Image 01 Image 03

READER POLL: Who Should Replace Megyn Kelly? (UPDATE – It’s Tucker Carlson)

READER POLL: Who Should Replace Megyn Kelly? (UPDATE – It’s Tucker Carlson)

We ask, you decide

Earlier today, Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly announced she’d be parting ways with the cable news network and heading over to NBC News. Kelly’s departure will leave a gaping hole in Fox’s prime-time lineup.

We’re just speculating here but we’ve picked potential replacements from the Fox News stable of the well-known faces, including news types and ideologues, and one total outsider, Jake Tapper.

So, dear reader, we want to hear from you. Who do you think should replace Megyn Kelly?

UPDATE 1-5-2017 10:05 a.m. (by WAJ)Tucker Carlson To Replace Megyn Kelly In 9 P.M. Fox News Slot

Follow Kemberlee on Twitter @kemberleekaye


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Laura Ingram!

Tami Lauren

Pat Cadell!

@Artist_Angie | January 3, 2017 at 9:39 pm

Dana Loesch

    johnny dollar in reply to Ulises. | January 3, 2017 at 10:15 pm

    She’s not conservative, but she appears to have an open mind and is very intelligent. Also, quite attractive.
    All necessary qualities!

Candy Crowley?

    userpen in reply to Andy. | January 3, 2017 at 10:37 pm


    C. Lashown in reply to Andy. | January 4, 2017 at 12:00 am

    Candy Crowley would certainly fit the ‘gaping hole’ observation criteria… A big fat ugly frigging gaping hole that no sane non-lib would touch! A great way to attract liberal transgenders though.

    re: “Kelly’s departure will leave a GAPING HOLE in Fox’s prime-time lineup.”

amatuerwrangler | January 3, 2017 at 10:23 pm

Harris Faulkner.

For all I care, she could be replaced by a potted palm. I don’t watch television; haven’t for almost eight years now.

Andrea Tantaros. She is a kickass and take names type that FNC needs to keep interest up. I like Tucker Carlson but he is turning into an entertainer and not a serious journalist. He can beat up on these leftist fools all day long but that won’t cut it. I also like Monica Crowley. She is very bright and is a bone hard conservative.

    Bruce Hayden in reply to inspectorudy. | January 4, 2017 at 5:22 am

    Tucker is gaining an audience. There is a real audience for beating up stupid liberals with logic. Esp. now with the Trump election, and the ascendance of a more confrontational conservatism. I get links to his show almost daily now, and usually watch them (because, no matter how much I hate admitting it, I know I will enjoy them) – which means that, for me right now, he is the real face of Fox News.

    I think that he works well in the time slot they gave him. The problem is that his shtick just doesn’t move to the prime time slot. Neither, really, did Greta’s. Good though in the transition between daytime and primetime.

It’s got to be Dana Loesch. Who else would hold everybody’s feet to the fire, regardless of their political leanings?
Nobody does it like Dana would.

Dana Loesch

Shannon Bream. Beautiful, smart, not narcissistic, and not mean.

    DJ9 in reply to lawdoc. | January 4, 2017 at 1:15 am

    Another vote for Shannon Bream.

    I always thought she was way overdue to get her own Fox show, but she is versatile enough that she can fill-in anywhere (and has), and that’s pretty valuable to management, too.

    Unless she’s happy with her current circumstances/position (always a possibility), she should take her best shot at this spot.

Seriously, who else but Ivanka Trump – if she can afford to give up her day job

    C. Lashown in reply to Oldfogey. | January 4, 2017 at 12:03 am

    GREAT suggestion, principally because it would drive the globalists crazy!

    Then after Soros buys Twitter and shuts it down, Trump could just funnel his policy changes through Fox news, the #1 News Network.

Someone seriously voted for Shep?

why no option “Kill your TV”?

I voted for Tapper, but Harris Faulkner or Tomi Lahren would be better.

Tucker Carlson is probably about a year away from being good at this type of show.

Hannity? I’d prefer his being replaced by anyone else listed or mentioned above.


Anderson Copper

Relax it’s a joke!

Why does Megyn Kelly have to be replaced by just one person? Why not have two or three of the names already suggested “replace” her. That way each of the anchors would have more time to prepare and perhaps do better stories with more depth than the press of doing all the shows, every day can afford a single individual?


Sharyll Atkisson

    Yes! This, a thousand times this. She’d be great.

    The only downside to Sharyl is that she’s nonpartisan and will rip into any Republican just as hard as she ripped into Reid, Pelosi, and Obama. This is actually what I love about her, but for prime time Fox, she may be too real, too smart, and too impartial.

      isn’t that the whole idea, have someone that will after both sides with out preconceived notions.

      PhillyGuy in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | January 4, 2017 at 7:29 am

      I agree with Fuzzy – she would be great. First rate individual. Not ego driven like whatshername who has the slot currently.

      There is NO downside to someone with the caliber of Sharyl Attkisson doing the job the majority of journalists refuse to do. I would be so happy to see Fox give her a shot. Best.Move.Ever.

David Burge

I think Shannon Bream has a shot. I don’t think anyone else on the list has one. Trish Regan is also likely in the running along with Sandra Smith. I think Kimberly Guilfoyle is a dark horse candidate but not as likely Bream, Regan or Smith.

My money is on Trish Regan. Smart and has the ability to handle financial and business news.

I don’t think an outsider has a chance. People like Jake Tapper and Dana Loesch are in the you gotta be kidding category.

    Shep doesn’t have a chance in hell. He’s a leftie, an alcoholic, and a moron.

    Agree with you about Jake and Dana, though.

    My votes are long shots, but I’d love to see a staunch conservative take over. Tucker’s show is going great, so they may move him to prime time and pick someone else for the off slot.

      I agree Shep doesn’t have a chance and isn’t in the running. Sandra Smith is a real female reporter at Fox and not a reference to Shep.

      She along with Bream and Regan are probably the top 3 in the running to replace Kelly from what I’ve read and how they rotated those three in to replace Kelly during the holidays.

    Guilfoyle?? Puleeze, I quit “The Five” because my ears couldn’t handle that nasal screech.

    She and Sarah Palin would both benefit tremendously from a Speech Coach.

      I didn’t say I wanted Guilfoyle. I said she was a dark horse candidate because reports are she is campaigning for the job. But I think Fox will pick someone who already works for Fox and will likely pick a female. It seems to me they were trying out over the holidays Regan, Bream, Sandra Smith, the most so I’d say odds are it will be one of them with my bet being Trish Regan.

      As for the five I agree it is mostly unwatchable but because of Perino and Gutfeld.

I voted for Judge Jeanine, but I also like Andrew Napolitano. The spot needs a real conservative who is not afraid to speak her (or his) mind. No more whiny Megyns please.

I’ve also seen Taya Kyle on a few times, and she’s great. Not sure she’s ready for her own show, but down the road . . . .

I care just as much as who would replace Rachel Maddow. If you watch Cable news and you are watch something other than OneAmericaNews, Newsmax TV, with occasional trips to the Blaze for Dana Loesch and Tomi Lahren, you are not a conservative.

God help us all if Sean “what about Reverend Wright (in 2016, still)” Hannity is supposed to be the voice of conservatism going forward. He is the only conservative, and is a good man, but what an intellectual lightweight.

How about a post to come up with your Dream Networks? That would be fun.

thalesofmiletus | January 4, 2017 at 1:38 am

Ann Coulter. Can’t think of anyone better who could un-cuck the place, if only by attrition.

Megan Kelly is the Ronda Rousey of conservative news hosts: having just got knocked-out at Fox, she’s about to take another beating at NBC.

ScottTheEngineer | January 4, 2017 at 1:49 am

Greta Van Sustern.

    Bruce Hayden in reply to ScottTheEngineer. | January 4, 2017 at 5:12 am

    Greta has the lawyer side down. She can be just as relentless as Kelly. But, she doesn’t have the looks and presence for prime time. Kelly had the looks, and the polish, on her. A lot of guys probably wanted to meet Kelly, so watched her on TV. Not so with Greta (who probably did better work). The polish was important. Kelly was a former white shoe law firm attorney, working in a top tier law firm. Greta, I believe, was a prosecutor, a much grittier profession. I think that you need the polish to anchor a really prime time slot.

    Hate to be a sexist here, but the reality is that Fox News is more aimed at males than females. And, part of its success has really been their ability to put smart, attractive, articulate women on the air. Not the airheads or bimbos that the other networks would promote (often, it seemed, for ideological reasons). Sex sells, and Fox seemed to be the only network that really understood that.

      ScottTheEngineer in reply to Bruce Hayden. | January 4, 2017 at 12:52 pm

      I never liked Kelley for her looks. I liked her show because she put forth an intelligent witty argument. If you compared her to Robin Meade (Tits and a Teleprompter) You could clearly see the difference. Seems like all that wen out the window after she had a baby for some reason.
      I liked watching Gretas’ program for the same reason. She’s what I would consider a good role model for my daughter. Besides she’s a good person.

Larry O’Connor.

Hannity is unwatchable.


How about an hour of Popeye the Sailorman cartoons? That’s how much I care who replaces her.
Hope she’s getting a good first year payday from NBC, because nobody I know watches it, so I expect she’ll have the job about a year, no longer.

    She’s not a complete idiot. The deal is good; multi-year (probably three, maybe more), a daily show (that will fail), a Sunday show (that has a better chance, but that is likely going up against 60 Minutes, so . . . do the math), and “special coverage” (this is what she totally sucks at; I couldn’t stand watching her juvenile, self-involved segments on Fox and ended up watching most election night results on CNN).

    She won’t save NBC because she was never the draw on Fox.

      Bruce Hayden in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | January 4, 2017 at 4:53 am

      She was hot for awhile, passing Greta and Hannity, and seemed to be within striking distance of O’Reilly. I did watch her for awhile – the only “news” show I would watch, loving to watch a smart, well prepared, attorney take apart, typically, but not always, liberal, politicians.

      I think that the thing that killed her at Fox was her taking on Trump, almost as some sort of mission. Big mistake. Once would have been fine, but she didn’t stop it at one. One would have been acceptable. Making him a target was not. He was the type of target that she loved – his bombastic style lends itself to being shredded by cross examination of the specifics. So, she couldn’t resit, and kept at it. And, that was the effective end of her career, with many of her former supporters turning on her, in their support for Trump. And, I was one of them, not watching her since, maybe, the beginning of the summer. She went from one of the good guys, to one of the enemy, in that six months.

      Meanwhile, the Ailes sexual assault scandal blew up, and she didn’t keep her mouth shut. She was being paid a lot of money, and showed that she really wasn’t on the team at that point, but was, rather, in it for herself. Different rules for the headliners, than for the lower level staff. Her job, at the top, was to stay out of the fray, if she couldn’t support her management (that was cutting those million dollar checks). She wasn’t loyal to her top management, and they, in turn, weren’t loyal to her. (Not that I am justifying Ailes’ sexual harassment, because I am not – it had to stop, it did, he had to go, and did).

        Great comments, Bruce! I dared venture a few less than flattering comments about Megyn early on, but she was a favorite among many, and I got pretty lambasted for it. That didn’t change my opinion, but it did make me less willing to share it (the goal, I guess, of bashing someone relentlessly for not thinking as you do). Anyway, that was a pick my battle moment, and I didn’t care about Megyn Kelly enough to keep explaining why I didn’t like her, so I shut up. I wouldn’t have if it mattered, though, I’m no shrinking violet. 🙂

        Not sorry to see her go, though. Her show was unwatchable at the end of nearly every single segment (she’d giggle and tell stupid “jokes” or share stupid stories about herself. I just couldn’t stand to watch her, especially when she sucked up to guests explaining how she knew them, why she admired and love them or whatever. Cloying and annoying.).

        She’s gone, though, and I don’t think she’ll be a runaway hit on NBC (unless they made her the Nightly News anchor and made her stick to reading the news. She’d excel at that if she stayed on teleprompter and didn’t giggle off into unfinished sentences and side glances at her staff).

      Bruce Hayden in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | January 4, 2017 at 5:02 am

      I don’t see her saving NBC for a couple reasons. First, she really doesn’t fit there. She isn’t a liberal “dem operative with a byline” type of anchor. Her approach works better from the right, than from the left.

      Secondly, daytime is very likely the wrong venue for her. The target audience there is female, and she isn’t the type of woman that other women like. To really make it in daytime TV, women have to be nice, and she isn’t really very nice. Besides, she works on logic, and they are looking for emotion. They want to feel good. She won’t provide that. My guess is that her daytime show will crater. She needs to be on in the evening, with a lot of males watching, when a smart, bull dog, cross examination by a relatively attractive woman can be appreciated.

      PhillyGuy in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | January 4, 2017 at 7:31 am

      I will miss the cocktail dresses and the stripper outfits.

Annette Haven?

talk about “Must See TV”….


What about having a center-right version of Frontline? It could have feature length reports on different topics and would be like the best episodes of 20/20, Nightline, NatGeo, etc before they went hard left. There’s so much talent out there – Malkin, Beck, Goldberg, O’Rourke, D’Souza, Dobbs, Stossel, etc and so many other writers and bloggers.

Because honestly, if her replacement is just going to be someone else reading the news and interviewing the same analysts and making the same comments, what’s the point.

I think that Kelly will be hard to replace at Fox. The problem is that whatever they do goes up against prime time TV on the networks. And, that means that the host/anchor needs to have the sort of polish and presence that she has, at least if a woman. But, also, for Fox, has to be at least a little right of center. Extreme though probably won’t work either. Needs to be the cable news alternative for the 50% who are not liberals in this country, but, now in the Trump era, also has to attract the working class whites that would be turned off by too conservative a host. There is a sweat spot there, that I think Kelly was hitting, until her elitist intolerance of Trump killed her at Fox.

    casualobserver in reply to Bruce Hayden. | January 4, 2017 at 7:17 am

    “….killed her at Fox…”

    How so? They offered her $20 million, reportedly, and her show is the second highest rated on the station. Doesn’t sound like she was negatively affected in the least.

    What seems clear to me is she is changing the timing of her workday AND it sounds like she will not be doing the same kind of hard news. It doesn’t sound like she is compromising in the least. She is simply making a career change.

    I agree that FNC has a big challenge to keep that time slot as productive. Some of the people in the poll in this post could do a good job, but almost none may be able to have the same audience draw. Even Tucker Carlson doesn’t yet compete at 7. Maybe moving him to 9 picks up some extra eyeballs? I don’t know.

      Tom Servo in reply to casualobserver. | January 4, 2017 at 1:57 pm

      I think Kelly’s move to NBC is going to greatly improve the lineup at BOTH networks.

      And Kelly was no one until Fox made her someone – what can be done once can be done many times.

Give Tucker Carlson the 9 PM slot, then debate who to replace Tucker at 7.

Who cares? Fox is not new anymore just wild speculation.

American Human | January 4, 2017 at 6:46 am

Why is there no option for “Who Cares”?

I think there’s supposed to be a Polldaddy poll on this page, but I’m not seeing it. Yes, I have my adblocker turned off.

I’m in favor of Liz Wheeler!

Haven’t watched FNC since scammity allowed u no hoo discuss Raphael Cruz supposed involvement in the assassination of JFK.
Don’t intend to return to FNC in this lifetime.

Diamond and Silk.

How about Hannity gets his old time slot back? If not, I pick Lou Dobbs.

buckeyeminuteman | January 4, 2017 at 9:05 am

ANDREA TANTAROS for two obvious reasons!!

Dana Loesch with commentary from Bill Whittle

Sharyl Attkisson. Let’s get a real hard-hitting journalism.

You left out the most important choice: “Who Cares?”

Kurt Schlichter

Laura Ingraham or Dr. Gorsky

I am lucky enough to get The Blaze TV by my cable company, so I already get to watch a nightly hour of Tomi Lauren and Dana Loesch. I stopped watching FOX when they went all in for Trump and shut out Ted Cruz. I can’t believe Greta is gone, and Hannity is unwatchable. They need someone who will be hard hitting without being partisan, and that could be Peter Scweitzer or Jim Geraghty.

    Barry in reply to jmlsmb. | January 4, 2017 at 8:04 pm

    “I stopped watching FOX when they went all in for Trump and shut out Ted Cruz.”


    Most people quit fox because they were anti-Trump. Some exceptions of course.

Laura Ingram

Andrew Wilkow

I go for Sharyl Atkinson she is a true investigative journalist

Elmer Fudd!…come on, Stopped watching Fox News a long time ago. Who Cares. Just another soap opera. Lets get to the fun stuff like Session’s confirmation hearing.

FYI: Tuesday, January 10
Jeff Sessions, attorney general — hearings at 9:30 a.m.
Wednesday, January 11
Rex Tillerson, secretary of state — hearings in the morning and afternoon
Elaine Chao, transportation secretary — hearing at 10:15 a.m.
Mike Pompeo, director of the Central Intelligence Agency — hearing at 10 am
Betsy DeVos, education secretary — hearing at 10 a.m.
John Kelly, secretary of Homeland Security — hearing at 2 p.m.
Thursday, January 12
James Mattis, defense secretary
Wednesday, January 18
Tom Price, secretary of Health and Human Services

Great choice by Fox.