I guess Rachel, Chris and Lawrence

[onecaliberal]

Are all ratfuckers, because 90% of all their shows have been about how democrats are going to lose and what Republicans are going to do.

[Robbins]

1. And we may all get screwed

Their shows are talking about corporate tax reform between Obama and Republicans.

It seems like only ed and Al are not cheerleaders for election Is over gop wins and obama should start going along with GOP

The country was screwed over by all the times after gop took congress In 1994 that Bill Clinton worked with republicans.

[onecaliberal]

2. I agree with you 100%

The polls haven't even opened and these idiots are acting as though it's over.

[Robbins]

4. Also

She talked about how great it would be if republicans took the senate for them to cover

She also covently ignores some things In her historical piece

1986-Dems took back the senate due to working on getting people registed and Iran-Contra breaking shortly before election

1998-Republicans were suspose to pick up seats due to CLinton sex scandal instead Dems picked up 5 house seats and dems prevented republicans from picking up senate seats

2006-you had a unpopular war and stories of great coruption In GOP controled congress

even she says republicans talking Impeachment.Is that good for country time and money wasted on Impeachment circus.And Obama won't get 67 votes to removes him so it's pointless but that's what the racist tea party wants.

[Midnight Writer]

3. The only poll that matters is tomorrow

and responsible reporters would acknowledge that in their stories.

[Bluenorthwest]

5. Reporters speak of events in the very recent past, these folks are commentators, editorialists

or just plain prognosticators. These are not news shows, those are not journalists.

[onecaliberal]

6. I agree with all of you.

I have voted in every election since I could vote. I just want Dems to grow a pair. Why are they running from Obama when he has a very decent record to run on.

I've had it with corp media. The point was if you're going to call people like me ratfucker for wanting dems with a spine, what do you call these so called left leaning media personalities on the eve of an important election?

[Marthe48]

7. I turned Rachel off last night

When these so called 'Liberal' shows keep quoting Republican a**********, I don't feel like I am watching a liberal viewpoint. I want to know what the Democratic party is doing and what my representatives are saying. It doesn't fire me up to hear that the first thing a Republican ruled Senate will do is impeach Pres. Obama. What a waste of time and my money. On the other hand, maybe they'll waste time and money on this, and forget about repealing ACA and women's rights.

[Blue Idaho]

8. TV Celebrities - Nothing More, Nothing Less.

These vain self centered celebutants are finally showing their true colors. They think they know which way the wind will blow so it's time to spin on a dime and cover their asses. It's time to curry favor with TeaPublicans so they keep a constant stream of guests to bump their ratings. Someone says the President is "out of favor" so fuck him - quick - let's book Ron Paul or Ted Cruz of oh I know Darrell Issa. Anything for the fucking ratings and an invite to the next round of inside the beltway cocktail parties.

Don't fall in love with TV personalities - they don't give a shit about you - they are only in it for the money.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

13. I've been saying this about Rachel for years, but you can't speak badly against Rachel Maddow

here on DU. She is off limits. Randi Rhodes used to raise this issue when it came to Maddow and how she sold out. When she's on her show, she takes it to Republicans in her monologues, but when she gets on the Sunday Morning political shows, we might as well be seeing Harold Ford, Jr. She is too nice, too cordial, and far too timid. She is not quick to respond to Republican bullshit talking points. She allows them to say all kinds of untrue shit while misrepresenting the progressive stance.

Republicans taking over the Senate is great for Tweety, Rachel, and it appears Lawrence, too! It increases their viewership.

Because you see, I've learned something about these other networks that are not Faux News--they are reactionary.

The so-called liberal commentators REACT to what Faux News and Republicans do. If Republicans don't take over the Senate and we essentially maintain the status quo with Democrats still in control, that does nothing for their corporate media masters.

However, if the Republicans take over the Senate and there's an impeachment battle, a filibuster battle, a SCOTUS battle, a war between the Republican Senate Majority Leader and the president, Rachel Maddow can spend her time REACTING to what Republicans are doing and nothing else of substance.

I think I get it now and that's why I haven't watched any MSNBC program now all year. Seriously, as I think about it--I haven't watched consistently since Obama was reelected.

[Blue Idaho]

14. I find Rachel personally very appealing.

She is whip smart and usually does her homework. But she - like any other commentator - has one job, to keep her ratings up. While she, Tweety, and Lawrence may have issues that fit with their personal agenda don't make the mistake of thinking they are your friends - or firm supporters of any causes you champion. They don't give a shit about you personally, they just care about their ratings. That's how the mass media model works.

In the capitalist mass media model YOU and your money are being delivered to the advertisers. Period. The programming is just the cheese in the trap.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

16. Agreed. Great point. Larry was my favorite because he seemed most reasonable.

And given his work with the late, great Daniel Patrick Moynihan, he had the inside knowledge and expertise about how government works. For political scientists like myself, there's nothing better than listening to a commentator who has been on the inside, working for policy wonk and a truly intellectual giant like DPM. With that kind of pragmatism that he brings to the network, I find myself drawn to him because he tends to be able to break down very complex public policy issues in such a way that is easier to understand.

Rachel, another political scientist, is very good as this, too. Trust me, I'm not denying her brilliance and intellect. That was never in question. Her personality is fine, though she sometimes annoy me with her silliness/giggling and shit--and being far too kind to these asshole, racist conservatives (e.g., referring to Pat Buchanan as "Uncle Pat&quot .

But I definitely understand where you're coming from and agree wholeheartedly. These folks are not our friends. They've often been very irresponsible.

I think Ed Schultz learned a very valuable lesson during the run-up of the 2010 election when he was telling Democrats on his radio show, as well as on his t.v. show that he wasn't voting; he was depressing the vote. I was an avid fan at that time and would listen daily. Outraged Democrats would call in after we lost the House in 2010 and yell at Ed for what they perceived as him depressing Democratic Party turnout. Though at the time, he couldn't admit his faults, by 2012, his tune had changed. He'd become this sunny optimist and had this "go get 'em" attitude. Even after that first debate between Obama and Mitt Romney when everyone panicked--only Ed and Al Sharpton agreed that Obama didn't perform as badly as everyone thought. Everyone else--Tweety especially, Rachel and Larry O' all predicted that Obama would lose the election because he had performed so badly after that first debate. (Remember that?!?!?) Funny how it's always those three who are supposedly the more "reasoned" liberals vs. Al and Ed Schultz who are often ridiculed and butt of jokes, or not taken very seriously on our side of the aisle.

[Blue Idaho]

17. Very well said!

I couldn't agree more!

Good luck where you are, here in Idaho we democrats may actually see a few happy surprises at the state and local level.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

18. I'm in Maryland, so I'm lucky. However, the race for governor is much tighter than it needs to be.

And we have had our share of Republican governors for such a BLUE state in the past. However, there's no question that Anthony Brown will win and become our first black governor. Coincidentally, Mike Steele was our first elected black Lt. Gov. governor under Republican Governor Robert Ehrlich. We need to ensure that never happens again. No more Republican governors!! Note: that was also during a midterm election where turnout is key. Again, turnout will be key tonight. The most populous areas: Prince George's County, Montgomery County, Howard County, and of course Baltimore City...are where Democrats dominate. When we come out to vote, we win.

Democrats put up Kathleen Kennedy Townsend against Ehrlich in 2004. Though a Kennedy, she was a HORRIBLE candidate (much like Martha Coakley against Scott Brown in MA). Dems lost but Ehrlich only served one term, losing to Martin O'Malley. Of course Mike Steele lost his Senate bid to our current U.S. Senator, Ben Cardin who is also up for reelection tonight and will win easily.

Martin O'Malley served two successful terms and is fairly popular since leaving office. Anthony Brown, his Lt. Gov. is running to succeed him tonight, but again, late polls showed the race closer than it should be and that's a bit scary. Brown will eek it out, though.

[LawDeeDah]

9. That's dissapointing, especially from Lawrence.

I consider him the very few to trust, most of the time.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

12. He is the only reasonable one out of these three. I'm shocked at him, too!

Expected this from Ed Schultz. Not from Larry O.

[otohara]

10. They Only Suppress The Vote

we're gonna lose so why bother.

I refuse to watch the days before V-Day

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

11. All 3 have had a losing record when it comes to predictions, especially Tweety....

However, I'm shocked at Larry O. I expected this bullshit whining from Rachel. She gets on my fucking nerves with her doom and gloom. I don't watch her anymore because I can't take her cowardice. While she's very smart, she doesn't stand up to Republicans strong enough on these Sunday morning mainstream shows; she giggles with them and plays too nice. No, thanks. As for Tweety, well, we all know what he's about.

But when it comes to Larry O', honestly I'm very surprised. I would have expected to see Ed Schultz on this list, not Larry.

I haven't watched any MSNBC at all.

I think the network has done a grave disservice to Democrats as the supposed "liberal network". All the doom and gloom may have depressed the vote. Constantly telling voters that Republicans will win and victory for Republicans is inevitable does nothing to get people out to vote. It is defeatist! For the so-called liberal commentators who participated in that defeatist rhetoric--yes, Rachel and others--I think they are incredibly irresponsible. And so I will not watch their shows.

[onecaliberal]

15. That^^^^

X1000

[budkin]

20. Totally agree... Rachel was pulling this before the last presidential election and I left

She's the ultimate "concern troll."

[book_worm]

19. Do they have exit polls? I mean are they really relevant anymore?

since so many people vote early.