MSNBC Changes Prime Time Lineup

Beginning Thursday, Rachel Maddow takes over the 9pm ET slot at MSNBC, replacing Dan Abrams' show, The Verdict.

Mr. Abrams, who is well liked at MSNBC, is expected to remain both there and at NBC News, where he is the chief legal correspondent. He will also serve as an anchor during some of MSNBC’s daytime coverage, as well as a substitute host on NBC’s “Weekend Today” show.

I wonder how much of Olbermann's popularity is due to Rachel's constant presence as a guest, which she obviously can't keep doing with a new show of her own.

I like Rachel. I hope she does well. And I hope Dan's back on the air with his own show soon -- one about legal issues, which is what I think he does the best.

< Biden: "I'm Not The Guy" | SUSA IN Poll: McCain By 6 >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Poor Dan (5.00 / 0) (#1)
    by janarchy on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 05:38:46 PM EST
    He left his job as program director so he could go back to doing what he loved -- his own show, and now he's off the air again. The fact that he didn't drink the Kool-Aid and was one of the few talking heads on MSNBC who didn't have non-stop 24 hour CDS probably contributed. Can't say I'm surprised at all.

    The talk is (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 05:40:52 PM EST
    he may be in negotiations with other networks.  The reality is, you either drink the Keith Olbermann potion or you're dumped.

    I really hope Olbermann has his meltdown soon.


    BTW (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 05:42:56 PM EST
    "The talk" was via TVNewser.

    The "potion" comment alluded to the fact that Dana Milbank was also ousted for not loving Obama enough.  Abrams' sin was not hating Clinton enough.


    I was wondering about Milbank (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by janarchy on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 05:48:28 PM EST
    I saw him on another Network recently (CNN) and was surprised to see he'd been ousted too. I knew they buried both Craig Crawford and Wes Clarke for crimes against Obamanity -- I thought Milbank was in the tank for BO. I guess not!

    hilarious! (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by DFLer on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 06:17:25 PM EST
    crimes against Obamanity

    I'm laughing out loud.


    I hope he goes elsewhere (5.00 / 3) (#7)
    by janarchy on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 05:44:34 PM EST
    I sincerely like him and still continued to tune in on occasion after I'd sworn off MSNBC for good. Now he's made it even easier to ignore them.

    I used to adore Maddow until she started on the CDS/Kool-Aid band wagon and was more smug, obnoxious and delusional than even KO when it came to the realities of the campaign. Talk about identifying with the aggressor... ::sigh::


    Plllltttt.... (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by flashman on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 05:52:37 PM EST
    From what I saw, Abrams wasn't so much better than the others at MSNBC.  I thought his "neutrailty" was just an act.  Before I stopped watching, he would count up the "Mis-steps and Mis-cues" but would always have Hillary-haters like Maddow and Engene Robinson to comment.  Honestly, that format of getting opinions from Maddow, Robinson, Howard Feinman, etc. has so played out.  I'll bet Maddow's new show will feature the same tired, worn-out opinionists that appread on the rest of MSNBC's prime time line-up.  

    Come back, Phil!  Come back!


    Dan Abrams admitted he didn't have a clue (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by bridget on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 10:02:40 PM EST
    re politics but that didn't keep him from sitting  in judgement over Obama and Hillary every night with his "Mis-steps and Mis-cues." He really didn't have a clue. He was so annoying and wrong ... but then I stopped watching MSNBC shortly after ...

    lol@Dan Adams who likes to appear objective but it was so obvious from his "judgments" that he preferred Obama plenty and so did Maddows, Robinson, Feinmann et al.

    When Rachel Maddows appeared first on Tucker Carlson's show (to make him look good, I guess) I knew she would eventually be a member of the club. She cannot be trusted. Sorry. As anyone who witnessed her primary coverage on MSNBC surely knows. Say anything critical ./. Obama and Maddows turned instantly into a yelling over the top Obamafan.

    P.S. Before I forget, I always liked Dan Abrams when he did the legal stuff. That was his forte. All those years back to the Simpson trial. He should go back to that IMO.  


    I always got the feeling (none / 0) (#16)
    by janarchy on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 05:57:26 PM EST
    that the CDS-crowd was foisted upon Dan by the MSNBC bookers given that it was the same frakking people on every show from 5 pm onward (Hardball, Gregory's show and Countdown). At least Dan made some attempt to call out Obama and co. some of the time instead of insisting he sh@t gold,
    p!ssed champagne and generally worked miracles. His show wasnt perfect but compared to everything that ran before him, it was refreshing. I could only watch him some of the time vs. not being able to watch the others any of the time (and to think I used to watch Countdown religiously every night prior to March 08)

    I would love to see Phil back! (none / 0) (#25)
    by Joan in VA on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 06:25:05 PM EST
    I liked Dan for the eye candy factor, mostly. His show was better on mute.

    Abrams (none / 0) (#40)
    by Christy1947 on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 09:48:24 PM EST
    I agree with the conclusion of the prior poster but not the underlying rationale. tThere is always a balance for the chief talking head between having a personality the audience likes and projecting it too much so it overshadows the material, especially the lawyer persona which never worked for me as I've been one too long, and he he projected it with the schtick too much. Although he did good work on Siegelman.

    btw, "cds" is an acronym I don't recognize. What is it?


    CDS (none / 0) (#41)
    by flashman on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 09:50:32 PM EST
    Clinton Derangement Syndrom.  The irrational, blantant haterd of anything Clinton which has infected most of the media and much of the left leaning blogs.

    Thank you. n/t. (none / 0) (#42)
    by Christy1947 on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 09:52:07 PM EST
    I really have to wonder.... (none / 0) (#35)
    by Jerrymcl89 on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 08:15:08 PM EST
    ... what kind of show Olbermann plans to do if Obama wins. If there aren't two unicorns in every garage, he'll not have lived up to Keith's hype.

    Easy, he'll parot Fox News blatant partisanship! (none / 0) (#46)
    by suzieg on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 08:19:31 AM EST
    Ditto (5.00 / 0) (#8)
    by JimWash08 on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 05:44:47 PM EST
    Dan was the only reason I watched MSNBC. I also enjoyed his coverage of legal cases. While he did not have CDS, he was critical of Hillary during the Primary and I appreciated it because he was fair with his criticism.

    I think his main misstep with his "Verdict" show was the cheap shots he took at other networks and news programs at the end of the hour. It was too much like Olbermann's "Worst Person" gimmick.

    I hope Dan has a new lease of his TV career life at another network, preferably CNN.


    I never thought I'd say this (5.00 / 0) (#14)
    by Jjc2008 on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 05:51:20 PM EST
    (cause I was fairly tired of his constant defense of the poor boys at Duke), but Dan Abrams ended up being the only MSNBC person who I thought even attempted to be fair.

    Setting aside the politics, (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by scribe on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 05:42:18 PM EST
    if Dan would do a show on legal issues, he could make it both entertaining and informative.

    Which would be a world better than the crap even Court TV (which used to have real pros talking about real cases) slings at us.  I for one have had enough of the Nancy Graces of this world.

    I remember Dan Abrams running over to (5.00 / 4) (#18)
    by PssttCmere08 on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 05:58:37 PM EST
    the cameras to share the verdict on Bush v Gore to tell us what it all meant....that seems so long ago.  I like Dan Abrams and wish him well...Rachel Maddow, not so much.  She has lost all her objectivity and is nothing more than a puppet.

    I remember that like yesterday. I was so mad. (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by Teresa on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 06:15:36 PM EST
    Heartbroken and mad.

    yep, I kept waiting for the "however" (5.00 / 3) (#27)
    by PssttCmere08 on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 06:30:31 PM EST
    part that never came...twas a very sad day.

    I agree (5.00 / 2) (#26)
    by massdem on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 06:28:23 PM EST
    that was a great time for Dan Abrams.  It was a nice change knowing that the reporter actually understood what he was reading.

    And yet another indication (5.00 / 0) (#5)
    by rooge04 on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 05:43:56 PM EST
    that the Obama nation that is NBC has become Fox News. Except worse.

    I am sure he will land on his feet, (5.00 / 0) (#6)
    by ran scot on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 05:44:12 PM EST
    he was the general manager of MSNBC after all.

    And least we forget he made 9pm a viable slot, that use to be a dead zone after Countdown.

    I used to love Rachel (5.00 / 4) (#9)
    by Carolyn in Baltimore on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 05:45:04 PM EST
    She is very smart and her facts lined up. When she got CDS I just didn't get it. Did she do it to get ahead or did she believe it? Guess we'll see.
    I wish her well. I no longer want her baby.

    YUP Rachel lost me as a fan (5.00 / 3) (#13)
    by Jjc2008 on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 05:50:01 PM EST
    when she showed signs of CDS.  Very disappointing and sad.  But I do think having CDS is a requirement of employment at NBC.

    Same here (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by janarchy on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 05:58:45 PM EST
    (see above) As far as I'm concerned, she clearly lost her mind from the Kool-Aid.

    Me, too (5.00 / 2) (#23)
    by nemo52 on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 06:17:18 PM EST
    She's really smart, and generally a good analyst, but when she began to join in with the CDS of the MSNBC boyz club, I really had to wonder -- was it career, or is CDS just catching?  Or was she just so swept away by love for Obama?  -- I was disappointed, and hope she regains her balance.

    At first I couldn't stand Dan Abrams, but (5.00 / 0) (#10)
    by independent voter on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 05:46:07 PM EST
    he really grew on me. I am surprised they did not keep him and get rid of the host that spits on everyone!

    Rachel is ok (5.00 / 0) (#11)
    by CST on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 05:46:53 PM EST
    Dan is better.  I wish she replaced Olberman instead.  I really don't like that guy...

    Damn, I liked... (5.00 / 0) (#17)
    by Marco21 on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 05:58:18 PM EST
    The Verdict and Dan. As mentioned, he had the unique ability to bag on Clinton on issues, not make up shiz like Olbermann did.

    I don't agree (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by IzikLA on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 06:02:07 PM EST
    I think Maddow was one of many travesties during the primaries.  She has the Clinton hate and the Obama love - that is why she is getting her own show at MSNBC.

    In fact, Dan Abrams was the ONLY person at MSNBC that I could watch -- for the most part he called people on their crap.  He did not play favorites and he questioned it when he saw it.

    I like Joe in the Morning - can't wait for him to (none / 0) (#47)
    by suzieg on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 08:21:31 AM EST
    come back after the Olympics

    NBC, Please Hear my Plea (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by bselznick on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 06:34:49 PM EST
    Please replace Morning Joe with a Rachel... PLEASE!!!

    Excuse me, (5.00 / 3) (#29)
    by tek on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 06:41:30 PM EST
    but did you pay attention to Rachel Maddow during the primaries?  She (a woman) slashed Hillary to pieces in the lowest possible terms.  It's just hard to have any respect for these people anymore.

    yes (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by sas on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 08:48:22 PM EST
    rachel was deeply disturbing

    she sucked up to the boyz and trashed hillary at every turn

    no wonder she is getting her own msnbc show

    she knows her place


    To (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by sas on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 08:45:23 PM EST
    be truly progressive, you must be a feminist.

    Maddow may be, but Olbermann is surely not.


    MSNBC (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by DFH no6 on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 12:07:13 PM EST
    MSNBC is as bad as, or worse than, Fox News?

    Olbermann is as bad as, or worse, than Bill O'Reilly?

    Scarborough and Buchanan are the "most objective" commentators on MSNBC?

    You people are INSANE.

    There most certainly is a "Clinton Derangement Syndrome", but it's not what you think it is.

    To add on... (none / 0) (#21)
    by Marco21 on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 06:03:36 PM EST
    I like Rachel and did get the CDS vibe from her during th primary season, but now I honestly cannot recall specifics, unlike the Olbermann memories seared into my brain for life.

    Can anyone fill in the blanks for me?

    Why the change? (none / 0) (#30)
    by Pianobuff on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 06:43:27 PM EST
    Keith O is taking credit and giving credit to the Kos kids.

    Jeez, no wonder Olbermann loves Obama; (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by Anne on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 07:02:23 PM EST
    they both share a tendency to take credit for things they may not have had a lot to do with...

    As for Rachel, she lost me when she decided she needed to prove that she could trash Hillary just as well as the boys did, and made no secret of how much she enjoyed doing it.

    The transformation of MSNBC is just about complete; perhaps Keith will announce that the network will henceforth be named MSNBarack and that, yes, it was all his idea.  


    Never a fan of either (none / 0) (#31)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 06:49:26 PM EST
    Dan seems like a nice guy.

    Getting Rachel away from Olbermann will be interesting - is she really like that or was she just playing to him? Let's hope the former.

    Rachel is smart (none / 0) (#32)
    by JThomas on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 07:01:04 PM EST
    and a very strong advocate for progressives. We need voices like hers out there calling the GOP on their neo-conservative tendancies.
    I am glad she will have an hour to pick apart the Cheneys,Boehners,and McCains.

    Abrams was ok also but clearly not really a professional pundit as he has said many times.

    MSNBC is the voice of the defense industry. (none / 0) (#34)
    by WillBFair on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 07:07:48 PM EST
    'Nuff said.

    Rachel Maddow (none / 0) (#36)
    by facta non verba on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 08:35:39 PM EST
    was a student of mine at Stanford. She is very bright, went on to win Rhodes Scholarship. She is also a left-wing nut.

    I never liked her on Air America (none / 0) (#39)
    by ChrisO on Tue Aug 19, 2008 at 08:55:13 PM EST
    I couldn't believe she got the MSNBC gig. It's kind of funny that the two most objective people left at that network are Scarborough and Buchanan.

    Crossing my fingers (none / 0) (#45)
    by mmc9431 on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 07:33:54 AM EST
    It will be interesting to see if she can regain her progressive roots now that she's out from under KO. We need someone that still believes in the progressive causes and will call the Obama people on it. She was never shy about voicing her opinions in the past. Hopefully she will have a "Hilary" moment and find her voice again.