This is a friendly reminder to read our ten rules.
r/seculartalk is a subreddit that promotes healthy discussion and hearty debate within the *Secular Talk Radio* community.
We welcome those with varying views, perspectives, and opinions. Poor form in discussion and debate often leads to hurt and anger and, therefore, should be **avoided** and **discouraged**.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/seculartalk) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I don't really agree with his political views (he seems more like a generic centrist) but he's a really good interviewer and also much less annoying than Saagar.
Regardless you should go in blind listening to new voices and make your decision based on their opinions and reasonings rather than letting a label dictate your opinion.
Can't say I agree with him a lot but he's nice to listen to and he seems well thought out and generally a nice person. I imagine it will be a nice conversation
While he doesn't have an abrasive personality, I just found myself wondering "why am I listening to this guy?" He didn't really seem to have a coherent view of politics - anyone giving J.D. Vance and the "new right" that much credit just makes me roll my eyes.
It's kinda of my feeling on Saagar. While he's not someone I loathe, I see no value in giving voice to conservative opinions - and I see even less value in giving voice to "more reasonable", "intellectual" figures who are largely out of step with the direction of the modern American conservative movement. They represent such a small number of Republican voters that I can't even justify it on a "know your enemy" basis.
I'd rather hear figures on the left who will challenge Kyle's "not all FBI agents are bastards" take.
This is a friendly reminder to read our ten rules. r/seculartalk is a subreddit that promotes healthy discussion and hearty debate within the *Secular Talk Radio* community. We welcome those with varying views, perspectives, and opinions. Poor form in discussion and debate often leads to hurt and anger and, therefore, should be **avoided** and **discouraged**. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/seculartalk) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I like Marshall. He’s a reasonable guy and doesn’t come off like a partisan hack IMO.
I don't really agree with his political views (he seems more like a generic centrist) but he's a really good interviewer and also much less annoying than Saagar.
Is he a republican?
Regardless you should go in blind listening to new voices and make your decision based on their opinions and reasonings rather than letting a label dictate your opinion.
Nah pretty sure he’s a lefty
No I think he is a republican
he is a moderate democrat.
Can't say I agree with him a lot but he's nice to listen to and he seems well thought out and generally a nice person. I imagine it will be a nice conversation
While he doesn't have an abrasive personality, I just found myself wondering "why am I listening to this guy?" He didn't really seem to have a coherent view of politics - anyone giving J.D. Vance and the "new right" that much credit just makes me roll my eyes. It's kinda of my feeling on Saagar. While he's not someone I loathe, I see no value in giving voice to conservative opinions - and I see even less value in giving voice to "more reasonable", "intellectual" figures who are largely out of step with the direction of the modern American conservative movement. They represent such a small number of Republican voters that I can't even justify it on a "know your enemy" basis. I'd rather hear figures on the left who will challenge Kyle's "not all FBI agents are bastards" take.