90% of his show is repeating what has been said in his previous 900 shows including the famous 688 show that was his highest rated (I guessed at the numbers). He just says it in a different way every day. I listen because a lot of Spygate is confusing and it helps to hear it in an attempt to better understand all the layers. But insight? Not so much.
When he talks about anything other than Spygate, it really isn't all that interesting. His thinking is not particularly unique, interesting or fresh.
I suppose it isn't fair to compare him to Rush, but Rush is the gold standard. Rush is always thoughtful, interesting and engaging and Rush normally does not scream at you the way Dan does. Dan has that hyped up voice who doesn't seem to realize a microphone has an amazing ability in 2018 to transport his voice without talking at an exaggerated level and at break neck speed. And then, there's Joe, which I will spare you my thoughts.
I think Dan is great for this period of time and I have told many they should listen to him to become more informed about SpyGate. I appreciate his earnest approach (yes, he is serious), his honesty that nothing is going to happen to these people, but as time marches on and people lose interest in Spygate, I'm not certain Dan stays relevant as a commentator. I just checked and I don't think he is syndicated, but is a podcast only show.
I don’t disagree that he has a limited repertoire of subjects, but I place the number at four: Spygate, Economics, Politics, and Law Enforcement.
The fact that he spends (IMO) about 70% of his show on Spygate is not a bad thing as you stated, simply because Spygate should be the most important thing at all levels of politics right now.
It is the most profound abuse of power against the citizenry in the history of this country (that we know of)