This show is meant to be in the same vein of The Daily Show but is lacking on a few fronts. The easy review is that the show really isn't funny. This would be an overall facile assessment of the show as a whole.
First of all, the show is set up with two hosts. This creates the need for each host to tee up jokes and play off of the other. They didn't really have the chemistry in order to do this the way The SNL cast does on those fleeting moments when they actually end up making a hit sketch. Instead the tee offs are rigid and scripted and it shows in the joke delivery. This interplay could have been developed, but with only several hours of screen time that type of rapport has not developed. Unfortunately in that type of show business, you need to hit the ground running. Especially on Fox, where shows are often given only a half season to show their strengths.
Next is the writing. They must have known that the show want going draw out the laughs from a studio audience and decided to laugh track it instead. There are jokes told that just really aren't funny, but do succeed in being ironic. There are other jokes, that with proper delivery would have provoked an audible laugh from an audience. But in the eight or nine episodes that I watched, I actually laughed perhaps four times. Some of the jokes take too much internal context that by the time you work out why it was a joke, the punch of it has been reduced. Most of the rest are just very simple jokes based on political tropes, yet less masterfully done than John Stewart (and some of this is due to the back and forth dynamic breaking up the tempo of delivery).
Then, just in case you aren't certain that it is a legitimate spoof of another news spoof show (in case you thought it was a knockoff SNL news sketch) they bring in Dennis Miller for his special brand of pointing out something inane and tying it in to a little known, vaguely related (if that) reference and pretending to be high-brow about it. Cobbling these different styles together breaks up any tempo that may have been built and creates an incongruous comedic situation; those who would find the standard part of the show funny probably fail to 'get' the jokes from Miller and those who appreciate Miller's humor likely consider the rest of the show merely grasping for low hanging fruit.
TLDR: the show suffered from the market forces of not being appealing to any demographic by being a comedy show devoid of humor. It was a true testament to the Libertarian experiment.
First of all, the show is set up with two hosts. This creates the need for each host to tee up jokes and play off of the other. They didn't really have the chemistry in order to do this the way The SNL cast does on those fleeting moments when they actually end up making a hit sketch. Instead the tee offs are rigid and scripted and it shows in the joke delivery. This interplay could have been developed, but with only several hours of screen time that type of rapport has not developed. Unfortunately in that type of show business, you need to hit the ground running. Especially on Fox, where shows are often given only a half season to show their strengths.
Next is the writing. They must have known that the show want going draw out the laughs from a studio audience and decided to laugh track it instead. There are jokes told that just really aren't funny, but do succeed in being ironic. There are other jokes, that with proper delivery would have provoked an audible laugh from an audience. But in the eight or nine episodes that I watched, I actually laughed perhaps four times. Some of the jokes take too much internal context that by the time you work out why it was a joke, the punch of it has been reduced. Most of the rest are just very simple jokes based on political tropes, yet less masterfully done than John Stewart (and some of this is due to the back and forth dynamic breaking up the tempo of delivery).
Then, just in case you aren't certain that it is a legitimate spoof of another news spoof show (in case you thought it was a knockoff SNL news sketch) they bring in Dennis Miller for his special brand of pointing out something inane and tying it in to a little known, vaguely related (if that) reference and pretending to be high-brow about it. Cobbling these different styles together breaks up any tempo that may have been built and creates an incongruous comedic situation; those who would find the standard part of the show funny probably fail to 'get' the jokes from Miller and those who appreciate Miller's humor likely consider the rest of the show merely grasping for low hanging fruit.
TLDR: the show suffered from the market forces of not being appealing to any demographic by being a comedy show devoid of humor. It was a true testament to the Libertarian experiment.