Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why does Rachel Maddow spend part of every show to make it sound like we're losing?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
rockymountaindem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:23 PM
Original message
Why does Rachel Maddow spend part of every show to make it sound like we're losing?
It makes her sound ridiculous. What's the point of this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
JohnnyCougar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:24 PM
Response to Original message
1. To prevent us from getting complacent.
Vote. Canvass your neighborhood. Bring your friends.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
regnaD kciN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 06:18 AM
Response to Reply #1
89. I don't think that's the case with her...
Edited on Wed Oct-29-08 06:19 AM by regnaD kciN
I think she's just naturally an ultra-pessimistic personality.

This is especially true on her radio program. Practically from the time Obama sewed up the nomination, she would mention in passing during conversations with guests that she's certain McCain will be elected. At the point when things were going best for Obama poll-wise, she would, at most, hold that we had "a chance," although not a good chance. And this wasn't while encouraging others to get off their backsides and do something productive; it was at times when that wasn't even an issue, like when she was talking about other subjects and the election would come up as a side matter, as when (as I noted before) she was interviewing guests.

This is not a "game-day talk" with Maddow. Her attitude really seems to be "it's fun to watch what's happening in politics, but our side is pracically always going to lose...so what?" And, personally, I've found it wearing for several months now.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
baldguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:24 PM
Response to Original message
2. She remembers 2000.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shakespeare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:37 PM
Response to Reply #2
33. This is the correct answer.
As we all remember 2000.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoePhilly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 08:58 PM
Response to Reply #2
61. And 2004
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:24 PM
Response to Original message
3. Because we can still LOSE this thing
and she wants to keep everybody edgy and working towards the goal to win.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jhrobbins Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #3
45. Absolutely and she is also reiterating what Obama has warned-
for everyone not to get complacent - so maybe her little naysaying segment is actually helping keep people on point. Works on me/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
timber84 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:24 PM
Original message
annoys me too...
trying really really hard to like the show but Keith is still my numero uno
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tallison Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:33 PM
Response to Original message
26. I'd go with Keith, too, if I had to choose...
but luckily, I don't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vanderBeth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 09:14 PM
Response to Original message
69. Keith remains my number one, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mwei924 Donating Member (990 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:24 PM
Response to Original message
4. She needs to chill.
It's getting annoying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rasputin1952 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:25 PM
Response to Original message
5. Trying to make sure complacency does not overtake
us.

We may have the Right to vote, but history shows, not all that many show up to the polls.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tarheel_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:25 PM
Response to Original message
6. You and I have the same problem with Rachel. She takes a very
pessimistic tone, and gives comfort to our enemies. I don't mind her rallying the base, and saying to them that they should get out there and early vote, but this "talk me down" segment makes me cringe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Political Heretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 09:09 PM
Response to Reply #6
66. Please bury the phrase "gives comfort to our enemies"
That shit is fucking over the top.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 09:03 AM
Response to Reply #66
100. No. It isn't. It's exactly right. There's such a thing as confidence and working for a landslide.
It is demoralizing what Rachel does.

I criticized Josh Marshall for doing something along the same lines.

You can kick people in the ass telling them it's imperative we work for a landslide

OR

You can demoralize them and tell them this is probably useless but go out there and try anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedawg12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 10:14 PM
Response to Reply #6
78. "talk me down" is a rhetorical challenge - she knows damned well they can't
instead of saying this is so and it sucks, she uses this tactic to show why she can't be dissuaded.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GodlessBiker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:25 PM
Response to Original message
7. To remind us we have to vote or we could lose.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jhrobbins Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 08:07 PM
Response to Reply #7
55. Right this minute, Obama is saying the exact same thing on Countdown
I guess he just doesn't know what he is talking about. Maybe somebody should email him and tell him there's nothing to worry about - right?

:grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skooooo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:25 PM
Response to Original message
8. In my opinion, she's always had kind of tempered...

...devil's advocate approach to her broadcasts - not in everything she says or reports, but a constant dose of it. I've learned that I don't always agree with her when she's in this mode, and she's not always right.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedawg12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 10:17 PM
Response to Reply #8
79. she may not always be "right" but she is clearly for Obama
her devils advocate role comes from anticipating the attack reply from the other side.

She doesn't hold a adversarial position. That's the difference.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elkston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:25 PM
Response to Original message
9. Exactly. Her pessimism gets on my nerves sometimes.
I can't wait until we win so she'll stop being a worry machine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:25 PM
Response to Original message
10. Well if I worked with Bukkkanan day in and day out, I'd be unusually concerned too
I myself waver back and forth in confidence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalmuse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:26 PM
Response to Original message
11. Because like a lot of us...
she's probably still traumatized from 2000 and 2004. My stomach just sank into my feet when she was saying that the early voting numbers aren't on par with 2004.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Medium Baby Jesus Donating Member (592 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:26 PM
Response to Original message
12. Maybe she is "concerned"
Perhaps the gang should troll her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stray cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:26 PM
Response to Original message
13. President McCain or President Palin is a possibility until the votes are in
Gore should have won in 2000. Kerry should have won in 2004. Polls are not an election. McCain could be the next president elect with a Palin presidency in the works
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fed Up Donating Member (443 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:27 PM
Response to Original message
14. i noticed it too the other night, just one more wk of this
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
casus belli Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:27 PM
Response to Original message
15. Because until we win, we haven't won. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scheming daemons Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:28 PM
Response to Original message
16. I love her show, but her "concern trolling" is getting tiresome

It is counterproductive.


NOBODY is going to be complacent. If the polls said Obama was up by 30, there would STILL be nobody complacent.

KNOCK THIS SHIT OFF.


It does NOT help.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Medium Baby Jesus Donating Member (592 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #16
20. Wow! Concern about concern!
It boggles the mind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jhrobbins Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 08:02 PM
Response to Reply #20
50. No shit Sherlock - I guess some folks are smarter than Obama
about this campaignin thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Medium Baby Jesus Donating Member (592 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #16
21. Server dupe!
Edited on Mon Oct-27-08 09:30 PM by Medium Baby Jesus
It boggles the mind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captiosus Donating Member (711 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:33 PM
Response to Reply #16
28. I have to say that I agree completely.
I just turned off the show when she started talking about how it was all good news but then turned around and started acting defeatist.

She was like that all last week and I don't think I managed to watch a full show of hers last week. This week is starting the exact same way last week ended.

I get tired of the pessimistic concern trolling. We have both Barack Obama and Joe Biden repeatedly telling people to get off their duff and vote. Rachel doesn't need to be a negative cheerleader. Her entire interview with Dean kept pressing him on a topic he clearly wanted to get beyond because the democratic candidates have talked repeatedly about how critical it is to vote.

I'll also agree that no one is going to be complacent. There have been 2-3 hour lines in Norfolk, VA for early voters and, according to local news, no one left the line today. At all. If people were really complacent, they would have just up and left.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedawg12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #16
80. She was mocking the mclame/pukin in fighting and asked Beschloss
to talk her down about this being ugly and dangerous for mclame if he wins.

Of course Beshloss pointed out that the POTUS and the Veep often end up at odds, and mentioned Nixon Agnew - hardly a complimnetary comparison for mclame but then Beschloss finsihed off by saying he has never seen it rear this early.

Hey, she has to have a way to get people on the show who can't come out blatantly on our side and still have them show up and discuss things by framing devil's advo questions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:28 PM
Response to Original message
17. She is a glass half empty person.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluestateguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:29 PM
Response to Original message
18. She's a professional worry wort
She'ds fit right in at DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ErinBerin84 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:29 PM
Original message
I appreciate her
urging everyone not to get complacent, and while I understand that it's kind of her style, it can annoy me sometimes too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
knixphan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 02:47 PM
Response to Original message
108. yep.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
coyotespaw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:29 PM
Response to Original message
19. because we still can lose this
all it takes is getting a bit too cocky, and folks stop showing up to vote. We need to turn out in record numbers to keep the bastards from stealing this election from us. It may look like we're up by 14 in the fourth quarter after the two minute warning, but we still have to play each down like it's our last, 'cause it could be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cosmic Charlie Donating Member (684 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:30 PM
Response to Original message
22. she's used to losing. it's a well-known syndrome
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:30 PM
Response to Original message
23. She is warding off the evil eye.
You know...like some people think it seriously unlucky to compliment a newborn's good looks.

If this makes no sense to you, you might just be too young.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Awsi Dooger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:30 PM
Response to Original message
24. So she can maintain her status as most overrated person on the planet
If you had the same words and themes coming out of a newcomer's mouth, there would be a flurry of mocking threads on DU.

Instead, it's apologist heaven.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nc4bo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:31 PM
Response to Original message
25. She's going to be rolling out the Rev. Wright SB ads in a minute or 2.
Dang it - I know it's old news and all.

Where the heck are our Hagee, Parsley, Dobson and Muthee ads?

Not asking for much, just one or 2.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blue sky at night Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:33 PM
Response to Original message
27. We think she just doesn't like Barack....
there has always been a holding back of her support, perhaps she liked Hillary or just wants to remain above those who cheer-lead too much....you know like over on the darkside.....







CHange, HOpe, OBama/BIden......!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RoccoR5955 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #27
36. If she liked anyone, it was Kucinich.
Many of us on the "far left," (not my opinion) would rather have had Kucinich as our candidate.

AFAIC, there is no true "left" in this country. There is only the right, and the far right, but then again, I am a socialist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Overseas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 07:59 PM
Response to Reply #36
46. I never saw or heard her promote Kucinich. I would remember
because I'm a Kucinich supporter.

She's stayed more neutral than most.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Parker CA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:33 PM
Response to Original message
29. To expand her viewership into the groups beyond the hardcore dems. Ratings, ratings, ratings. n/t.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:34 PM
Response to Original message
30. I don't know, but if she does one more bit about the Bradley Effect
I'll mute it. Probably best for me to do that when I see the "Talk Me Down" segment coming anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:34 PM
Response to Original message
31. they're paying her to practice mass reverse psychology on us
so we will be even more surprised and delighted when Obama wins
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RoccoR5955 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:36 PM
Response to Original message
32. Because complacency will be our downfall.
We must be vigilant. We must remember that if we don't go out, and do the hard work we COULD lose! I have seen it in local, as well as state elections. If it can happen there, it can happen on any level. Keep working, it's only for another eight days. If and when we win the party will be that much sweeter!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captiosus Donating Member (711 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:42 PM
Response to Reply #32
38. In my opinion, there's a distinct difference between being
Edited on Mon Oct-27-08 09:43 PM by Captiosus
Optimistic/Hopeful and Vigilant and Pessimistic/Downtrodden and Vigilant.

Obama and Biden have been the former. They have been talking hope and change while reiterating that we can't sit home on November 4 and expect change to happen without our own involvement.

Rachel has repeatedly been the latter. Instead of talking in hopeful terms, she looks at it like we've already lost. Like it's already being stolen. She then bases her commentary in those terms: decidedly negative. "Bradley Effect!", "Voters are going to have to wait for hours!"...

Rachel's negativism is a major turn off. I know we're all weary after 2000/2004, but the lesson learned is that you don't keep harping on it. You learn from it. You add the lessons learned to messages of optimism, change and hope. Negativism just reminds us of the injuries of the past and is self-defeating.

Funny thing is, if she posted here at DU with threads similar to what she says on air, she'd be maliciously slammed, even by many people sticking up for her, as a "concern troll".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
budkin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:38 PM
Response to Original message
34. Obvious... we can't let up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:39 PM
Response to Original message
35. 'Cause she knows we haven't won yet
..and if you remember your history, we've been in the position where we were expected to win in previous elections - those who forget the lessons of history...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dana_b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:42 PM
Response to Original message
37. some of us e-mail her and Keith all the time
with voter purging and election fraud stories. She's as worried as some of us here are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PretzelWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:43 PM
Response to Original message
39. BECAUSE, you AMNESIACS!!! we gotta play like we're
21 points down. No surrender. No letting off the gas. Just keep motoring high speed past the finish line and then look back to survey your awesome results. Until then....head down, keep legs churning forward, and act as though 1,000 wild horses are trying to tear victory away from you.

that's why.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tblue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:53 PM
Response to Original message
40. Thanks for the warning. I will skip Rachel's show tonight, for the first time ever.
Negativity does not motivate me. It immobilizes me & makes me want to crawl into bed and curl up in a fetal position. My plan is to work in the Dem office from now until the election. If somebody like Rachel wants me to believe it's all for nothing, I don't wanna hear it. She's not God, last I checked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hansel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #40
59. I'm with you and I'm sure there are more like us than not.
Edited on Tue Oct-28-08 08:55 PM by Hansel
If we have to stand in a line for 7 hours and we are going to lose anyway, why bother?

Her approach is demoralizing and counter-productive. It's hard to enthusiastically talk Obama up to others if you're convinced he's not going to win.

It's one thing to do what Obama's doing by saying that we can still lose this thing, so you need to go vote so we're okay. It's another to act like we are doomed and don't have much of a chance.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheManagement Donating Member (93 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:56 PM
Response to Original message
41. She should
Keeps complacency far far away.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exultant Democracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-27-08 09:58 PM
Response to Original message
42. If you want to win by five points you have to run like you are 10 behind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krkaufman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 07:55 PM
Response to Original message
43. If not "losing", she was too accommodating in her chat last night, w/ Mark McKinnon ...
... going along with the "Democrats have shown they can blow it" meme. Rachel *should* have reminded McKinnon that Democrats need to remember that we needed bigger margins, because Republicans have shown they have no compunction about stealing an election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MarjorieG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 08:40 PM
Response to Reply #43
58. Well, we can blow it. If I remember correctly, McKinnon left McC because Obama good for the country.
Plus Rachel needs to have a variety of opinion on. She's very interested in foreign policy and security, so I expect an interesting show on policy, priorities going forward.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SeeHopeWin Donating Member (649 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 07:57 PM
Response to Original message
44. Loony leftist?
lol...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr Fate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 08:00 PM
Response to Reply #44
49. Who called who a Looney Leftist? What are you talking about?
???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bridgit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 09:17 PM
Response to Reply #44
70. oh noes you di'int!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 07:59 PM
Response to Original message
47. Why are there all of a sudden several thread dissing Rachel Maddow
today? What has she done do deserve this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nyc 4 Biden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 08:27 AM
Response to Reply #47
94. Just a bunch of drama queens.
Don't you know we need to complain about something. Even if it is one of the two prominent TV personalities that are actually on OUR side.

I think Rachel is great, couldn't be better. I honestly don't see what she is doing wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 09:01 AM
Response to Reply #94
99. actually the real drama queens are the DUers who can't abide anyone critiquing Rachel.
OMG! Attack the DU'er who DARES to find fault with Rachel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nyc 4 Biden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 09:05 AM
Response to Reply #99
104. There may be some truth to that....
...I will admit I do have a major crush on her. So LEAVE RACHEL ALONE!! (ala chris crocker)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BuyingThyme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 08:00 PM
Response to Original message
48. I've been out of the Rachel loop lately, but back when I was in, she said he would lose.
Consistently.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Overseas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 08:03 PM
Response to Original message
51. Oh well. I love Rachel even though she's more conservative than I am.
I love her erudition and ability to hit back to right wing arguments quickly and precisely.

She's more conservative than I am and always was, even on her radio show where she was freer to expound and be more humorous.

But she's so much more articulate than the other anchors so I am thrilled that she's made it from radio to TV !
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 08:04 PM
Response to Original message
52. GOTV
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 08:04 PM
Response to Original message
53. She's being cautious instead of getting to cocky
and she is correct to do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FloridaGrl Donating Member (615 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 08:05 PM
Response to Original message
54. I agree
She gives the worst case scenarios. I am one who speaks out against complacency but come on she is too skeptical. She even said used early voting in FL as a example of why she's worried that people aren't going out to vote as Obama would like. Uh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demo dutch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 08:09 PM
Response to Original message
56. PhD in political science, no complacency, I think she realizes we can still lose this thing
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheKentuckian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 08:36 PM
Response to Original message
57. I think there is a line between being ever wary
and being pessimistic and Maddow isn't stellar at that. I think this has the opposite of the intended affect on many voters. Of course their are those that see a good poll and fall asleep.

I wish she'd cool it with the being talked down, especially everyday. If you need to be talked down every single day you need to seek help or go ahead and jump.
The most constructive thing she can do is hit McGollum between the eyes HARD every day which motivates "the base" and piles up talking points that the Republiscum have to take time to defend rather than attacking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoePhilly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 08:58 PM
Response to Original message
60. Because we should have won in 2000, and 2004, and did not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cadmium Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 09:01 PM
Response to Original message
62. I sense a few reasons.
#1 as Pirate Smile suggests, she probably is a glass - half empty type personality

#2 appropriate caution -- especially since the biggest races in her political career have been close/shouldve won races in 2000 and 2004

#3 she is a bit of a scold. Within a week of inauguration, I bet she will be complaining that Obama is not moving progressively enough.

#4 there actually are a few plausible ways to lose - esp if votes are sufficiently suppressed and if close polls like Zogby are right.

#5 Maybe she just doesnt have faith that the Obama campaign knows what they are doing by not playing dirty. (Thom Hartmann just changed his mind on this point today)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 09:04 PM
Response to Original message
63. Reality... Devil's Advocate... looking at things from all angles...
Rachel is a Goddess! She is the most intelligent thing to hit the TV and radio in decades!

The really smart thing to do is to look at an issue from all possible perspectives. That's what she does. It's brilliant.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bridgit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 09:04 PM
Response to Original message
64. she knows unlike many here, that politics, like football, is a game where the ball bounces funny
she's being cautious
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Political Heretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 09:09 PM
Response to Original message
65. Because elections aren't fair. We won 2000 and probably 2004 and still didn't "win"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 09:12 PM
Response to Original message
67. BECASE SHE IS A REPUBLONAZICON SHE IS EVIL & IS PLOTING AGINST US OMfG! BLERG*@#*
Ahem, back in reality, Maddow is not a concern troll and is not making it sound like we're losing. She's counseling against complacense. She's being a drill sergeant. It's for your own good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Political Heretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 09:13 PM
Response to Original message
68. She's a Poly-sci PHD, Rhodes Scholar and pretty much the smartest person in the media.
She's more than earned the right to use her position in the media to draw attention to all the ways in which this race is far from over - not the least of which are the massive and well-evidenced efforts of the GOP to suppress the vote on a scale that we've never seen before.

Frankly, I would rather she be using her time for that than to sit there and go "YAY WE GONNA WIN WOOT." I need that superficial back-patting like I need a hole in the head.

The best thing I can do now that we are positioned to win is be alert and aware of all the ways in which we could lose, including - most importantly - election theft.

I'll celebrate on November 5th.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
realitythink Donating Member (354 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 10:50 PM
Response to Reply #68
83. You're so right.. She is being rational
Expect her to take this tone throughout an Obama administration as well. In fact don't expect a softball interview with Obama on Thursday night. Rachel Maddow is the future of MSNBC and cable news. She is nobody's fool and she is going to balance out the right and help make the progressive movement mainstream. You all need to look out onto the horizon.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
knixphan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 09:18 PM
Response to Original message
71. I love Rachel.
But that's the only thing that kinda annoys me...

I'm totally anti-complacency, don't get me wrong...

But stylistically, I'm more of a "Let's not let up, cause I want to beat them so effing badly that they cry all the way home"-type,

Where Rachel is a "Let's not let up, cause I'm afraid - aren't you afraid too?"-type.

But that's minor. On all other points she's the beezneez.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cali_Democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 09:19 PM
Response to Original message
72. We should rename her Debbie Downer
Edited on Tue Oct-28-08 09:20 PM by Cali_Democrat
She worries so much and she tries to bring everybody else down to her level.

It has already happened to many posters on this board.

The worry on this board started right after Rachel Maddow's show yesterday.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedawg12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 10:27 PM
Response to Reply #72
82. Rachel didn't bring this board down yesterday nor any other time
however, the attacks on one of best media advocates for Obama, one of the most thoughtful and articulate being attacked like this is a little bit of a downer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cali_Democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 05:19 AM
Response to Reply #82
85. Don't worry, I'll still be watching her
Edited on Wed Oct-29-08 05:24 AM by Cali_Democrat
I absolutely adore her. But her worrying persona lately is getting on my nerves.

All of us on DU are different. Face it, we're all hardcore Dems and some of us are Rachel Maddow Types and some of us are Keith Olbermann Types.

I'm definitely a Keith O. type.

I will still watch Rachel though, I really like her. But she's a little too emotional IMO. She needs to block out her personal feelings at times and just attack!

I prefer the attack dog.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fourvahl Donating Member (147 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 09:20 PM
Response to Original message
73. She likes to be talked down
and I like to hear a good argument that actually talks her down. She brings all those little anxieties we might share with her to the surface and they are acknowledged.. or not. heh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
knixphan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 10:06 PM
Response to Original message
74. True - we're a diverse crowd
Some of us worry, others are just lookin' for a good scrap. We need pundits who cover the full range of personality types.

I'm closest to K Olbermann in personality. Not much room for worrying if I'm busy taking the fight to the enemy.

But when it's time to point out allllll those cracks in neocon logic, Nobody's better than Rachel.

If I were assembling an ideological 'swat team', KO would be the guy who busts into the hot room, guns blazing (With Bill Maher right behind him) - But when the bad guys bolt out the back door, I'd have Rachel positioned on a rooftop with a delicate sniper rifle.

Good thing is, when Rachel worries, it's a good omen -

Remember how she thought the long Dem primary would be the death of Obama?

Turns out Hillary just made him more indestructible, like the ultimate political vaccine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TragedyandHope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 10:08 PM
Response to Original message
75. Obviously, to get people off the couch and into the voting booth
And good for her!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal_Stalwart71 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 10:09 PM
Response to Original message
76. I'm sick of her whining, though. We are working our asses off in VA for Obama every day of the week.
The last thing we need to hear is whining and crying. While I understand what she's trying to do, it is very demoralizing to those of us who are trying to stay positive while working hard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedawg12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 10:23 PM
Response to Reply #76
81. Wow- she demoralizes dem workers? Not pukin/mclame lies?
Stunning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal_Stalwart71 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #81
113. Don't understand what you mean. I'm simply stating that her comments are demoralizing
Fuck McCoward and Mooselini. I don't give a damn about them. I would like for us Democrats and progressives to have just a little faith in what we're trying to accomplish. There are many of us who are working hard on the ground. The last thing we need is a mental/emotional breakdown right now. We're trying to remain focused, full speed ahead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluedawg12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 10:11 PM
Response to Original message
77. She doesn't sound rediculous nor does she spend time
making it sound like we are losing.

She does give a clear analysis of the risks of this campaign and the uncertainties.

I don't get attacking someone who is so clearly for Obama and has the brains and courage to say why.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jillan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-28-08 10:52 PM
Response to Original message
84. Because she wants us to get out there and make calls or canvass.
She doesn't want us to sit on the sidelines.

I love Rachel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dennis4868 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 05:33 AM
Response to Original message
86. maybe she knows something that we don't?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WallStreetNobody Donating Member (389 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 05:38 AM
Response to Original message
87. Better than making it sound like a win is in the bag, COMPLACENCY is the only way we can lose now
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joanne98 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 05:42 AM
Response to Original message
88. She doesn't want us to get over confident!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
olegramps Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 07:46 AM
Response to Original message
90. I went to bed in 2000 smiling and woke up crying
Its never in the bag. Much can go wrong at the last minute. I especially fear the outcome if the lines at the polls are three or four hours long. I don't know if all those young people who support Obama will stand the test or just go have a beer. I believe that the Republicans have done everything possible to make the system as cumbersome as possible. Not enough voting machines, ids, purging, etc. to make the lines as long as possible. Just think how having to cast a provisional ballot delays the entire process. They search the books, then you have to produce an id, they have to go get the ballot, they have to log it in, meanwhile people are waiting and waiting and then voting with their feet.

I would support declaring the presidential election day be a national holiday. The way it is now favors the Republicans. The working class who are forced to work on election day are at a major disadvantage and must cast their vote either before going to work or after. I realize they have to let you off to vote, but how many people are aware of this law?

This is why the Democrats should have had a more active campaign to get their people to vote absentee. No rigged machines, no standing in line, all done in the comfort of your home while enjoying a cup of coffee. It should have been a MAJOR tactic of the Democrats. The absentee ballot totally destroys the major weapon of the Republicans to limit the vote.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kahuna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 08:04 AM
Response to Original message
91. I've given up on her. I need to concentrate on the positive, not the negative..
harping that she does. I can't take it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
book_worm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 08:19 AM
Response to Original message
92. She's been predicting a McCain victory for months now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geekgrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 08:40 AM
Response to Reply #92
96. No. She hasn't. She is being cautious and skeptical, and we need someone like that!!
I've been watching her for months and she isn't a downer to me at all. She is being cautious and skeptical, and we need someone like that.

thanks Rachel!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 08:27 AM
Response to Original message
93. Because we cannot exhale until November 5--maybe not even then.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrsBrady Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 08:37 AM
Response to Original message
95. Rachel is simply asking us to look at both sides and THINK
she wants us to use our brains and think.

Rachel is clearly a good democrat and has been for Obama a long time.
Even long before she was on the "TV machine", I thought that she was leaning to Obama on her radio shows.

How many talking heads went to both Stanford and Oxford and have a PHD in Political Science? She can talk circles around any of the folks she has on.
Many people like that would talk down to the audience, but I like that she brings in thoughtful discussion, makes good points, and asks us to THINK instead of just spooning it in.
I don't see this anywhere else, much.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geekgrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 08:42 AM
Response to Original message
97. THANK YOU RACHEL-- for being concerned about voter fraud and supression !!
Edited on Wed Oct-29-08 08:43 AM by geekgrrl
She's become the watch dog for stolen elections, in some ways, and we are very lucky to have her!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
npincus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 08:59 AM
Response to Reply #97
98. yeah, I am surprised at the nit-picky critiques of Maddow on this forum
Edited on Wed Oct-29-08 09:00 AM by npincus
what are people really saying? They miss the Days when Chimp was above 40 percent approval and libs were sidelined to talk-radio? WE HAVE A FRIGGING 2-HOUR BLOCK on cable tv!!! I,for one, never thought I'd live to see that happen. The remarks about tuning out really gall me.... if progressives tune out based on Rachel not being their perfect projection of a liberal broadcaster, then how long do you think her show will also on MSNBC? And how easy will it be for another liberal voice to get a program?

I think people here should praise her to the sky... do I love everything she says and how she says it? NO. I also find the "talk me down" phrase a bit too cute by half. But SO WHAT. If progressives don't support one of our own when he/she is given MSM programming, WHO WILL?

rant over! :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AnnieBW Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 09:03 AM
Response to Original message
101. It ain't over 'til it's over
To quote one of my favorite philosophers, Yogi Berra, "it ain't over 'til it's over." I'm sure that like many of us, Rachel won't breathe a sigh of relief until the Electoral College proclaims Obama the winner whenever they meet.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dem629 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 09:04 AM
Response to Original message
102. Why does anyone watch to begin with?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peaches2003 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 09:05 AM
Response to Original message
103. Obama's biggest group of voters don't always vote
College age ands younger voters and AAmerican voters don't always show up at the polls or wait on long lines. Just the way it has been historically and they HAVE to vote this year! Rachel is saying exactly what Barak is saying!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
southpaw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 09:12 AM
Response to Original message
105. She's doing a Corporal Hicks
"Hey! I know we're all in strung out shape, but stay frosty and alert. We can't afford to let one of those bastards in here."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hepburn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 09:17 AM
Response to Original message
106. Because IMO her concern appears to motivate Obama supporters to...
...get the fuck out and vote! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
knixphan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 02:45 PM
Response to Original message
107. I'll say it again. Different styles work on different people.
Edited on Wed Oct-29-08 02:45 PM by knixphan
Nobody should be complacent.

Nobody.

And I am not. To the point where I flew out of state on my own dime to hit the streets for the O. (CA-to-NC, I'm back now, calling NV)

Bottom line: Rachel's style of provoking us to stay vigilant is much different than Randi's or Thom's or Keith's or Maher's or Colbert's.

You pick the cheerleader you wanna hear during the next 6 days, and stick with it. Many of my friends feel Rachel's worry-style, because it matches their fears, and the answer gives them comfort.

For me, it's Keith/Randi. (more my personal style of cheerleading: the 'Let's f*ck 'em up!' style.)

Diff'rent strokes...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
riverdeep Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 02:55 PM
Response to Original message
109. I was wondering how long it would take for Dems to turn on her.
Less than two months must be some kind of record.

Happy thoughts, only happy happy thoughts always and forever make the bad go away. If the last eight years of living under the Bush administration where we constantly went "He can't actually do that, can he?" have taught us anything, it's that no matter how pessimistic you get, you can never keep up.

I've listened to her for quite some time now, and she's pessimistic by nature, it has nothing to do with this election. Her motto seems to be, hope for the best, prepare for the worst. If you don't like it, you can always turn to the dozens of other successful liberal shows on cable news, oh wait, you can't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 02:56 PM
Response to Original message
110. She's technically a concern troll disguised as unbiased media to end complacency. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Batgirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 03:22 PM
Response to Original message
111. Prophecies of Doom, or simple acknowledgment of a possible bad outcome?
I've only heard the latter. Yes, it makes me cringe because it's so awful to contemplate. However, just because she verbalizes it as a possibility doesn't mean she's "making it sound like we're losing."

I like her show quite a bit. She doesn't have to be some sort of DU fantasy pundit to get my general approval. It's unlikely I'll ever forget how Rachel and Lizz on their morning show on AAR helped me cope with the aftermath of 2004. I still don't know how they went on the air the day after the election. (Also Marc and Mark, and Sam and Janeane). I don't listen to AAR any more but back then it was a lifesaver.

I hear people now saying it was irrational at the time to be optimistic about a Kerry win, but most people got their hopes up really high on Election Day only to have it all fall apart. Many of those showing "concern" now are just gun shy of going through another shattering experience and are struggling to feel a guarded optimism. Could be the case with Rachel too. Or maybe she views her job as being more than a cheerleader.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
knixphan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-29-08 03:29 PM
Response to Original message
112. Rachel's a worrier, but she's the BEST there is at one thing.
...Taking apart neocon talking points.

When this election is over, Rachel will be back in her 'true element'.

Waiting for an outcome is not her strength. (Remember the long primary?) Taking on the wingnuts is. (See Maddow-vs-Frum)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 26th 2014, 08:27 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC