This is a very important podcast with a wide spectrum of topics and Joshua is unbiased. Journalism at its best.

This has been a wonderful if at times difficult experience and a much needed one. I'm sorry to see you guys go, we need this!

I really enjoyed this podcasts.

I really appreciate the diversity of the topics, hosts, guests and especially the callers.

Like all the different voices and points of view. We need something to take the 'Talk of the Nation' spot. Don't go!

A real attempt to pop the media bubbles so many of us live in. Diverse views--desperately needed--now more than ever!

Well I'm 15 minutes into it and I can't go on. I guess I'm a little more conservative than this show. I really think it labeled wrong.

Guests reflect on or respond to callers and are unfailingly thoughtful, even if callers aren't.

i like the interplay between call-in guests and experts. nuanced, intelligent framework, excellent hosts on both sides of the spectrum, fearless examination of the hot issues. hope this program survives beyond the first hundred days.

Indivisible provides a fantastic platform that helps shed light on the broad spectrum of political philosophies across this country - in a respectful and meaningful way.

As I live on the west coast, I've experienced this great call-in show purely as a podcast. Excellent moderators and well-chosen guests. I look forward to it every day and miss it the 3 days of the week they don't broadcast. Particularly enjoy Charlie Sykes' and Kerri Miller's nights, focusing on norms and identity.

I've enjoyed some of the guests on this show such as Alberto Gonzales and Jeffery Rosen. It's nice to hear an argument sometimes. It's also kind of rare to hear different views on NPR.

Scroll through the reviews of this podcast and you'll see the most critical ones are those that say Trump supporters should not have a voice. It challenges the typical NPR listener to think outside of their bubble and consider other opinions. They whole point of the show is to look at ALL sides of the political spectrum without being condescending or dismissive.

Listened to a 5 or 6 episodes. The hosts and their guests have little to offer in terms of actual ideas on how to lessen the divide between parties. The hosts' political leanings come through loud and clear even though they seem to be trying to push down their leftward ideologies for the sake of journalism. This is just another vehicle to deride the current president and the conservatives that back him wrapped up in a "neutral" blanket that is so thin you can see right through it. It should be called something less misleading than "indivisible". Maybe more like "The liberal media trying to pretend to make nice with Americans who don't live in New York, San Francisco, Minnesota or Chicago".

This is a terrific idea and I wish they'd keep it beyond the first 100 days. No, I don't agree with all the hosts, callers or guests but I appreciate hearing their thoughts in a calm, rational manner.

I really enjoyed "The Divided States of America" leading up to the election. I was really pleased to see WNYC making "Indivisible" for the first 100 days of the Trump administration. I really hope that there will be a similar show after the first 100 days end. I gain insight from every show. I look forward to Charlie Sykes shows. He is one of the voices I listen to for views that differ from mine. My favorite shows were both hosted by Kerrie Miller: Week 1, 1/26/17 and Week 6, 3/2/17. I could listen to an entire series taking deep views of where our different views originate from and how to respectfully talk across the divide. I really want to know how we Divided States can stop talking past each other and let go of our false assumptions about each other. That seems to be a key part of figuring out how we can work together to solve the very real problems we face as a country. This podcast gives me hope.

I enjoy a host who can actually be impartial. I have listened to a couple of the podcasts where the host tries to pull a certain ideology out of the republican callers and shorten the democratic callers. It doesn't sound like indivisible to me... Beyond the occasional biased host who makes it sound more like republican talk radio, there is some good dialogue and an easy way to listen to the other side and what they believe.

Can I give negative stars? This is public radio's sad attempt to be inclusive, by pandering to the 'reasonable' right wing. For example, tonight's conversation was hosted by conservative commentator Charlie Sykes. He had one guest on, someone who opposes Trumpcare from a libertarian perspective. No balance! Additionally, Sykes chalenges center or center-left callers, yet never challenges callers o the right (I've noticed that this is true of all the hosts). Finally, after ridiculing a caller in favor of single-payer ("it would be nice, too, if there were unicorns...") he makes the tired old argument about the US having the "best health care system in the world (not what the stats say, and of little use to those who can't afford it) and how he doesn't want Washington bureaucrats dictating his health care. Jeez, insurance company pencil-pushers who worship the bottom line are much worse; that's real life! The problem isn't that these views are aired on public radio, the problem is that falsehoods and biases go unchallenged through a fair give-and-take that would include non-conservatives. If your a never-Trump Republican (I here there are still a few around, hiding out in a stalled elevator) or a Trump-voter who wants to blather on about how misunderstood you are, then this program is for you. If you want serious discussions of our nation's leadership crisis and serious policy analysis, then you'd best look elsewhere.

Like others have mentioned, the show has a different host each day of the week, which can lead to a disjointed feel. It's a smorgasbord, and you should really sample each day before passing on the whole show. I don't love all of the hosts, but I love Kerri Miller, and when she and her guests are on point they are really on point. To everyone who's a little pessimistic right now, start with Week 6: Can We Reunite America? for some really great radio.

This series is amazing. We are in such tricky political times, and this collective project helps put it in perspective. Sane, civil, honest engagement with what divides us, and how to bridge this space in order to move forward in time. HIGHLY recommend this podcast!

Fantastic podcast ! I like that all the host let the callers voice their views without passing judgement .

Excellent show, podcast taped live. I enjoy listening to the (sometimes odd) call-ins and appreciate candid commentaries. Keep it up!

I appreciate the chance to hear all the different viewpoints.

THANK YOU for doing this show I am struggling to find ways to relate to people who aren't in my "bubble" and this show informs me and gives me courage to have optimism for our country's future

Really enjoying Sykes shows.

I've listened to Charlie Sykes at least three times and some of the other hosts. Sykes has excellent guests, and he's insightful. The callers are the least interesting part of the podcast.

So rare to have a national call-in show with so many different voices and perspectives. Love this.

Finally a practical approach to the resistance.

I love how varied the perspectives are from night to night. There's a lot to think about here, and so far it's not too hard on the blood pressure, either.

This show is doing a wonderful job of presenting a diversity of opinion, and the hosts are very good at fairly handling the callers. This is a rare platform for political discussion that doesn't give me hives. It provokes thoughtfulness and debate without stressing me out. After the 14-week run, I hope this show informs the way public media gather audiences and reflect back to the communities they serve. I think it's tweaking the model in a much-needed way.

The host won't let the callers make their points. He just cuts them off and goes on blathering. I give credit for trying to be inclusive, but this seems like you are trying to encourage complacency. Don't tell us everything is fine and Trump is just another president.

Elevates ignorance so journalists can pat themselves on the back. Who is this for?

The whole point of this podcast is supposedly to hear the various points of views and feelings from the public. I feel that the callers are interrupted far too often by the host, who then goes on to babble on about whatever he desires. Very annoying. Give more air time to the callers since they're the ones we want to listen to on this podcast. The host should only be facilitating discussion instead of dominating it. Take a lesson from Tom Ashbrook; he does an excellent job at hosting caller discussion.

I have been searching for a forum that allows for open discussion on both sides of the aisle. I hope to gain a better understanding of the other side in a manner that is diplomatic and civil. Thank you for this great resource!

Zero stars...period. (To borrow a phrase) NPR needs to move away from this appeasement stuff. I listened to two episodes and they were both decidedly right wing. If the Corporation for Public Broadcasting looses its funding under Trump, it's because you try too hard to accommodate people who have the wrong outlook. If you stood up for something you would be surprised to see the public support you would get. Thumbs down on this attempt.

They've only done one week (4 full episodes), so we shall see, but if they keep the same hosts for each day of the week, following is what appears to be the case to me. Monday's episode is good and Tuesday's episode is AWESOME. Wednesday's episode is lame: old, white, male, Christian conservatives talking about economics at a time like this, when human and Constitutional rights are being ignored and stripped away, friendly allegiances are being trashed, and our leader is sucking up to murderous, kleptocratic, authoritarian dictators because they have him on tape molesting little girls. Thursday's episode is just gross with phony baloney attempts at psychobabble. It was chock full of false equivalencies, trying to pretend like folks on the left and folks on the right are equally to blame for anything going on here. "It takes two to tango" doesn't mean it's both people's fault when one person refuses to dance and wants to kick the other person out of the country and take away their healthcare and voting rights and free press just because the other person is brown, smart, female, Muslim, and/or young. In conclusion, I think the aim of this project, to bring the left and right together "again", is admirable, but I think they're going about it the wrong way. This is a long term problem that can probably only be solved by addressing the problem of abusive parenting in right wing families. You will only do further harm if you keep asking lefties accept blame for what the fascists do with the foolish hope that it will melt the fascists' hearts and make them start admitting when they're wrong. It's against their upbringing to be empathetic or humble and apologetic.

I'm half way through the first episode and it's hard to listen to people talk about voting for Trump because of their "research" into Hillary and oh by the way I never liked her and I have gay Mexican friends. It's a great idea to start a conversation but this isn't one. This is Americans, both sides, justifying why they voted against their stereotype plus a guy saying how horrible it is that we decide that people are racist& homophobic based on who they voted for. Hmmmm maybe that's because the was candidate they voted for sounds racist homophobic anti Semitic and misogynistic? I'll listen to the next episode(because I believe we need to talk) but if it's more of the same I won't listen again.

I strive to better understand the motivations driving people whose political views oppose mine. This podcast has (so far) been very beneficial for that, and will surely lead to more open and respectful conversations, which are so desperately needed. Thank you to the wonderful hosts and to everyone who calls in from all across the political spectrum. Much love to all of you!

Can't believe I just listened to 25 minutes of "I'm not x, I have x friends!"

I love the premise, I love the way people from all parts of the nation can contribute to an important dialogue, and I love that it's exposing me to voices I would've never heard before.

We're trying to launch a conversation that humbly says: maybe I don't know everything. Maybe I should listen. Even if you're wrong, we should talk.

I've only heard the first episode so far, but really enjoyed it. I've been trying to listen to the second episode, however I keep getting an alert that it is not available:(

Being able to give a voice to both sides with a diverse audience is the first step in trying to create a less divided and less polarized Society. Great job guys, keep up the good reporting.

Happy to hear a shoe that's being people from both parties together for debate. I like that the hosts are from across the nation. Excited to hear more!

Very timely need for honest discourse with regular Americans from every viewpoint. Only one episode in, but I think it's a keeper.

Thank you!