Word on the street is that David Gregory won't be in his post as moderator of Meet the Press for much longer. That's why there have been a series of different guest hosts whenever he's been absent (trying out the in-house talent). It's actually how Savannah Gutherie sealed the deal for Today (she guested on MTP and showed a knack for balancing coverage of hard issues as well as she had on Today with soft issues). Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski hosted the round table (he was okay, she was horrible). I think they're going to have to look outside of NBC for a replacement for David Gregory; however, I wouldn't put it past NBC to hold a coronation for Luke Russert (I'm joking in the headline btw!
Luke Russert Tapped to Host "Meet the Press!"
|by Anonymous||reply 70||08/29/2013|
Oh HELL no!
|by Anonymous||reply 1||07/06/2012|
I loved Tim Russert's MTP. It was engaging and thought provoking and Russert was good at his job. David Gregory sucks. He has always sucked. Big dick face notwithstanding.
|by Anonymous||reply 2||07/06/2012|
They want to give it to Joe Scarborough?
|by Anonymous||reply 3||07/06/2012|
Oh, fuck me. Luke Russert is an entitled idiot who is really no great shakes as a journalist. He is an egregious example of out-of-control nepotism. I don't work in NY media myself, but I know a number of people who do, and many people in the NY news business really resent him.
|by Anonymous||reply 4||07/06/2012|
David is a fucking asshole!
HATE him and his stuck up attitude.
|by Anonymous||reply 5||07/06/2012|
Luke Russert hosting Meet the Press would be like Joey Luft directing a remake of one of Judy's films. Blue. I like blue.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||07/06/2012|
It always should have been Chucky T. Of course Chris Matthews would kill for the slot.
|by Anonymous||reply 7||07/06/2012|
David Gregory was a bad pick from the very beginning. He was an honorary Bushie and he's never proven himself to be an effective interviewer. Tim Russert knew the ends and outs of Washington and he didn't easily settle for platitudes or non-answers.
|by Anonymous||reply 8||07/06/2012|
What about Chuck Todd? Too ugly?
|by Anonymous||reply 9||07/06/2012|
Chuckie is a good numbers cruncher. He was always MSNBC's go to guy for polling and analysis of the polling results. He was really good at that. Then St Russert croaked and they moved Chucky into a reporting position where he currently flounders about until somebody says something newsworthy by accident.
I think Rachel, Martin Bashir, Lawrence O'Donnell or Chris Hayes could easily handle MTP. Lawrence is probably the safest bet. The problem is the republicans would immediately stop booking people on the show because they cannot get the host to pass on the talking points.
|by Anonymous||reply 10||07/06/2012|
Nepotism at its worse.
|by Anonymous||reply 11||07/06/2012|
Gregory is dreadful. Boring, too lazy or stupid to ask follow-up questions about obvious lies, and hopeless at controlling the conversation when it devolves into guests talking over each other.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||07/06/2012|
Chris Matthews would be the obvious choice.
|by Anonymous||reply 13||07/06/2012|
Candy 'Big Mamma' Crowley has been offered the job.
|by Anonymous||reply 14||07/06/2012|
Oh for fuck sake. If people think Chuck Todd should replace Gregory, then WTF is the point in replacing Gregory? There's no difference between the two.
Rachel Maddow would be the right choice --which is why she'll never get it.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||07/06/2012|
What about Cookie Roberts? Too old?
|by Anonymous||reply 16||07/06/2012|
|by Anonymous||reply 17||07/06/2012|
R 16 - Too annoying.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||07/06/2012|
Agree -- Maddow would be the right choice.
|by Anonymous||reply 19||07/06/2012|
John King is available.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||07/06/2012|
If Candy Crowley gets the gig, do you think they'll position her sideways like they do at CNN so she won't take up the entire screen?
|by Anonymous||reply 21||07/06/2012|
No, Maddow is not the right choice. She's an excellent, hard-working interviewer who does her homework, but even she needs to rest now and then.
How is she supposed to do 5 shows a week and then MTP? She's certainly not going to give up the freedom of TRMS for hosting a commercial-infested Sunday morning talk show.
Plus, she's too liberal for the format. They want someone who won't scare the Repug horse asses in the streets.
|by Anonymous||reply 22||07/06/2012|
[quote]John King is available.
Yes, we've heard he's no longer with that ugly shrew who looks like her head was put through a vise
|by Anonymous||reply 23||07/06/2012|
Chris Matthews has his own Sunday morning political show with his name on it. I doubt he would want to be on a show that is largely set in stone in how it's run.
|by Anonymous||reply 24||07/06/2012|
Candy Crowley would eat up all the donuts in the green room before the guests got there.
|by Anonymous||reply 25||07/06/2012|
|by Anonymous||reply 26||07/06/2012|
The epotism of nepotism
|by Anonymous||reply 27||07/06/2012|
Where the hell does OP get Luke Russert from?
|by Anonymous||reply 28||07/06/2012|
[quote]Luke Russert Tapped
Shit, I thought I was the only one to tap that.
|by Anonymous||reply 29||07/06/2012|
David Gregory in the Green Room.
|by Anonymous||reply 30||07/06/2012|
That's David Gregory meeting Mitch McConnell.
|by Anonymous||reply 31||07/06/2012|
[quote] Tim Russert knew the ends and outs of Washington
Oh my fucking dear.
|by Anonymous||reply 32||07/06/2012|
I really hate to be one of those people to use it, but it's my only reaction to R32:
|by Anonymous||reply 33||07/06/2012|
Rachel Maddow would be awesome, but she already has a hard time booking Republican guests, so it'd be near impossible for her to host a Sunday morning news program. I agree with the poster who said that there's little room between David Gregory and Chuck Todd. Both of them are fairly incompetent waterboys for the Republican party.
|by Anonymous||reply 34||07/06/2012|
[quote]How is she supposed to do 5 shows a week and then MTP? She's certainly not going to give up the freedom of TRMS for hosting a commercial-infested Sunday morning talk show.
George Stephanopolous, a fellow Rhodes Scholar, does it...so could Rachel (in theory).
|by Anonymous||reply 35||07/06/2012|
Russert Senior was the biggest gasbag imaginable. His kid seems like an idiot, but in the flood of big media sentiment after his dad died, he got bumped up. Given that the chat shows all book the same guests (old, male, Republican, predictable), novelty might help. It didn't help Christiane Amonpour, but they never really let her depart from the script or book any different guests.
|by Anonymous||reply 36||07/06/2012|
I like Luke Russert, but he's just a baby. No way is he ready to host an important Sunday morning show.
|by Anonymous||reply 37||07/06/2012|
My favorite host: Lawrence O'Donnell.
|by Anonymous||reply 38||07/06/2012|
Luke Russert's loud, obnoxious partying on Nantucket over Memorial Day weekend has dimmed his popularity among his fellow islanders--who loved his dad and still love his mom. How old is he? Because he operates on the level of a freshman frat boy.
|by Anonymous||reply 39||07/07/2012|
Luke Russert = entitled lil ass
|by Anonymous||reply 40||11/15/2012|
Rachel or Laurence would be good choices. They do their homework and would ask tough questions on both sides. Luke Russert however is not seasoned or mature enough to handle it.
|by Anonymous||reply 41||11/15/2012|
Rachel and Laurence would be seen as too biased. Republicans generally don't appear on their shows.
MTP is supposed to be neutral journalism.
|by Anonymous||reply 42||11/15/2012|
I want Luke deeply inside me. Hot to death.
|by Anonymous||reply 43||11/15/2012|
If David Gregory really is on his way out, and I pray he is, then maybe they'll go with someone who is currently one of their resident pundits like a Howard Fineman or Joan Walsh.
I think Rachel would be great, I'd love to see O'Donnell or Chris Matthews, or even Willie Geist. But it won't happen. Joe Scarborough is lucky to have Morning Joe. He's an obnoxious, rude asshole.
I agree about Chuck Todd and David Gregory being waterboys for the Repukes. I can't stand Todd's snearing delivery when he talks about Obama. He is overrated as a numbers cruncher, too. Tim Russert dubbed him that. He was Russert's "sidekick."
If you have any doubts how callow and obnoxious and full of himself little Luke is, do find a clip from the question he asked Nancy Pelosi at her news conference yesterday morning. Rachel Maddow aired it in it's excrutiating entirety last night. He was so fucking offensive he should have been escorted out. For his own sake.
|by Anonymous||reply 44||11/15/2012|
NBC still has the great John Siegenthaler on the payroll; he was a contender for Brian Williams' job, but somehow has ended up relegated to doing those crime and prison shows on weekends.
An intelligent choice would be to lure the great Gwen Ifill away from PBS. She's fair, objective, but still a take no prisoners type.
|by Anonymous||reply 45||11/15/2012|
John Siegenthaler was fired from NBC in 2008 due to budget cuts
|by Anonymous||reply 46||11/15/2012|
What did Rachel say about it?
|by Anonymous||reply 47||11/15/2012|
I like John Seigenthaler too.
|by Anonymous||reply 48||11/15/2012|
Jenna Bush is in talks to replace Leslie Stahl on "60 Minutes!"
|by Anonymous||reply 49||11/15/2012|
Luke's anus is warm, moist and inviting, but can sometimes smell like funions...
|by Anonymous||reply 50||11/15/2012|
If he gets the gig, there should be an anti-nepotism campaign to get people to turn off!
|by Anonymous||reply 51||11/15/2012|
David looks like Howdy Doody.
|by Anonymous||reply 52||11/15/2012|
NBC should steal Martha Raddatz from ABC and hire her to replace Gregory.
Where Christiane Amanpour failed, Raddatz will succeed. Raddatz knows both her foreign and domestic policies. I believe that Raddatz is one of the most objective broadcast journalist out there.
|by Anonymous||reply 53||11/15/2012|
Raddatz would be a great choice.
|by Anonymous||reply 54||11/15/2012|
|by Anonymous||reply 55||11/15/2012|
[quote]MTP is supposed to be neutral journalism.
And yet the definition of neutrality means "rightwing hack."
Maddow being an intelligent woman is apparently all wrong to host MTP, but David Gregory dancing with Rove or speaking before Republican groups or being a complete douchebag who lets people sit there and lie is the definition of gold-standard journalism?
|by Anonymous||reply 56||11/15/2012|
The problem with Maddow and O'Donnell is that they are branded as liberals. Would you want Chris Wallace or Sean Hannity moderating?
|by Anonymous||reply 57||11/15/2012|
How disgusting to even compare Maddow to either of them, R57, esp. Hannity. WTF is wrong with you? Do you also think she's the counter to Limbaugh?
Maddow does not engage in a daily hatefest where she targets a group for demonizing. She doesn't sit there and say things she can't back up with actual documentation and audio/video.
Even when she was on the panel, the rightwingers just try and talk over her because they don't want to hear facts.
|by Anonymous||reply 58||11/15/2012|
Things are so bad now, R4, that Luke Russert might not so bad as you may think. There really are no standards anymore.
|by Anonymous||reply 59||11/15/2012|
Two words: Chelsea Clinton.
|by Anonymous||reply 60||11/15/2012|
what r56 said
|by Anonymous||reply 61||11/15/2012|
You can't tell me Maddow wouldn't bring in huge ratings as host, esp. the most important demo. It's clearly not about ratings for the NBC brass who clearly prefer a hack who leans right.
[quote]Wednesday Ratings: Rachel Maddow Wins The Night, Beats O’Reilly, Hannity In Demo
|by Anonymous||reply 62||11/15/2012|
Necronepotism, filling vacant jobs one who's your daddy? at a time.
|by Anonymous||reply 63||11/15/2012|
Luke Russert is not his father. He is in no way capable or qualified to host MTP. Gregory's a hack, Raddatz had to last-minute cram domestic policy for the VP debate because it's not her thing.
They won't offer it to Maddow because chickenshit Republicans are so afraid of her intellect and high likability numbers that they won't sit down with her.
I don't know, maybe if Raddatz is willing to get more into domestic issues she would be a good choice. She did well enough after short-term study at that VP debate.
|by Anonymous||reply 64||11/15/2012|
To MSNBC: See! This is what happens when you don't develop talent, but rather promote unqualified, smug, dismissive and dispassionate benefactors of genealogy or timely marriages. Yes, I'm talking Luke Russert and Chuck Todd in particular.
|by Anonymous||reply 65||01/17/2013|
YOu have to be kidding me!!! If they want Meet the Press to completely die -- they will put in Luke Russert. He is the most smug a**hole on NBC. He has no compassion whatsoever and has no business being on TV.
|by Anonymous||reply 66||01/30/2013|
R67--How did Chuck Todd gain from geneology? Is he relatred to Mary lincoln?
|by Anonymous||reply 67||01/30/2013|
sorry R65--not 67--that's me
|by Anonymous||reply 68||01/30/2013|
Chuck Todd is a right wing stooge. He met with Ohio's John Husted to discuss rigging elections in Republicans favor in 2014.
|by Anonymous||reply 69||01/30/2013|
NBC's network "news" is emblematic of a nation gone totally corrupt: heralding The Mediocre and their less-than-mediocre offspring and their offspring is a testament to systemic and entrenched corruption. Along with Big News' complicity with the government and big business to deceive the public, negative sociological actions like nepotism become repugnant to a citizenry weaned on the notion of fair play.
Russert and Todd are there because of genetics or their connections. They have opportunities to quiet their critics, but so far few are impressed.
|by Anonymous||reply 70||08/29/2013|