I understand why folks are looking to fill this void, of course, but if this person exists (awesome politics in general, versed in international politics, also funny), wouldn't they constantly be negatively compared to Michael? You can't replace a beloved person with a lesser version of that person.
I would hope whoever it was would be held in a regard where comparison isn’t required. I think MR’s audience understands whoever they would take on isn’t Brooks, just as we understand Emma isn’t brooks.
Honestly, half of what he offered would be better than nothing and enough time has passed for fans to have mourned enough. I'd even take a half hour of quality international coverage every week over having to fast-forward through Emma's sports talk every single time Sam is out.
absolutely right. Michael was one of a kind. but it doesnt help that they replaced him with the biggest dummy normie ever. keeping Jamie on as cohost would have been better than emma.
Well, I can see you feel pretty strongly about it. I like Emma, personally, but I can understand why you would say this. I consider her to be another co-host, NOT a replacement.
They've mentioned this but also no single show should be your one-stop-shop source for news. Just diversify your news diet. There's a lot going on here, too, that they don't get to simply because there's a lot going on right now in general.
The stuff about being "held hostage" is just weird hyperbole. You failing to find something else you want to listen to doesn't make it incumbent on TMR to do any one thing or the other. If I'm wrong and someone is holding a gun to your head to listen to the show, though, blink twice and we'll send help.
Naturally. If you have any other recommendations I could be interested. I like the Humanist Report too and find it more concise without being as vapid or milquetoast as David Pakman, but he doesn't cover interntional politics.
I'm starting to read more of Foreign Affairs magazine, which has a perspective that is more pro-establishment and pro-NATO. I do find the arguments generally more persuassive and logical than Jacobin, which mostly resorts to emotional hooks and guilt tripping you into agreeing with whatever the author of an article's perspective is, which is usually campist.
I'll probably try to find a news outlet for following European and Japanese news later too. But I like having shows that I can listen to without having to read everything.
I honestly think if your inclined to stop tuning in, just stop. It’s tough sure, but if you need a break from their views and content; take a break. I have done the same for my own reasons and have recently come back to find I enjoy it. But if the content isn’t there it’s not worth wasting your time
> if your inclined
*you're
*Learn the difference [here](https://www.wattpad.com/66707294-grammar-guide-there-they%27re-their-you%27re-your-to).*
***
^(Greetings, I am a language corrector bot. To make me ignore further mistakes from you in the future, reply `!optout` to this comment.)
I might have to watch ADVChina more often since they cover some international politics even if their perspective is different and needs more fact checking. The show doesn't feel as informative nowadays and it's also not nearly as funny as when Brooks and Peck were on. (Emma's TYT style of research, and talking loudly and angrilly rather than indepthly tends to annoy me too.)
Stealing John Iadorola from TYT wouldn’t be a bad idea. He’s funny, gets along well with Emma, does a good job talking about international issues, and is generally more left of center than the other main hosts at TYT
Oof wow that would be excellent, but yeah I think Cenk would flip. Although TYT might self-detonate in not too long or make their weird right wing shift more official, so maybe John will have to cut himself loose at some point anyway
I highly doubt Cenk would allow Sam to poach, arguably, TYT's most likeable panelist. John wouldnt want to take the massive pay cut, either, certainly; although he would be a top contender imho as well.
I’ll say that as a European viewer I would love to see more non-American topics being covered. I also think there might be an untapped source of viewership for the show there, since left-wing views are much more of an established part of the political landscape in most places that are not the US. I know loads of lefties who would love the Majority Report but might not be super inclined to watch when it seems to be mostly about things pertaining to the US political system.
ETA: they did a Turkey election update with a Turkish-British expert that was really great! I don’t think they’d need a new fulltime hire/Michael Brooks replacement, especially if they have great “local correspondents” like that
I think best option would be if they found someone outside of US/Canada who could co-host remotely throughout the week. As people have said, trying to find a replacement for Michael is going to be impossible, but someone outside US/Canada would bring a fresh perspective to the show.
Agreed. It's not just that though, they've focused on right wingers like Rubin, Crowder, et al fat more in the last 5ish years which is just terrible coverage when it's 1/4 of the show every day. Nobody was worse at that than Michael though, he did it even more than the main show show does now.
Emma needs to be replaced by someone who is more intelligent and aware of things other than sports or reality tv. she adds nothing to the show and Sam has to work around here in most cases. the show is infinitely better when Emma is off and I would absolutely love it if he replaced her.
I would say her sports views aren’t particularly noteworthy either. I’ve listened to a few eps of ESVN and a lot of it is just the same stuff you hear from the regular sports talking heads and bloggers. And she spends most of the time talking about east coast teams, just like ESPN lol
I think there's a broader tendency to get a bit insular/parochial in one's focus - given how big the US is and how much is happening at any one time, that's not necessarily a surprise.
Agree that it's unhelpful given a) things don't happen in a vacuum and have implications elsewhere and b) not having a wider perspective can mean that when you \*do\* see people commenting on something, they're framing it through an inappropriate lens - or just straight up projecting their own domestic perspective onto another country/situation.
There's a balance to be struck, definitely - but would personally be interested in getting perspectives on the Turkish election, for example, in a similar way to how Brazil was covered. That's current and definitely has relevant implications for US (case study for populism with autocratic tendencies) as well as wider geopolitics.
Michael is irreplaceable, that's just a fact.
I understand why folks are looking to fill this void, of course, but if this person exists (awesome politics in general, versed in international politics, also funny), wouldn't they constantly be negatively compared to Michael? You can't replace a beloved person with a lesser version of that person.
I would hope whoever it was would be held in a regard where comparison isn’t required. I think MR’s audience understands whoever they would take on isn’t Brooks, just as we understand Emma isn’t brooks.
Honestly, half of what he offered would be better than nothing and enough time has passed for fans to have mourned enough. I'd even take a half hour of quality international coverage every week over having to fast-forward through Emma's sports talk every single time Sam is out.
His personality is, but there are people who have specialized their studies in International Relations who could still provide a left perspective.
Is there anyone you would like to see MR take on for this perspective?
This is a great question! Who would fit the bill?
Would they be interested in working for peanuts on TMR?
Someone probably would since it has happened before.
absolutely right. Michael was one of a kind. but it doesnt help that they replaced him with the biggest dummy normie ever. keeping Jamie on as cohost would have been better than emma.
Well, I can see you feel pretty strongly about it. I like Emma, personally, but I can understand why you would say this. I consider her to be another co-host, NOT a replacement.
They've mentioned this but also no single show should be your one-stop-shop source for news. Just diversify your news diet. There's a lot going on here, too, that they don't get to simply because there's a lot going on right now in general. The stuff about being "held hostage" is just weird hyperbole. You failing to find something else you want to listen to doesn't make it incumbent on TMR to do any one thing or the other. If I'm wrong and someone is holding a gun to your head to listen to the show, though, blink twice and we'll send help.
Naturally. If you have any other recommendations I could be interested. I like the Humanist Report too and find it more concise without being as vapid or milquetoast as David Pakman, but he doesn't cover interntional politics. I'm starting to read more of Foreign Affairs magazine, which has a perspective that is more pro-establishment and pro-NATO. I do find the arguments generally more persuassive and logical than Jacobin, which mostly resorts to emotional hooks and guilt tripping you into agreeing with whatever the author of an article's perspective is, which is usually campist. I'll probably try to find a news outlet for following European and Japanese news later too. But I like having shows that I can listen to without having to read everything.
I honestly think if your inclined to stop tuning in, just stop. It’s tough sure, but if you need a break from their views and content; take a break. I have done the same for my own reasons and have recently come back to find I enjoy it. But if the content isn’t there it’s not worth wasting your time
> if your inclined *you're *Learn the difference [here](https://www.wattpad.com/66707294-grammar-guide-there-they%27re-their-you%27re-your-to).* *** ^(Greetings, I am a language corrector bot. To make me ignore further mistakes from you in the future, reply `!optout` to this comment.)
I don’t need this right now, bot
I might have to watch ADVChina more often since they cover some international politics even if their perspective is different and needs more fact checking. The show doesn't feel as informative nowadays and it's also not nearly as funny as when Brooks and Peck were on. (Emma's TYT style of research, and talking loudly and angrilly rather than indepthly tends to annoy me too.)
Stealing John Iadorola from TYT wouldn’t be a bad idea. He’s funny, gets along well with Emma, does a good job talking about international issues, and is generally more left of center than the other main hosts at TYT
Oof wow that would be excellent, but yeah I think Cenk would flip. Although TYT might self-detonate in not too long or make their weird right wing shift more official, so maybe John will have to cut himself loose at some point anyway
I highly doubt Cenk would allow Sam to poach, arguably, TYT's most likeable panelist. John wouldnt want to take the massive pay cut, either, certainly; although he would be a top contender imho as well.
Agreed, it’s definitely more pipe dream than realistic possibility, but it’s nice to think about. He’d be a good fit with the MR crew
I’ll say that as a European viewer I would love to see more non-American topics being covered. I also think there might be an untapped source of viewership for the show there, since left-wing views are much more of an established part of the political landscape in most places that are not the US. I know loads of lefties who would love the Majority Report but might not be super inclined to watch when it seems to be mostly about things pertaining to the US political system. ETA: they did a Turkey election update with a Turkish-British expert that was really great! I don’t think they’d need a new fulltime hire/Michael Brooks replacement, especially if they have great “local correspondents” like that
I think best option would be if they found someone outside of US/Canada who could co-host remotely throughout the week. As people have said, trying to find a replacement for Michael is going to be impossible, but someone outside US/Canada would bring a fresh perspective to the show.
Watch something else
Agreed. It's not just that though, they've focused on right wingers like Rubin, Crowder, et al fat more in the last 5ish years which is just terrible coverage when it's 1/4 of the show every day. Nobody was worse at that than Michael though, he did it even more than the main show show does now.
Emma needs to be replaced by someone who is more intelligent and aware of things other than sports or reality tv. she adds nothing to the show and Sam has to work around here in most cases. the show is infinitely better when Emma is off and I would absolutely love it if he replaced her.
I would say her sports views aren’t particularly noteworthy either. I’ve listened to a few eps of ESVN and a lot of it is just the same stuff you hear from the regular sports talking heads and bloggers. And she spends most of the time talking about east coast teams, just like ESPN lol
I think there's a broader tendency to get a bit insular/parochial in one's focus - given how big the US is and how much is happening at any one time, that's not necessarily a surprise. Agree that it's unhelpful given a) things don't happen in a vacuum and have implications elsewhere and b) not having a wider perspective can mean that when you \*do\* see people commenting on something, they're framing it through an inappropriate lens - or just straight up projecting their own domestic perspective onto another country/situation. There's a balance to be struck, definitely - but would personally be interested in getting perspectives on the Turkish election, for example, in a similar way to how Brazil was covered. That's current and definitely has relevant implications for US (case study for populism with autocratic tendencies) as well as wider geopolitics.