We can't afford Rachel to keep her daily show for ONLY first 100 days.

[elleng]

VERY sorry to say it, as Rachel has her needs, but we can't survive without her brilliance.

[LaRaven]

1. She just had an excellent 1/2 hr segment!

Exposing the ‘perfect’ first two months of this coup

[MissB]

2. The Enola Gay comment was priceless

[pnwest]

3. That was a blistering first 15 minutes. It takes a lot

to shock me with this administration anymore - but the Paula White story disgusted me to my core.

And I didn’t know about the 100 day thing! Noooo!

[Prairie Gates]

4. Counterpoint: Rachel Maddow has zero effect on anything

[Woodwizard]

11. Exactly

Preaching to the choir.

I Don't watch any cable news it is all there to keep you watching. Npr, pbs, bbc, ect gets the same info without spoon feeding.

[Duppers]

31. I listen to PBS &

Also watch MSNBC.
There are some overlaps but one can learn from both.

I wouldn't call be informed by Rachel Maddow as being spoon fed❗

[Midwestern Democrat]

35. I don't begrudge people for watching MSNBC hosts, but they need to be aware they are watching highly partisan "feel

good" programs - they are not watching truly objective reporting that will ever really say anything that they don't want to hear. And that cocoon might be comforting but ultimately, ignoring or dismissing unpleasant things you don't want to hear doesn't actually prevent those unpleasant things from happening. For example, I wasn't happy Trump won the election but because I kept up with objective reporting during the campaign - I wasn't at all shocked by it - I fully expected it.

[writerJT]

15. True.

The fawning over tv bobbleheads is bizarre.

[ShazzieB]

24. I beg to differ, strongly.

Rachel is no bobblehead. She's fucking brilliant. If you don't like her, fine. Nobody's going to make you watch her if you don't want to.

You want bizarre? Bizarre is being unnecessarily rude just because some people happen to like a TV show (or shows) that you don't personally care for.

What is it with people being so harshly critical of others making choices that are different from their own? There's way too much of that at DU these days. Why is it not enough to just say, "Eh, not my thing" instead of insulting others because they like something or someone you don't like? Seems like nobody knows how to respectfully agree to disagree anymore...or can't be bothered to, anyway.

If I sound cranky, it's because I AM cranky. There's a monster in the White House, with a team of other monsters helping him destroy our government and do awful things that are already starting to cause all kinds of misery and suffering for large numbers of vulnerable people - and they're just getting started! So hell yes, I'm cranky, and I have a right to be!

We ALL have a right to be cranky, and it would help a lot to be able to come to DU and NOT get insulted for something as petty as one's choice of TV commentary. We've all got enough to deal with right now. It sure would be nice if we could try NOT adding to each other's burdens by being mean to each other on top of everything else.

[Duppers]

30. You are calling Rachel Maddow a Bobblehead❓❗

[krkaufman]

18. Sure...

… but was it necessary ?

[Woodycall]

19. Bullshit!

She's not there to fucking "handle" things for us. She's there to inform, inspire, and help us organize ourselves for the fight goddamn it. Do you think that FDR mitigated the depression and won fucking WWII by himself??

[rich7862]

20. Prairie Gates

Sorry to disagree with you. Rachel Maddow has a major effect on keeping the truth out there, along with keeping up our hopes that we can beat the disgusting criminal nazis destroying our democracy.

[Celerity]

27. agree

[Happy Hoosier]

32. She keeps me sane and informed.

If that's not valuable to you, fine. I find her extremely valuable.

[Deuxcents]

5. I wish we could clone her so she won't get burned out..her "perfect " segment tonight was spot on..as usual

[bdamomma]

6. Rachel

is reporting how this criminal felon, is cutting more aid to the world regarding communicable diseases. Children will die due to starvation and disease. Measles running rampart in Texas. And this ass RFK Jr. telling people to give their children Vitamin A and Cod Liver Oil, causing liver disease.

[elleng]

8. Thanks for including serious health matters.

[RockRaven]

7. Cable news personalities are not going to save us. Even one's favorite.

[elleng]

9. You are free to ignore them, and to not spread their information.

[bdamomma]

10. Yes, thank

you for saying that. This information being reported should be listened to and digested.

Of course, WE THE PEOPLE, are the only ones who will save ourselves. Not directed to you elleng.

[elleng]

12. Thanks, we do need to remind of the power of We the People,

the only ones WITH such ability.

It is difficult for many to understand this, so I and others do what we can to remind, happens in waves (to ME, at least, DAILY, depending on my momentary ability.)

[berkerly6240]

36. She seems to set us up for disappointment alot..she 100% guaranteed Hillary winning..

gave long segments on how it was impossible for Trump to win even if every thing fell his way. She lost me there though I still watch and she continued to do it.

[greyl]

13. She'd be better off on her own. nt

[elleng]

14. But would WE???

[bdamomma]

16. Could you

clarify "better off on her own?". Like to be on her own independent Substack, or on You Tube (or for example Mary Trump Media).

[greyl]

34. Right, and with her staff, but no corporate boss.

Lots of people out there making a living like that.

[bdamomma]

37. Definitely

I can't keep up with them all. I have my favorites.

[badhair77]

17. I appreciate her breakdown of the news each evening.

I like her humor, also. To each their own.

[aggiesal]

21. She been really good for the 1st half of the show, in the 100 days series ...

The 2nd half are usually interviews but she takes up half of the segment, like what she has to say is more important than any answer from the person interviewed, before going to the interview.

Prior to the 100 days series, I didn't watch her at all. I felt that she took way too much time to get to the point.
One of the reasons are the tangents she goes on.

[Hekate]

22. All of us who recognize how much we need her really need to write to MSNBC & tell them

Tell your friends, people

[calimary]

23. THIS!

I sure wish she’d stay on. We need you, Rachel! Think of it as your patriotic duty.

[cliffside]

25. Was thinking the same thing earlier, she summarizes news stories instead of dwelling on just one story ...

happy to encourage her to stay on at least a few times a week.

If you listen to her podcast she has done one of the best jobs in MSM linking history of almost a century ago to today.

Looking on what is happening now in isolation misses the danger we are now facing.

History matters.

[Mike Nelson]

26. Rachel is...

... an excellent host. Her 1st segment is great... there has been an improvement in some of the writing since she was last daily. Rachel and her staff are fantastic. Sometimes, especially with the Crooked Donald gang, you have to put the show together with very little time. I would add a daily "regular" - like Jacob Soboroff. He and Alex Wagner, maybe. I like the "current events" guest after her opening. She makes a lot of money, I know. Still, she was willing to take a pay cut and go daily for 100 days. I like Lawrence following her... Velshi could be a good closing hour. But I would have kept Joy Reid, so what do I know?

[BlueTsunami2018]

28. She's great at what she does.

Unfortunately, the people who need to be watching her don’t watch her.

[Vinca]

29. I totally agree. She's been so good the past few weeks. She's got to stay on!

[LetMyPeopleVote]

33. I agree

I do not want Rachel to go back to once a week after trump's first 100 days