this whole convention.

Jimmy Carter was president.

I don't "have to go" to CPSAN. I choose to go there.

I'd rather hear the speeches and see the videos that CNN is cutting away form than see commercials and listen to superficial observations from overpaid talking heads.

I don't have access to any of the cable stations. NPR & PBS did a great job of commercial free coverage.

...or self delete.

After his speech. Check the transcript. I'll never forgive her for that. Ever. Not ever.

But that doesn't mean she is supporting Drumpf....

I'll stick with Cspan.

But I agree CNN is the place to go.

Rude and offensive. Or said that he offended her. She needs to clarify that.

Even Gloria Borger is fair to us on CNN.

That criticism was annoying but no harm intended I'm sure. She's aware how regressive a Trump administration would be to gay rights among other things.

I will repeat to you what HRC once said "Humanism is feminism and feminism is humanism."

Do you think anyone can be an "uber humanist"?

To say Rachel Maddow supports Trump because she was critical of a single speech given by Bill Clinton at the DNC is damn ridiculous. Where is Sarah Silverman when we need her?

and hasn't watched show after show after show of Rachel hitting Trump harder than anyone on the network aside from Lawrence O'Donnell, then maybe, maybe an argument can be made that she was tougher than she needed to be on Bill. But to call Rachel a Trump supporter is indeed ridiculous.

and that's including Jeffery Lord.

to where rachel declared her support for don the con? Thanks in advance.

It's hard to forgive her for that. It was thinly veiled but still there. She called Bill Clinton rude, strange and offensive. She needs to retract that.

I at best see her as a Stein supporter now until she clarifies what she meant on Tuesday night.

and didn't see a thing that says she was supporting comrade donnie. Serve up the link or just go ahead and admit you were being hyperbolic and posting complete bullshit.

Rachel of all people until she said Bill Clinton was rude and offensive. Saying such a thing at this time of all times is unforgivable.

She's also buddy buddy with Bush stooge Nicole Wallace. Have you see the 'sismance' those 2 have going? And Nicole is no friend.

She said on Morning Joe July 6th that Comey's rantings tilted her back to Trump, Nicole did.

criticism of bill clinton equals she supports trump? c'mon.

I've noticed it before, actually. I think it's diminishing Rachel's perspective (I don't think she supports Trump, though).

don't want the talking heads disrupting what I'm trying to watch and hear.

I'd like to see a link or proof of Rachel supporting Drumpf.

I'll watch CNN when I want to see the odd news report....

Gavel to gavel coverage with no pundits or even TV hosts.

if I want to hear commentary and immediate reaction to events. Otherwise, I'm enjoying C-SPAN.

CNN has been good. They have 1 Con on who gets to tebut everything anyone says, but that's fine too.

MSNBC is finished.

He obviously REALLY detests what Trump is doing to the REPUGS and it has made him into a pretty damned decent pundit this go-around.

But other than that, it's been good.

I've watched the whole thing via the DNC website live feed and it's certainly a breath of fresh air.

I stopped watching "Cable Newz" in 2004, haven't gone back. Cut the cable tv cord entitrely a year or two ago, don't miss it a bit. While I may not be up to date on the latest antics of the ice road truckers, I have somehow survived.

Couldn't agree more about rejecting the "professionals" whose job it is to tell me what I should think. I wish I could cut the cord too, but my internet connection is a genuine tragedy of ruralness.

This thing moves faster.

RUN!

and their coverage that focuses on any anti-Clinton activity around the Convention while ignoring the ultra super majority of people who support her.

For that reason, I've chosen not to watch their Convention Coverage.

...in Congress, when Paul Ryan cut off the power in the chamber, CSPAN continued to broadcast using people's Face Book accounts and other media off their cell phones.

They are hardly "Republican."

None of the muckraking cutting away to disturbances and the "very serious people" talking them up, making much more of them than they were. Though, by not turning the cameras on the section most of them were in, occasionally making a bit less of their impact also.

I did cut to CNN and MSNBC inoccasionally to see what they were saying. I missed the promised final interview (oh, darn ) of some foolish girl who proudly exposed her many misunderstandings on national TV to see if she'd "changed her mind." Hope her friends convince her this too will pass. At least she cares.

also offer convention coverage without ANY commercials or prattling bobble-heads "telling" you about the convention instead of just letting you actually watch it.

and desparate to elevate trump.

I have even watched them when the convention was off-session for a lot of interesting features. For example, they interviewed Rickey Minor today! Very cool.

Enjoyed their tour of the Constitution Center, too.

And Axelrod usually provides cogent analysis as well.

Plus, from what I have seen, Anderson does talk over or spoil significant moments.

First of all, we can't stand Brian Williams. We used to like Rachel, but now, not so much. I do personally like Chris Mathews and Lawrence O'Donnell. But CNN's coverage of the conventions has been much better then MSNBC's.

want to avoid the mostly inane commentary of the "experts."

But I was interested to note that when I was watching the video (not in real time) of Bernie's speech on Monday, they identified him as "I-Vermont."