MSNBC at 10pm Thom Hartmann or Cenk Ugyar?

[Pryderi]

I know I posted a similar poll last week, but if given the choice between just these 2, whom do you choose?
Who should follow Rachel Maddow?

[Idealism]

1. Thom is one of the most intelligent voices in the media hands down

[ShortnFiery]

3. And he has many connections within the Progressive Political Community. He would greatly

complement Rachael Maddow's show. I think both Thom and Rachael are thoughtful POWERHOUSES of intelligent and engaging political discourse. :thumbsup:

[Idealism]

That would be one helluva two hour block!

[oregonjen]

5. And one of the most hard working

[Ian David]

8. Cenk works at least as many hours as Tweety does, yet fucks up less, and makes much more sense.

The only one who spends more hours a day talking are my daughter and Pat Buchanan.

[EFerrari]

15. I agree. And his knowledge is wide ranging.n/t

[ihavenobias]

24. I actually think Thom is THE most intelligent voice in the media.

He's the only reason (well, Rachel too) I renewed my Air America membership. If the poll question was who is the most intelligent host that could end up on MSNBC there's no question I would choose Hartmann!

But presumably the question also involves who would be more *entertaining* and appeal to a broader audience (instead of just nerds like us who enjoy Thom's awesome 5 or 10 minute tangents on history, etc.), and for that reason I choose Cenk.

Actually, there are I choose Cenk.

[Window]

34. I agree wholeheartedly Tom. I like them both for the reasons you stated.

Peace:kick:

[ronnykmarshall]

2. Who's Cenk ?

[Richardo]

4. Don't start.

[Sebastian Doyle]

7. The Young Turks

Or should I say "The Young Turk". Because he literally is from Turkey, AND because TYT used to be a three person show, but Cenk has been a solo act for a while now.

[Ian David]

6. I like Thom much better. But I would have to choose Cenk for a show on MSNBC. Here's my reasoning...

1) Thom is shy, and that comes across on the television. He looked awful on Olbermann the other night. It was as if he kept forgetting there was a camera he had to look up at.

2) I like Thom's show on Air America way too much to allow MSNBC to fuck with it.

3) Since Marc Maron and Sam Seder aren't going to get a show on MSNBC, that makes Cenk my next runner-up.

[Pryderi]

9. I hadn't thought about that...I've never seen Thom on camera.

[Ian David]

10. He's a good looking dude (except for the beard. I can't stand beards).

I think Thom would be a better fit for a more widely syndicated radio program.

And I would love to see Marc and Sam get a three-hour morning call-in show on Air America (GIVE THEM LIONEL'S SPOT!) plus a one-hour evening show on MSNBC.

[GreenTea]

13. Good thing you didn't live in the wild, fun, sexy, radical 60's-When Thom & many other progressives

became politically aware....Beards were considered natural & free flowing, as opposed to the uptight straight, suits of conformity and business as well as the "establishment" with their shaved mugs all over Wall Street and everywhere else in America.

[Sebastian Doyle]

11. I don't think Thom being on MSNBC would affect his radio show at all.

Thom's radio show is in the morning, the TV show would be in the evening. Rachel's show got all screwed up by her being on MSNBC, because her initial appearances on "Race to the White House" (with Douche Gregory) just happened to start right when her radio show did, so they tried the simulcast, which was a bad idea, given the Douche's domination of the show (and who the Hell wanted to listen to his Rove loving ass on Air America?)

[Ian David]

12. Being simulcast on MSNBC sure effected Rachel's show. And when Stephanie Miller was on MSNBC...

... for those three, wonderful, glorious days, she had to tone down her act.

Granted, Thom Hartman doesn't make fart jokes, but he might have to lose the "Full Monty Alert."

I also don't want to have to look at Terry Jeffries on my TV when Thom interviews him.

[Sebastian Doyle]

14. If Hartmann had a TV show, it would be separate from his radio show completely

because of the time difference, there would be no need for the overlap.

One great thing about having Thom on TV, and open to a much wider audience who might never listen to his radio show, is that Thom isn't afraid to have right wingers on his show, and he usually shuts down their stupid talking points. Not shouts down, like they might do on other networks, but just rationally tells them exactly how they're full of shit.

And that needs to be on TV. Hell, that needs to be on the NBC network feed, not just cable.

[Ian David]

16. Good point. And Thom could always be trained to look up at the camera.

[Donnachaidh]

19. I'd much rather have an EDUCATOR, which Thom Hartmann is

Cenk is just jonesing for that nationwide coverage, and what we don't need now is another talking ego on the television.

Put someone on who can EXPLAIN without talking down to the audience. Hartmann is theonly one to do that.

[ihavenobias]

25. You're half right and half wrong

Thom is brilliant, as I've said and will continue to say. But he's INCREDIBLY dry. I love him and yet I recognize this objective reality.

The goal isn't to appeal to the closed circuit of policy wonks is it? After all, they/we already soak up information constantly. The goal is to appeal to a broader *television* audience.

Cenk doesn't "talk down", rather he distills complicated issues into something that's easily understood, and he does so in an entertaining way that appeals to an audience that often includes (but is not limited to) policy wonks and history buffs. Just because he's (much) more animated doesn't mean he isn't intelligent and articulate.

And yes, he's plenty educated: "He is a graduate of the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania and Columbia Law School, and a former associate at the law firms of Drinker Biddle & Reath in Washington, D.C. and Parcher, Hayes & Liebman in New York City."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cenk_Uygur

[Seldona]

35. I would go with Cenk as well.

snip

Cenk doesn't "talk down", rather he distills complicated issues into something that's easily understood, and he does so in an entertaining way that appeals to an audience that often includes (but is not limited to) policy wonks and history buffs. Just because he's (much) more animated doesn't mean he isn't intelligent and articulate.

snip

I agree 100%. Cenk is also quick on feet. I love his style of leading people to their own conclusions. Logic is so hard to come by these days. Watch his guest appearances on the major networks. He owns whomever he is up against.

[Cleita]

28. Another reason is that Thom is stretched pretty thin with obligations as it is.

I don't know if he could add a TV program to his schedule and the vibes I get from Thom is that he would try to do it all.

[Ian David]

17. This might not be good... Thom Hartmann left Air America?

Thom Hartmann left Air America?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4980579

[thereismore]

18. Uygur, not Ugyar. Sorry. nt

[skeewee08]

20. I want someone with personality:-)

[lib_wit_it]

21. Cenk has a great personality for tv.

[ihavenobias]

22. Who's Cenk "Ugyar"? You mean Cenk Uygur?

;)

[ihavenobias]

23. 5 Reasons Cenk Should Get The 10pm Slot

5 Reasons To Choose Cenk:

1)-He's made huge inroads with New Media. The TYT youtube channel reached over 63 million views in 18 months which is astounding for anyone familiar with the format. Cenk would represent an inevitable and invaluable bridge between cable news and the internet.

2)-Building off of #1, Cenk could bring in an untapped, younger demographic. You know, all those young people who got involved this last election aren't necessarily interested in listening to yet another old white guy on TV.

3)-He's had an insanely impressive guest list which includes: Rachel Maddow, Arianna Huffington, Ted Kennedy, Michael Moore, Alan Greenspan, Grover Norquist, Howard Dean, Naomi Klein, John Cusack and way too many others to name. Imagine who he could get on MSNBC?

4)-It would add some diversity. Viewers are ready for change, and that includes the aesthetics/background of their talk show hosts. After all, we did just elect "Barack Hussein Obama".

5)-His style and delivery are very different from both Maddow and KO. And he's proven his tv presence with his stints on CNN-HN, like when he defended Gen. Wesley Clark's McCain comments.

PS---Even if he doesn't get the job, this resume should be MORE than enough to give him a platform as a guest pundit on existing shows.

[peacetalksforall]

26. I think Cenk's focus and depth is clever and original. I don't see him having any problems

disaloging with guests. His humor is outstanding - very important because it's 100% original and delivered with lightening speed and it drills down in a second.

Thom is smart and knows his stuff, but lectures. He talks a little more than he listens. But, maybe that is call-in radio.

I think for personality - Cenk is more on par with Rachel.

[choie]

27. sam seder

[TheUnspeakable]

30. sam would be perfect- so smart and SO funny!!!!

edited to add I love Thom and voted for him.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

36. I third that notion

Sam was emerging as a crossover star to TV around the same as Rachel - then Mark Green incompetently screwed up and canceled his show to make room for a condescending, barely-left-of-center boomer douche named after a train set

[OwnedByFerrets]

29. I am Thoms biggest fan, but I have to choose Cenk.....

Thom does not have the personality for television.....as far as I have seen so far. I believe him to be the smartest person in the room, any room, but in order to survive on TV, one MUST have personality. I want Thom to continue being a guest until he learns how to use the camera.....if that is what HE wants.

[OhioChick]

31. Love Thom, but have to go with Cenk on this one. n/t

[theFrankFactor]

32. I Love Thom but...

I love him in his current format. The long format of radio is perfect for his more methodical, doctrinal style. Cenk has a playfulness that suits the shorter form and translates well on television. Ideally? BOTH!


Thom and I at a Democracy Radio Conference D.C '02

MY NEWEST PROGRAM
http://media.switchpod.com/users/jd/TheFrankFactorshow4020209.mp3

[Rosco T.]

33. personally... Dan Rather n/m

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

37. Can't decide - I love 'em both

And both wasted an hour of their time to help me and my little magazine out, so I recuse myself from voting.

Maybe they could team up for a show