I’m ok with taking political sides, but spending 45 minutes calling all republicans authoritarian seems to be a bit much for me.

Adam Davidson, New Yorker magazine. Read what he writes, listen when he speaks. Because you will learn. 5🌟

I have to ask if I Have to Ask is aware of the existence of a pool of potential guests who AREN’T successful white men. Dry as dust and just as appetizing - I tasted, considered, washed it down with a bit of good wine and left the rest on my plate, unfinished and bound for the podcast dustbin.

I love this .

This perspective, though often in depth, is thoroughly a white cis male perspective. If you’re looking for reasons we maintain the status quo, it’s a good show. If you’re looking for interesting insights that are inspired by PoC, women, non binary folks... not here. It feels like the white male intellectual discussion of our society. Very cerebral and contemplative, but never by those oppressed.

Chotiner is a cringe-inducing interviewer. He confuses intelligent dialogue with pointless querulousness in nearly every episode—see his recent boorish conversations with Laura Kipnis, David Frum, and Katie Roiphe. He thinks and talks with the clueless liberal arrogance that makes other-constituted liberals like me despair for the future of the left. Great guests, hopelessly immature host.

Your mileage with this podcast will depend on how much you can stand Isaac Chotiner. Since he constantly interrupts his interviewees and is very opinionated (the hardheaded type), I’ve really liked some interviews and hated others. It’s something to have as a backup interview with a certain person if no recent or decent one is available, but very far from my favorite interview shows.

Isaac is a great interviewer.

This podcast has quickly become a favorite of mine. I find Mr. Chotiner’s interview style very appealing- he’s personable while asking thoughtful, deep diving questions. I’ve gained a great deal of insight from listening to the variety of guests interviewed here and would recommend the podcast to anyone who enjoys a long form interview format.

I look forward to the release of this podcast every week. I enjoy Isaac’s interview style. He has a clear direction but he’s willing to “dance” with the subject when necessary. And the caliber of guests has been impressive. Keep up the good work! It’s appreciated.

Listened to the Mark Lilla interview. Interviewer couldn’t corral his college dorm room debate style long enough to conduct a thoughtful interview. He was constantly challenging Lila’s thesis in ways the betrayed extreme unwillingness to see the Dem. problem at a higher level of discussion. His near laser-like focus on Trump’s attitude and capabilities (lack thereof), as well as the extremely negative adjectives used in nearly ever sentence with DT’s name was distracting and betrays a lack of dispassion unbecoming of a serious interviewer. I’m not a trump fan, but give me a break. hammering home the obvious doesn’t add value to any discussion of the larger issues. Doubt I will listen to another. “sad” ;-)

Keep up the great work! I re-listened to the George Saunders episode today after learning that he was awarded the Man Booker Prize and loved it all over again. Thoughtful questions, interesting people and some great insight. Thanks! Just what I needed on my commute!

I appreciate Chotiner being willing to push back against his guests' claims, but he comes off as too self-absorbed and petulant. Instead of seeking clarity, he wants to dominate the conversation. In his talk with Lilla, he makes a lot of excellent challenges which add nuance to the conversation but his manner is so un-self-aware that he starts sounding hysterical and like an ostrich with his head in the sand. He's so unwilling to listen to or fully understand Lilla's claims, that he seems exactly like the mentality that Lilla is criticizing: being closed off and not even being willing to think about the American experience across groups. It's pretty off-putting. I think he can improve, but right now Chotiner seems much more like a rabbling pundit than an intellectual, and it's infuriating listening to his inability to disagree without being disagreeable.

Hat's off to you. Wonderful new (ish) podcast. Great great interviewer.

I disagree with Musicology man. I thought this was excellent, one of Chotiner's best. After hearing Lilla being interviewed by NPR and the New Yorker, I was predisposed to see his side of the argument: Democrats have caved into identity politics and, because of this, have lost their way. Yet Chotiner continued to press Lilla on the data for this -- where are the Dems caving in? Not Obama, not Schumer or Pelosi, all of whom use inclusive rhetoric. Meanwhile Chotiner made the point that, on the right, identity politics has become boilerplate rhetoric at the state and national level. While Lilla used anecdotes from college campuses to make his point about an out of touch liberal elite, Chotiner stuck to the data. There is better evidence that the shift has been an embrace of ethnic nationalism on the right rather than identity politics on the left. I was stunned when Lilla refused to acknowledge white racial anxiety as a primary component of the shift from Blue states to Red. Even 50 years ago Lyndon Johnson -- a master of legislatative assessment-- predicted the turning of the south after Civil Rights legislation. As a history prof myself, I think that Chotiner got the better of Lilla on this issue. He was incisive, insistant, and exceptionally polite. Well done. Michael Robinson, U Hartford.

Maybe allow your guest to speak and give clear answers instead of interrupting with new questions. If I wanted to hear someone speak over someone else I'd watch a press conference with Trump.

I just listened to Chotiner's interview with Mark Lilla. While Your Host closed the interview by thanking his guest for debating him, it wa hardly a debate. Rather, Chotiner consistently missed Lilla's larger argument as well as a number of subsidiary points his guest was attempting to make, especially regarding identity politics. If you want to hear how such a discussion can be fruitful, listen Yascha Mounk's interview with Frances Fukuyama on the podcast The Good Fight. Like Chotiner, Mounk's outlook was shapes in contexts in which concerns with identiry and identity politics were of paramount importance. Unlike Chotiner, however, Mounk is open to new ways of thinking about the.roles identity should play in our politics.

I truly enjoy Chotiner's interviewing style. The conversations are insightful and entertaining. I thought the Ben Rhodes & Lydia Polgreen episodes were especially strong.

Enjoyed the Chait episode and his great insights on how populism manifests differently between the parties

His conversation with Andrew Sullivan was just sublime.

Off to a good start and I loved the interview with Chris Hayes

Learned the difference between oppression and exploitation in our times. Excellent episode with Chris Hayes!

Great job Isaac -- and congrats to Julia and others at Slate for giving you a larger platform.

I'm a huge fan of Isaac's Slate interviews and really looking forward to this podcast. He's funny and sharp and asks thoughtful and probing questions when most in the media are looking to either fawn or score points. Schumer interview was great and I look forward to the next episode.

Hoping he will stick to the shorter format interview. That's for my selfish reasons of my time constraints.

Enjoyed the first episode. Looking forward to more!

Great start with the interview of Chuck Schumer. Glad to have this podcast in my regular rotation.

For anyone who has followed Chotiner's interviews, no surprises that this is a fantastic podcast.

Enjoy today's podcast thank you and please keep up the good work!

Really impressed with the Schumer interview in the first episode. I like that it's shorter than the Marc Maron type interview shows (which I still like) and punchier than some of the friendly chat shows.