Not sure how any of them can seriously consider themselves serious political journalists before and after this event given the election results versus their forecast. I’m sure that they will try and hide behind some probability jibberjab, but this team did horribly and probably not worth listening to for important analysis.

Weighing in on the fake culture wars (no two people define ‘woke’ the same) should be beneath you. The GOP Senate undemocratically stole a SCOTUS pick from Obama. A man who lost the popular vote placed three corrupt Justices on the Court. “The Left” is reeling from the consequences of these anti-democratic actions. Rightwing response: woke.

I agree with a previous review. We all made an effort to pronounce John’s name correctly. It seems strange that he can’t be bothered do the same for one of the people running for president.

Oh, sure it makes any needed recounts “simpler…” Adam just conveniently omits mention that each state has different voting rules which allows one party dominated states — usually red — to mess about with voting rules, ballots (remember hanging chads?) & generally put a finger on the scale for their favored party before, during & after balloting. Maybe hire smarter millennials? He’s just as bad as Idriss C. Miss Fasman.

I value you tremendously - I don’t have to choke on the insanity of American news. BUT, John, you simply must pronounce KAMala Harris correctly. It must be deliberate, which makes me wonder what on earth is going on. Thank you.

I’m not going to be able to keep listening to this through election season if John can’t figure out how to pronounce Kamala. A US journalist would, and should, be reprimanded if they couldn’t manage to pronounce Kier the same way twice in a row.

Wonderful podcast, a lot of great guest interviews. My only dislike is charlotte Howard’s obvious political bias. I usually agree with her, but if I wanted overtly biased analysis, I’d just go to New York Times.

Why are all Economist’s podcasts so bad when the magazine is so good? Clearly being a great writer does not translate to radio. Please hire some real presenters/producers/editors that know how to communicate a story because it’s so bad right now. To be clear, it’s not just this podcast, it’s every Economist podcast without exception.

I can’t believe Check and Balance is part of The Economist’s otherwise good offerings. The answer is these lies are just too unbelievable for anyone to believe. The economy is a mess. If you’re not a homeowner or you are a retired person with a pension or a taxpayer - the economy is the worst. Access to rental or homeownership is almost out of reach for young workers. This economy is killing our future, Biden Inflation Reduction Act spending is still causing inflation and long term deficit impacts. Please tell the truth, we deserve the truth, we can handle the truth, we need a change.

The blanket conclusion that no one likes either candidate is in accurate and quite annoying. I’ll be glad to see you all with egg on your faces when your predictions turn out to be widely wrong come November.

I have been an Economist subscriber for years and still am, but my inability to listen to podcasts through Apple Podcasts is more than frustrating. The Economist and Apple need to fix this absurd issue. The only way I can listen to the podcasts now is through the Economist app, and that is hardly optimal. The entire queue plays automatically, there is no brief description of the individual episodes, the reverse and forward don’t work properly. Please fix this issue.

Love the discussions by and among the hosts superimposed with the interviews!

I have an economist subscription but can not get through new pay wall as my phone does not have latest operating system! I am not spending $1,000 on new iPhone to hear C& B!!! Still listening via podcast section of my economist app on phone but not convenient.

No question these folks are five stars. But seems there’s an issue with the new Apple subscription linking, resulting in my usual Friday afternoon gratitude at hearing their thoughs being replaced with a bit of a sad silence. Can some technologically-adept person look into the issue?

I look forward to the occasional free episode, but I will not be buying a subscription. I want to support ethical journalism, but I also want to support my family. I’ve been listening for over 3 years, and I love the Podcast. I could not recommend it more to those two read these reviews and might make a buying decision off of it, but I fear I have to knock one star off the rating for losing my weekly friday afternoon pod. Just as a statement, I would support increasing ads if it meant keeping the pod unlocked, but I understand often these decisions are not made by people who might understand the externalities associated with moving to or from a subscription base.

Doesn’t make the slightest effort to present anything but extreme liberal views, ignores anything that could be a negative for Democrats

The subscription is a no-brainer even if only for this pod, let alone for all the high quality Economist shows. We’re in a thick soup of hot takes and derivative content - we need objective curation helping us see through to what matters, and we need context, both historical and global. This has both when it comes to U.S. policy and politics. Charlotte is fantastic.

It’s been good knowing you and a joy to listen to such excellent podcasts each week. It’s sad to know that John & Charlotte & Idrees will be continuing their discussions in muffled tones behind a wall from next month on. Maybe I would’ve taken out a subscription if it had been for less. In fairness it’s vital that good journalism be in reach of all, not just those who can afford it. Also ironic, by the way, that this new subscription plan be announced during a podcast concerning the ‘working class.’

I’m a bit bummed they’re going to put this show fully behind the paywall instead of simply offering the show with ads to the non paying public and allowing subscribers to listen to an ad-free version, like many podcasts have done. I enjoy the show, but I’m looking to cut back on my subscriptions, not add to them. It’s truly unfortunate that good journalism so often is locked behind paywalls when less-credible, less-informative podcasts are available for free. I understand needing funding to support quality journalism, I just don’t think this is the way to go about it.

Long-time listener who's enjoyed downloading the podcasts pretty regularly. I often disagree with the hosts, but it's sometimes interesting to hear their opinions. Had to unsubscribe this week bc it's moving to subscription only, and I certainly don't plan on paying money to overhear a conversation lol. Good luck with that, though.

But likely to lose a lot of listeners as the Economist starts their subscription plan. Even a couple dollars will be enough to lose folks to the many free shows available. Too bad because all people would benefit from listening to Idrees.

This whole episode was a deep fake!

i have raised a boy and s girl in a veey small town in the midwest. way less opportunities for boys in these towns if your boy is not into traditional american sports, hunting there is little to do for them or opportunities for boys in these areas for their creative sides for boys that are not patriarchal typical boys. boys are as sensitive as girls but the US has tried to stifle this in boys here esp in small poor towns and try to “beat” it out of them. the US has forgotten about boys in small poor lack of creative outlets in towns in the midwest.

Kicks dic— who would have thought that the worst island in the world would create the best, most level headed observations of American politics?

I’m a subscriber to The Economist in the USA, I spend my driving hours at night in South Texas listening to the digital edition of The Economist and I do like this podcast, as a migrant with basic education I learn something different everyday. I recently became a U.S. citizen and I proudly can say I’m not a low information voter.

PLEASE give Charlotte her own show! I want to hear everything she thinks about every thing!

I really enjoy the in depth discussions. Only drawback is the female reporter with a vocal fry. All reporters should be trained to eliminate their vocal fry if they speak that way. It’s torture to listen to.

This is one of my favorite podcasts. Y’all do a great job, and I say y’all and I’m not from Texas. Yes, Texas is growing and people are moving there. However, many interesting things are happening in other parts of the U.S. Here in Denver, we’re going to choose a new mayor soon. In 2018 we passed public financing of campaigns and some might argue that this system has failed us. One of the leading candidates for mayor has raised unprecedented amounts of money for his Dark Money group - and he of course denies knowing anything about it. One of the donations to a Dark Money organization (Independent Expenditure group) is $780,000 from Reid Hoffman, co-founder of LinkedIn. We’ve had a terribly corrupt and incompetent mayor here for nearly 12 years. Is this unique among American cities or not? Denver struggles with the same important questions other large, growing cities do: homelessness, affordable housing, public safety, transit and rising healthcare costs - especially for the self-employed. Featuring Denver in an episode would I know make it a great one.’ We’re still staunchly pro-union, as in the part of he country that won the civil war - unlike Texas, which still seems to be confused. A few of our main streets are named Lincoln, Grant and Sherman. I hope you’ll come visit - or visit Kansas City, Portland, Milwaukee, Omaha or Chicago.

When talking about the democratic bench, how could you forget Colorado Governor Jared polis? in a state with more unaffiliated voters than either Democrats or Republicans, he won reelection handily and swept the entire flight of democratic state officials to election. He did not handle lockdowns poorly. Colorado does have issues with crime , homelessness and affordable housing, but the economy here is thriving.

It’s just that good. Provides insights into American politics one would otherwise miss. The trio of John, Charlotte and Idrees (haven’t forgotten about dear Jon Fasman) is a winning combination of intelligence, wit, and that “je ne sais quoi” of podcasting. I look forward to it every Friday. I only hope that Idrees understands the compliment of The West Wing:)

Ever since Trump’s emergence, the Economist has gotten more biased. This podcast reminds me why I no longer subscribe to the publication.

Really enjoyed the EV road-trip podcast. Was wondering if you would ever consider including the environmental/sociological negative implications in your episodes. Cobalt in batteries is mined on the back of Congolese slave labor and is ravaging their ecology with toxins. Also, the carbon output it will take to build the grid required to support these supposed “carbon-neutral” vehicles. Parts are assembled in China which is a coal-powered country, etc. Also, the charging stations in the US which oftentimes are powered using non-renewable energies. Not as green as we think they are.

I am relatively new to listening to Checks and Balances and am so happy I found it. Love the focus on a specific topic each time, and they really do have a natural and informative discussion that dives deep. My only feedback is: cut the icebreaker/casual convo up top. Really just need to jump into the topic, not banter about what everyone has been doing the last few days. It just isn’t needed and doesn’t help make me feel at all more connected to the hosts (who are all great). There personality comes thru on the discussion and good connection among them. No need for the banter up top. Thanks guys!

I loved the Alaska two-part series by Charlotte Howard. It highlighted the climate crisis in a unique way and I liked the audio from Charlotte in the field in Northern Alaska.

While I subscribe and enjoy many Economist podcasts (and would, unsolicited, enthusiastically recommend The Intelligence and Drum Tower to anyone), Checks and Balance is the absolute highlight of my podcast week. The analysis is insightful; the topics are timely, interesting, and relevant; but the single aspect of the show that sets it apart from the other Economist podcasts is that it is also entertaining on a personal level. The banter between John, Jon, Charlotte, and Idrees is just delightful.

I look forward to listening to Checks and Balance each Friday morning. The politics leadership of The Economist continues to provide THE most thoughtful and (generally) balanced analysis of politics in the US. Several decades ago I became a subscriber to The Economist because of the trenchant and thoughtful analysis of US politics and business. The team delivering this podcast continues on that vein.

Charlotte, Jon and John are the perfect trio! Intelligent, insightful analysis makes their podcast standout!

The team is extremely well qualified in both the subject matter and the details of current conditions which allows them to share, and lightning and useful perspectives on the economic events of the day. You also get to listen to good friends, making intelligent comments and asking you spell questions – and off an answer and them! An absolutectrest!!

This is show has become what NYT Pitchbot makes fun of

Of the (too many) podcasts to which I subscribe, I look forward to this one more than all others. I love the reaching back in history to set the table for the week’s discussion, and enjoy the lighthearted interaction between the amazingly knowledgeable hosts and the incisive analysis of all contributors. Keep up the good work!

I look forward to this podcast each week for the thoughtful reporting on the political landscape in America. Thanks for the deep interviews and probing commentary. My only complaint is that there should be more questions in the quiz.

They have a very one-sided view on things. You'd think that with three hosts they'd have a diversity of views, but apparently not. Also, they keep using the anti-semitic phrase, "the big lie," which is very disturbing.

Good podcast, but Charlotte Howard uses it as a platform to push her own (dem) politics and generally bash republicans; an obvious bias that can be irritating. The others are more objective and I particularly enjoy Idris’ well-considered perspectives.

Always insightful, witty, and well crafted with historical analysis, this podcast consistently delivers. As much as I tune in for John’s delightful Britishisms, Charlotte keeps bringing me back. Her reporting is brilliant, questions sharp, and praise of others generous. I also rarely leave without cracking up from some quiz comment. I’ll feel more confident eating my Grape Nuts this morning, knowing Charlotte approves.

And, my Mom and I like Grapenuts too, so there’s theee of us….

As a centrist the Economist podcasts have become my go to.

Sad. Another left leaning, disconnected, elitist, dishonest and biased show. If there is any effort to be centrist or evenhanded it is very faint. This is like listening to a couple of professors in college who never actually ran a business or worked their way up in corporate America.What is always amazing to me is that they lack the objectivity to recognize their own bias in the most basic statements. Book smart but pure stupidity.

The interviews are illuminating and the commentary adds insight, and I always learn something

That’s all

Over the past decade, the Economist has moved radically to the left and away from their 100+ year history of traditional ‘liberalism’ at the newspaper. The bias is particularly evident in Checks & Balances. The most recent example: They recently handed over the show for a three-part series by Tamara Gikes Borr, who said, “Political messengers can create negative campaigns by associating one thing with something bad so eventually people come to associate the two things.,” while in literally the same breath linking parental opposition to Critical Race Theory in schools with support for QAnon. The irony was not lost on me. The sad part is, there ARE often good arguments to be made for the left’s position on a variety of issues. Unfortunately, today’s Economist journalists operate in an echo chamber of liberal values and assumptions, without a single ‘traditional liberal’ or conservative on the regular panel, so what you get instead is the poor facsimile of journalism and analysis.