• We will be taking the server down at approximately 3:30 AM ET on Wednesday, 10/8/25. We have a hard drive that is in the early stages of failure and this is necessary to prevent data loss. We hope to be back up and running quickly, however this process could take some time.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why has the Rachel Maddow show have higher ratings than Hannity?

Fletch said:
I actually dont mind any of them, except Maddow. She is unwatchable not because of her content but because of her delivery: The constant pauses, rolling of the eyes and smacking of the lips and she talks as if she has an audience of 5 year olds. I flick over to her because I cant stand Hannity, but finding myself turning off the tv entirely after about 30 seconds.
Click to expand...

See, that's what I mean by personal taste. I find her delivery to be lighthearted and fun. Especially since her actual content tends to be in depth and nerdy with lots of documentation and background. I think she pulls it off really well.
 
bearpoker said:
See, that's what I mean by personal taste. I find her delivery to be lighthearted and fun. Especially since her actual content tends to be in depth and nerdy with lots of documentation and background. I think she pulls it off really well.
Click to expand...

She has a decent audience so more people must agree with you than me. She is like the liberal version of Ted Cruz for me. I couldnt listen to him for more than 30 seconds either.
 
bearpoker said:
See, that's what I mean by personal taste. I find her delivery to be lighthearted and fun. Especially since her actual content tends to be in depth and nerdy with lots of documentation and background. I think she pulls it off really well.
Click to expand...

But it is partisan cherry picked documentation. Just like those tuning into Fox News, the listener hears what they want to hear.
 
Moderate Right said:
But it is partisan cherry picked documentation. Just like those tuning into Fox News, the listener hears what they want to hear.
Click to expand...

A high quality rebuttal of a Maddow presentation would be worth watching. Too bad FOX can't produce one.
 
nota bene said:
I don't watch either, but I'm much more familiar with Hannity. Late at night I sometimes scroll past the rerun of his show but rarely tune in. I'd watch anybody, I suppose, who had a guest whose opinions I really wanted to hear (example: Chris Wallace interview of President Obama). But I've read that Maddow's opening monologue can run for 20 minutes. Not sure my TV attention span could handle this.
Click to expand...

Hey, to each their own. I have never watched "The Apprentice", "The Kardasians", or "Jersey Shore" :)
 
bearpoker said:
A high quality rebuttal of a Maddow presentation would be worth watching. Too bad FOX can't produce one.
Click to expand...

That's actually the irony. Most FOX News shows have someone representing the other side. Maddow rarely does. It's all a one sided agenda with her. No rebuttals allowed on Maddow.
 
bubbabgone said:
I don't watch Hannity or Maddow but I understand Maddow was very good on ER although I didn't watch that either .......
th
Click to expand...

Maddow on ER? I don't get it.
 
SonOfDaedalus said:
MSNBC has great journalists. Maddow is an Oxford educated journalist. She digs up documents and goes into detail like no one else. You really feel like she does her homework.

Overall, MSNBC has the best line up of intelligent journalists. Chris Matthews and Joy Reid are also great.

Is it biased? Yes. But unlike Fox News it’s intelligent and honest.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I almost gave you a "like" but Chris Matthews frustrates the **** out of me sometimes. He never lets any of his guests finish a sentence. During the W. Bush administration his show had a reputation for spreading a lot of misinformation.
 
Moderate Right said:
That's actually the irony. Most FOX News shows have someone representing the other side. Maddow rarely does. It's all a one sided agenda with her. No rebuttals allowed on Maddow.
Click to expand...

It's hard for Rachel to get conservative guests. They're afraid of her, despite the fact that she's always polite and friendly when they come on. A lot of her interviews are not with partisans but people who actually have working knowledge of the topic. For example, when she was doing shows about the Flint water crisis, she had people who were distributing drinking water or who talked about the effects of lead poisoning.
 
bearpoker said:
A high quality rebuttal of a Maddow presentation would be worth watching. Too bad FOX can't produce one.
Click to expand...
I had started to post something similar but it became a rambling wall of text...I refer your succinct response!

I'll be cynical and claim that it's not all Fox's fault they cannot produce one. I don't think many of the right wing talking points can be defended reasonably, in a fact-based styled delivery with credentialed professionals weighing in, etc. You simply won't be able to find such people to defend their ideas. And I think this comes from a few main arguments that are bunk. (not succinct as usual!) If they really did it reasonably and professionally, it would result in a show that presents a more centrist position...the extremist nonsense just won't hold up to scrutiny and they know it.

The top 0.01% corporations and doners want tax cuts and de-regulation and military spending, that's their only real goal. They then manufacture a whole platform/narrative to get voters to vote them into power, most of which will never actually affect any existing or new policies. I mean, all the culture wars nonsense, the religious nonsense, anti-abortion, etc., anti-diversity, etc., these are not national policy issues and likely never will be in any serious form. It's also why they so heavily have to lean on anti-liberal/progressive rhetoric. Create an enemy, and you oppose them...

But what are you actually fighting for? Defeating Hillary apparently, she was worse than Trump...so they say....without any basis in reality. When the real show was always about tax-cuts and re-regulation and military spending. When all is said and done, that's what Trump brought us...Tax cuts for the wealthy, Military spending, and they wrecked government (Tillerson gutted state dept., and especially Pruitt ruined the EPA).
 
lurchadams said:
I almost gave you a "like" but Chris Matthews frustrates the **** out of me sometimes. He never lets any of his guests finish a sentence. During the W. Bush administration his show had a reputation for spreading a lot of misinformation.
Click to expand...

HAHA, yeah, that's Chris Matthew for sure. I think it's hilarious now, he really can't help it, is mind is rambling on and it seems to just blurt out. I can see how that's annoying though...I just crack up every time. Sometimes I rewind it and my wife and I parse out how much stuff he tries to cram into those quips, just makes us laugh. He's not being rude intentionally it seems like, it's more emotional/character trait. But yeah, I don't often get much out of his show other than his zeal and his good grasp on political history...he's been doing this a while and has actually been involved in many of the historic scandals reported on today. Only watch him in the background on occasion.

"Let's play hardball. *eye squint*" That cracks me up too. He's a character.

I get to see Ari while cooking in the background, and wife likes me to watch Maddow with her, but other than that, I flip just for highlights.
 
bearpoker said:
A high quality rebuttal of a Maddow presentation would be worth watching. Too bad FOX can't produce one.
Click to expand...

The problem is that Fox News does nothing that doesn't support Trump, And that takes all of its time. So it can't spend time trying to help others, even those who are connected to Trump. As long as it doesn't directly effect Trump or his supporters, they don't cover it.
 
Mach said:
HAHA, yeah, that's Chris Matthew for sure. I think it's hilarious now, he really can't help it, is mind is rambling on and it seems to just blurt out. I can see how that's annoying though...I just crack up every time. Sometimes I rewind it and my wife and I parse out how much stuff he tries to cram into those quips, just makes us laugh. He's not being rude intentionally it seems like, it's more emotional/character trait. But yeah, I don't often get much out of his show other than his zeal and his good grasp on political history...he's been doing this a while and has actually been involved in many of the historic scandals reported on today. Only watch him in the background on occasion.

"Let's play hardball. *eye squint*" That cracks me up too. He's a character.

I get to see Ari while cooking in the background, and wife likes me to watch Maddow with her, but other than that, I flip just for highlights.
Click to expand...

Poor Chris also belches a lot during his shows and the poor guy has some major coughing fits. You're right about his grasp of history. He was a speechwriter/staffer for Tip O'Neill (back in the 70's?).

I don't have cable at home so I don't watch the shows unless I'm on the road. I podcast the maddow show and listen to it when I'm driving. She does back her claims up with facts.
 
independentusa said:
The problem is that Fox News does nothing that doesn't support Trump, And that takes all of its time. So it can't spend time trying to help others, even those who are connected to Trump. As long as it doesn't directly effect Trump or his supporters, they don't cover it.
Click to expand...

To be fair, Trump does crowd everybody else out. During the primaries I thought of him as a cuckoo in the Republican nest, eating all the food and pushing out the host's chicks. Defending him is a full time job.
 
bearpoker said:
It's hard for Rachel to get conservative guests. They're afraid of her, despite the fact that she's always polite and friendly when they come on. A lot of her interviews are not with partisans but people who actually have working knowledge of the topic. For example, when she was doing shows about the Flint water crisis, she had people who were distributing drinking water or who talked about the effects of lead poisoning.
Click to expand...

But if she weren't a hack for the far left she could get fans who were interested in moderate, unbiased news. But, that's not her shtick. Just as Fox News is a hack for the right, Maddow is a hack for the left. Lefties tune into her for the biased left take on everything and conservative viewers tune into Hannity and the like for biased right take on everything. That's the point. She presents news in a biased fashion, aimed at her biased left audience.
 
bearpoker said:
To be fair, Trump does crowd everybody else out. During the primaries I thought of him as a cuckoo in the Republican nest, eating all the food and pushing out the host's chicks.
Click to expand...

I hadn't thought of it quite that way, but this is a great analogy.
 
braindrain said:
If nothing else this thread has been great for demonstrating who some of this forums most blind partisan hacks from the left are. When even most of the posters on the left admit how bad Maddow is but you have a few posters singing her praises it says quite a bit about those few.

The only difference between Hannity watchers and Maddow watchers are the side of the fence the live on. Both are nothing more then partisan hacks.
Click to expand...

The other difference is that Rachel Maddow is a journalist, and Sean Hannity is a "talk show host" and according to his own words "should not be judged by journalistic standards."

But thanks for your opinion.
 
Floridafan said:
There is a noticeable difference between intentionally lying, and making mistakes or unintentional errors.
Click to expand...

So she is this great journalist who does tons of research on all her topics but just happens to be wrong so much and it so happens that she is usually wrong about some republican hit piece.

Either you are just to biased to see the truth or you are just extremely gullible.
 
JMR said:
The other difference is that Rachel Maddow is a journalist, and Sean Hannity is a "talk show host" and according to his own words "should not be judged by journalistic standards."

But thanks for your opinion.
Click to expand...
At this point she is little more then a talk show host herself. Just because she doesn't admit it doesn't change that fact.

But thanks for your opinion as well.
 
This one is easy. Maddow is educated and acts intelligent. Hannity is simply a "no talent" sensationalist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom