNN is marginally better than Fox as it is pretty obvious their slant on anout any issue. There are no organization who do a straight job with their analysis or news reporting. All pretty bad. Of course if you agree with CNN left of center slant, enjoy.
When the shutdown was being kicked down the road on that last day CNN had lots of analysis. I turned to Fox to see what their slant was and they weren't even covering it. I guess Murdoch was too embarrassed or something about the GOP capitulation.
So CNN spent their air time mocking Fox? That proves my point about their obvious slant.. :shrug:
How do you get that from what he said? CNN covered news about the shutdown, FOX wasn't. Nothing there said CNN was mocking FOX...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
NetnautX said:
FOX is terrible and MSNBC is just as bad. Only watch CNN for my cable news. The do a great job on political analysis.
MSNBC is like a leftist Hannity 24/7. Fox at least offers some balanced and has a few decent news reporters. CNN is marginally better than Fox as it is pretty obvious their slant on anout any issue. There are no organization who do a straight job with their analysis or news reporting. All pretty bad. Of course if you agree with CNN left of center slant, enjoy.
When the shutdown was being kicked down the road on that last day CNN had lots of analysis. I turned to Fox to see what their slant was and they weren't even covering it. I guess Murdoch was too embarrassed or something about the GOP capitulation.
So CNN spent their air time mocking Fox? That proves my point about their obvious slant.. :shrug:
No, they spent their time talking about the biggest story of the day. Unlike Fox which has been known to do things like run hours and hours on Rev Wright for example.

 
NetnautX said:
FOX is terrible and MSNBC is just as bad. Only watch CNN for my cable news. The do a great job on political analysis.
MSNBC is like a leftist Hannity 24/7. Fox at least offers some balanced and has a few decent news reporters. CNN is marginally better than Fox as it is pretty obvious their slant on anout any issue. There are no organization who do a straight job with their analysis or news reporting. All pretty bad. Of course if you agree with CNN left of center slant, enjoy.
When the shutdown was being kicked down the road on that last day CNN had lots of analysis. I turned to Fox to see what their slant was and they weren't even covering it. I guess Murdoch was too embarrassed or something about the GOP capitulation.
So CNN spent their air time mocking Fox? That proves my point about their obvious slant.. :shrug:
How do you get that from what he said? CNN covered news about the shutdown, FOX wasn't. Nothing there said CNN was mocking FOX...
True, but you can't fault Fox for having commercial breaks. Every network does it.

 
The president of MSNBC insisted Neilson ratings investigate their numbers saying it was not possible. Megyn was a successful lawyer before she got into broadcasting. Maddow was indoctrinated in European universities of socialism and went from academia to broadcasting. So like many Libs Maddow has nothing for work experience and only what was taught to her by socialist. When Kelly speaks, she speaks from experience in practicing law. When Maddow speaks its from liberal academia and no experience of the business world. Kelly is a class act with knowledge. Maddow is an empty suit that speaks hate. MSNBC cant compete, all their ratings are in the tank.

Kelly is an accomplished lawyer and family woman that broke into broadcast. Maddow is a liberal mouth piece strait out of liberal academia indoctrination. The numbers speak for them selves. MSLSD is in the tank just like all liberal media. Even liberals don't trust MSLSD. Like it or not Fox is the #1 name in news. Libs even trust them, don't agree with them but trust them for news. It is not all conservatives that watch Fox, its Americas most watched news because they don't edit tape to fit a narrative.
What is it the past several weeks (okay, several years) with the elementary-school name-calling out of the Conservative talking heads? I can't remember what Rush Limbaugh's pet nickname for Harry Reid was on his show (the one day I listened while stuck in my car for a few hours), but that one took the cake. "European universities of socialism?" MSLSD? Seriously, it might get a couple quick giggles out of the Duck Dynasty and Honey-Boo contingency...but it just makes folks look "obtuse." I'm embarrassed for them...as they're too stupid to even know they should feel embarrassed! :loco:

And personally? I guess if I'm in the mood for a little eye candy, I probably won't be watching "news." Tie for me, related to news, would go to "graduating with honors from Stanford and then completing a Rhodes scholarship at Oxford." But Fox knows its audience. White Jesus. USA #1. Get your hands off MY medicare/disability (while taking it from "them," AKA leeches, who deserve it...less?). Et al.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ghost Rider said:
Jewell said:
And nearly all the MSNBC hosts are snarky and not-picking, not just Maddow. I think that's encouraged by MSNBC higher-ups.
Considering how they continue to get slaughtered in the ratings, it clearly seems to be working for them. :lol:
Tim's been known to reference them. And he's got like 70,000 posts.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top