Chris Hayes: Fallen Out of Favor or Just Never in Favor?

[Different Drummer]

I read a lot of justifiable discussion here about the greatness of Rachel and Lawrence, but I don't read similar things here about Chris, so I'm just wondering if he's either fallen out of favor here or never been in favor. Thoughts?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. He's always been considered something of a lesser light

(though vastly better than Van Susteren), but I think he's been getting better and more interesting lately. He does get good guests.

[kentuck]

2. Chris Hayes is very smart...

Sometimes, almost too smart for his audience.

[StevieM]

3. Actually, Chris Hayes has always been my favorite. He has his own way that appeals to me.

And here is a dark and shameful confession. I miss the way he used to begin his show by saying: "Tonight. We are ALL IN."

Yes it was meaningless and a bit silly. But I liked it.

[stopbush]

8. And who, exactly, are the "Inners?"

That graphic zooms by during the intro to his show. I'm sure MSNBC was hoping he'd gain a following who followed their lead and assumed the title of inners. But no dice.

[StevieM]

9. I don't know. I just know that I like him a lot. (eom)

[JimGinPA]

11. "Inners" Came From His Morning Weekend Show nt

[hlthe2b]

4. He's quite good... as is Joy Reed.. as is Ari Melber

Just a stellar group led by the exceptional Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O'Donnell.

Though Chris Matthews and Chuck Todd (the toad) occasionally find and reveal a "nut", they are usually truly "inside-the beltway" clueless.

And, Steve Kornachi---uggh... Don't get me started.

I won't discuss the obvious RW imports, though I do respect Nichole Wallace (as the exception).

[bobbieinok]

5. Have always liked him

His reports on the ground from Ferguson were very helpful.

[bettyellen]

6. He plays dumb and accepts RW bullshit too often for me- also obsessed w WWC male voters to a ridic

Extent. So he falls into some dumb traps I think.

[Sienna86]

7. He's very bright and has great insight

I'm a regular watcher.

[skylucy]

10. I always watch Chris Hayes. I like him. He is a smart guy and is getting better at

nailing anyone who spouts right wing lies.

[helpisontheway]

12. I used to like him..He is kinda boring now. Nt

[WinkyDink]

13. He's fine. He doesn't break stories like Rachel or Lawrence. Lovely eyes! :-)

[RhodeIslandOne]

14. People here bash him because they think he's soft

Most of the time he invites conservative twits on and lets them hang themselves.

[Awsi Dooger]

15. Terrific...far superior to Rachel Maddow

Chris Hayes doesn't merely pick an topic that interests him and blab, blab, blab in a condescending tone for an hour, repetitive all the way. He understands the issues and also understands why certain demographics vote the way they do. Rachel Maddow would be clueless for 100 years in that regard, if allowed. You could hand her any poll numbers from any state and she would read it out, with zero comprehension if it made any sense regarding the ideology of that state. In fact, that would be a hilarious exercise. I wish her producer were deviously creative. It's beyond scary that she is hyped as an intellectual.

For a young guy Hayes also has excellent command of history and makes some very astute points about political events and trends from long before he was born. Again, he is simply in a different league than Maddow there.

[KT2000]

16. Smart guy

I like the questions he asks his guests.
Saw him on Booknotes, C-Span, and he is very bright. His book is about colonies inside this country - as in Ferguson.

[cally]

17. He's my favorite

His show seems a little less personality driven as Rachel's and Lawrence. I like him and find him very smart.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

18. I like Chris. He's a work horse, not a show horse.

[Tarheel_Dem]

19. Can't reach the remote quick enough when his face pops up on my screen. Lightweight.

[GhostofFDR]

20. Chris has his strengths...

...and weaknesses.

He's very good with investigative journalism and doing pieces on more complex subjects.

That's not going to stir a lot of people's enthusiasm, even though the information he presents is interesting, insightful, and uniquely his when he does his feature segments.

Tons of people don't read The Economist, but an average issue of their's is more informative than what a lot of magazines put out in a year.

Chris is pretty weak with guests. Not very assertive nor does he have a charismatic touch. He'd probably be better suited as following Rachel at the later timeslot. He has a more hard news with some commentary. He could easily do a show on PBS and fit like a glove.

There's a lot to like about Chris, and I wonder if hosting is his best fit. A show like 60 minutes, where he could do expose features would probably be a place where he could shine if he beefed up on his interviews. Of course, not every 60 minutes feature requires a bulldog interviewer.