Patrick Buchanan on MSNBC: Hillary Will Campaign Hard for Obama, But Not Shed Tears If He Loses

Patrick Buchanan on MSNBC just said that although he expects Hillary to campaign hard for Obama, she won't shed any tears if he loses. He recalled that Nixon campaigned "even harder than Goldwater" for Goldwater in 1964, but Nixon was not at all upset that Goldwater lost, because that loss opened up 1968 for Nixon. Buchanan thinks the same applies to now and 2012 for Hillary Clinton, and also offered that she's therefore not likely go for the jugular with McCain this year.

Keith Olbermann a few minutes later responded that Hillary cares too much about the issues to do anything other than all-out campaign for Obama.

Let's sketch out the various slightly but significantly different scenarios that could play out here:

1. Hillary campaigns hard for Obama, but does not go all-out, because she would not be unhappy if he loses.

2. Hillary campaigns all-out for Obama, but would not be unhappy if he loses.

3. Hillary campaigns all-out for Obama, and would be unhappy if he loses, because she cares so deeply about the issues he and she believe in.

Which strikes you as closest to the truth? The question is somewhat cynical, ultimately unanswerable (for who can know anyone's true motives), but nonetheless interesting...

See also: Hillary Speaks Powerfully at Democratic Convention, In a Scene for the Ages

Infinite Regress Democratic Convention Coverage from Day One: Olbermann to Scarborough on MSNBC: "Jesus, Joe, Get a Shovel!" ... Ted Kennedy at 2008 Democratic Convention: JFK Would Be Smiling ... Michelle Obama's Speech: Bringing Home America

MSNBC Unfurls Excellent New Lineup - But Why are They Keeping Their Lame "Doc-Block"?

MSNBC announced the following changes in its schedule, to take effect this coming Monday, March 17 -

.David Gregory, NBC News' Chief White House Correspondent, will anchor Race for the White House, a new daily show airing from 6-7pm
.NBC News' Andrea Mitchell will anchor MSNBC each weekday afternoon from 1-2pm
.Countdown with Keith Olbermann, on at 8pm, will now re-air a second time at 10pm, in addition to a third time at 2am.
.MSNBC's "doc block" will now air weeknights from 11pm-2am.
.Live with Dan Abrams will re-launch as Verdict with Dan Abrams, from 9-10pm.
.Tucker Carlson's show is out, but he will continue on MSNBC as Senior Campaign Correspondent.

These all look like excellent moves. With the strength of NBC regulars Brian Williams and Tim Russert, along with Tom Brokaw on election nights, MSNBC has the best election coverage in the business. David Gregory joining the weeknight lineup of Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, and Dan Abrams makes a lot of sense. And when you add to that the stature and savvy of political commentators like Patrick Buchanan and Joe Scarborough, MSNBC is unbeatable.

But there's one thing I've never understood about MSNBC, and still don't get in the new lineup: why is MSNBC alienating the audience for its political coverage with its "doc block"? I know that I have dialed away from MSNBC many times when I wanted to see politics, and MSNBC had yet another show about life behind some prison bars....

Moving the doc-block to 11pm is a step in the right direction. My suggestion: move it to three o'clock in the morning, or off the network altogether.

Especially in an election year, the "Doc Block" is not the way to go...

Kudos to Dan Abrams on MSNBC

In the midst of this heat-up of the Democratic primaries, and the extraordinary - and justified - attention it's getting in the media, I want to take a minute to compliment Dan Abrams for the fine coverage he just gave these developments in his 9pm in his "Live With Dan Abrams" show on MSNBC.

I've been enjoying this latest incarnation of Abrams' show for a while (my wife has been a real fan since even some of his earlier shows). I like mixture of facts, humor, sarcasm - not overweening, just right - that Abrams gives to the news and the media.

Tonight he outdid himself, with a three person panel (Lawrence O'Donnell, Rachel Maddow, Patrick Buchanan) joining Abrams like ringside judges in deciding five rounds of Hillary v. Obama in last night's debate.

It didn't hurt that I agreed with most of Abrams' calls (in particular, awarding the "good" Republican and "present at vote" rounds to Obama). I just found the whole set-up just right - funny and informative and even passionate where it needed to be.

I predict that if Abrams is able to keep this show going, it will someday make it to the top.

Or, maybe not - but, hey, that hasn't stopped me from being a devoted Journeyman fan.