Missing points on purpose or just chicken?

Eric and Dan are smart dudes who dive into deep discussions, and I'm almost fan. Sometimes, I stick around for their lively debates, but other times, I'm waiting for the inevitable trainwreck of a take. They make great points peppered w glaring blind spots. They seem to see themselves as thought leaders having robust, debates, but their thoughts aren’t diverse anywhere where it might matter.

They could benefit from more balanced discussions with different voices challenging their ideas. They say they appreciate opposing views, but it often feels like they're just confirming their own beliefs. Their intelligence sometimes comes off as political spin, and they seem hesitant to face tough challenges from outsiders.

Despite all this, I'll keep tuning in because I like them but also enjoy thinking about how freely they say some things they’ll be certain to regret. They are my podcast version of know-it-all little brothers. No need to fight with them when you know their day is coming.