What about Mary Katharine Ham?
She didn’t irritate me as much as most of the other “conservative” pundits, and she wasn’t as much of a shill as S.E. Cupp... so she would be closer to Jeffery Lorde in that she didn’t come completely off as an RNC talking point parrot... but she didn’t overly impress me either.
Haven’t turned on CNN really since the election, and probably won’t until the next one... Gave up largely on broadcast news, because its garbage... the whole lot of it... FNB was actually my main go to for coverage... and I won’t turn that on again probably until the next election cycle either...
I do think that if you had maybe 4 or 5 of the pundits in a room, and they didn’t know the cameras were on, you might actually get some intelligent analysis out of them.. but most of them are just talking to hear themselves talk and don’t have the intellectual depth, or critical thinking skills needed to be anything but a parrot... and that’s both sides of the aisle.
I think if you put Axelrod, that older lady, forget her name that is always with him, Lord, That younger guy with the eyes too close together, and Maybe a Ham and they didn’t know the cameras were rolling, you actually might get a real discussion... Of the entire panel GENERALLY these are the ones that tend to posture the least... and I would even be willing to accept Brazil, who often does give up good info.
But the majority of the rest of them, are just parroters, aren’t critical thinkers, aren’t able to really offer anything useful to the discussion other than the talking points of the DNC or the RNC etc...
Van Jones is by far the most racist person on tv, his rant on election night was the most unabashed racist thing EVER said on a news network, and not one person, not one called him on it... he should have been not only called immediately for it by the rest of the folks there, but CNN should have summarily fired him... but since his diatribe was against whites, no one batted an eye or did anything....