MSNBC host and conspiracy theorist Rachel Maddow will moderate the first Democratic primary debate along with NBC anchors Jose Diaz-Balart, Savannah Guthrie, Lester Holt, and Chuck Todd.

Maddow is the only one out of those who host an opinion-based TV show, which caused some people to raise eyebrows. It does not help that Maddow has dived into numerous conspiracy theories since President Donald Trump took office.

From The Daily Caller:

Jeff McCall, a media studies professor at DePauw University, told The Daily Caller:

I think the voting public would be better served if hosts of opinion shows were kept out of moderating campaign debates. That’s not to say that an opinion host such as Maddow couldn’t generate helpful questions, but the appearance is that an advocate is helping to referee the contest. Certainly, reporters also have their own values and perspectives, but the public normally expects reporters to come at any news event with some degree of objectivity. That is not the case for an opinion show host such as Maddow. NBC is, of course, trying to give their highest rated MSNBC host a promotional platform on this debate stage. I understand that, but it is unnecessary. Maddow already has a high profile among Democrat voters.

He also noted that Maddow’s selection is not unprecedented. During the GOP primary debates in 2015 and 2016, they had multiple “opinion-based panelists” including Hugh Hewitt and Mary Katherine Ham, adding that, “Their roles were rather limited, but they did participate on the panel. That was not a good idea either.”

She has obsessed over the supposed link between Trump and Russia, along with his taxes.

After the release of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report, Mike LaChance asked in a blog why people do not treat Maddow like other crazy conspiracy theorists like Alex Jones. Social media platforms had no problem erasing Jones and his conspiracy website, but Maddow still has a voice across all of them.

Even left-leaning Slate noticed and published a piece by Willa Paskin titled “Rachel Maddow’s Conspiracy Brain.” Paskin wrote after she watched Maddow’s show on the Mueller report (emphasis mine):

I’ll admit that I haven’t watched Maddow regularly for the past few years. Turning on her show this week was like discovering a Facebook friend is on the verge of a nervous breakdown. She looks the same as she did, she even sounds the same, but 15 minutes into a conspiratorial rant with no sense of proportion or, honestly, responsibility, you realize that something has gone wildly wrong: She wants to believe the instantly impeachable truth is out there more than she wants the truth, as gnarly and corrupt as it is. It’s easy to understand why this might appeal to the 4 million or so Trump-sick viewers who regularly watch Maddow’s program, but her audience is being served an alt-reality just as surely as Hannity’s is. If her audience of susceptible ostriches and amateur detectives, people who bury themselves in conspiratorial details hoping to unearth the one clue that will beam us out of this reality, is not as malignant as Fox’s audience of the hateful, aggrieved, and ignorant, in this one regard at least, what’s happening between MSNBC and Fox is not a contest: More than one cable news host can disserve their audience at a time.

Maybe the others can reel her in. The Washington Examiner‘s Philip Klein defended Maddow as he pointed out that when she moderated a debate between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, “she asked pointed questions of both candidates.”

However, she came under fire after she hugged each candidate. Maddow said she would embrace GOP candidates as well if she ever moderated a debate with them since she is a hugger.

I have doubts Maddow will act as she did in 2016 since it seems like Trump broke her like he has with others who suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome.

 
 
donate
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.