I always look forward to these conversations! Keep ‘em coming. Thanks!

Ian Bremmer, really? Down in the rankings unfortunately.

Very one sided, looks at the world from a very narrow elitist perspective. It got worse with the years

I am a liberal Democrat. I've never voted Republican in my life and never will. Still, I find this host and his guest one-sided, shallow, and dishonest. After listening to many shows, the last one being “Assessing Trumps Moves,.” I was disgusted at their unwillingness to thoughtfully analyze Trump's foreign policy. Instead, they nearly gloated as they cheerfully discussed how China, Europe, and the so-called global south would overshadow the U.S. Trump is a troglodyte, to be sure. He's crass, in many ways ignorant, and a mean-spirited bully. With that said, he's not the first American president with this profile. His policies should be discussed with intellectual rigor and fairness. All sides of the issue should be examined, and listeners should be allowed to form opinions. This podcast is no better than typical cable news commentators. The host frequently belittles America subtly and disrespects his listeners by not allowing an honest discussion of the issues. He ended this episode by saying, “The panel discussion was 3D chess and therapy simultaneously. What a laughable self-congratulation! Discuss topics in a balanced fashion. To the host: Allow for complexity, nuance, and detail, even if you disagree. However, I don't think that this host has that ability. This was my last episode. I'm out.

Trump said he would be a dictator on the BORDER day one only, in that he would CLOSE the border on day one. You are twisting words like the general media is so fond of doing. It’s a shame as it hurts your credibility.

Care to have any guests or points of view that actually challenge the leftwing opinions that overwhelmingly get center stage on the show? Making the world safe for your next cocktail party, I suppose.

I find a lot of the episodes of FP Live I listen to are just milk-toast (plain) and discussion with a slight focus on foreign policy aspects. There is no rigorous discussion of American (or any other nation’s) diplomacy, international dynamics, or geopolitical game theory. The interviewer’s questions are always mundane (what’s your background, what do you think about this, blah blah) and uninspired. There have been times an interviewee has had a pretty sharp or unorthodox opinion on a topic and voices a controversial opinion and the interviewer just lets them go on without asking questions to force them to flush out their viewpoint. If you’re looking for something to put on in the background FP Live is fine, but it’s not worth deliberately listening to as there are a multitude of other podcasts that simply put in more effort.

If you want a regurgitation of Establishment/ Democrat Party foreign policy that has failed across the board, this podcast is for you. The interviewer is below average and rarely pushes back on the many silly things that many of the guests say. The interviewer is incapable of independent thought or analysis. I often wonder where do they find these intellectual lightweights and kooks who will always praise NATO, unconditionally support funding for Ukraine without a goal in mind, hate Trump and the Abraham Accords, kowtow to China etc.

Did FP exercise any editorial oversight over this episode? Chunks of the pod are essentially a whitewashing of one of the world’s most authoritarian regimes. Disappointing, to say the least, coming from a pod that usually hosts interesting, informed and diverse viewpoints.

I found Keyu to be a weak guest and wholly unconvincing as she continually confuses growth vs levels of economic activity (output gap). Her articulation of the impact of weak Chinese demographics lacked a basic understanding of fundamental macro economic frameworks. I was hoping for a robust debate and it really fell short as she was a weak opponent.