Who should replace Tim Russert and why?

Question

Who should replace Tim Russert and why?

Answer 1

Tough one.  Can he be replaced?

Answer 2

I think we've lost a very, very good man. Despite all the praise though, I think Russert was very good but not excellent.

That does not mean, however, that he is replaceable. It seems clear he is not.

Some of the names bandied about in recent days are truly frightening. Keith Olberman is a hopelessly smug ideologue, unfit and undeserving to sit in Tim's seat. Joe Scarborough while not smug is similarly ideologically unworthy. Andrea Mitchell and David Gregory are good reporters but not good political inquisitors, no matter how much they want to be. Chris Matthews is outstanding but his is a different game: breathless, rapid fire political combat, not the slow, calm, poking and prodding of Meet the Press. Gwen Ifel is composed and inquisitive, if at times, too gun shy. She is the best name I've heard bandied about.

The name I haven't heard yet mentioned too much but who should be named and has been a frequent guest on Meet the Press who few people would recognize (like Tim when he first started) is John Harwood. His appearances on Meet the Press were smart, considered and elevated. He has worked for the New York Times, the country's most liberal national newspaper and the Wall Street Journal, the country's most conservative one. He works for CNBC, within the network's orbit right now and has written a brillaint new book about the real power brokers in Washington that few outside would know about. He would bring an awareness and expertise about Beltway insider power that Tim lacked.

I do not believe that NBC has the guts to name him though.

Tim was already Washington Bureau Chief but still a relative unknown and not a face for television when he was named to host Meet the Press in 1991, in a much less fiercely competative media time. What the show needs in a host is that to showcase that the show is "a national treasure" that has to be humbly and respectfully carried on by its host as it has since 1947. The show is NOT about its host, the way Hardball is so closely associated with Chris Mattews, The O'Reilly Factor so closely identified with Bill O'Reilly and so on. Meet the Press is now synonomous with Tim but only by virtue of Tim's fine stewardship of it, not because it was about him. Tim knew and understood that with a deep conviction.

I think Tim realized that what most people these days don't: being objective is not something most media folks either choose or not choose to be; you have to work at it and I think Tim believed that and worked at it.

We all want objectivity and Tim wasn't perfectly objective--no one really is. But boy, no one came closer.

Answer 3

To you idiots who suggest Comedian Rush Limbaugh, Russert was tough, but fair, not stupid, idiotic and biased

Chris Matthews, seems bi-partisan enough, hard hitting, never backs down

Answer 4

There is no one who can replace Tim Russert.  He was one of a kind.

Answer 5

Rush Limbaugh, Sundays are already full of liberal "talking heads" NBC needs some balance!

Answer 6

Chris Matthews because he speaks his mind and pulls no punches

Answer 7

Russ Limbaugh could do an unbiased show and ask tough questions to liberals and conservatives alike.

Answer 8

Chris Matthews.

He's a familiar face with a similar approach.

..even though he slobbers sometimes.

Answer 9

Chris Mathews. He is just like Tim Russert. Chris Mathews had live coverage of every major democratic primary, and he will be able to take over Meet The Press.