Most days, I receive at least one email suggesting I should join Fox News.

It’s rarely phrased kindly.

This reaction typically arises when I critique President Joe Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, or other Democrats—something I do frequently. The underlying assumption seems to be that if I express any dissent regarding the current administration, I must be a die-hard MAGA supporter, despite not having commented on former President Donald Trump. The prevailing view in this criticism is that you must align with one camp or the other.

But what if you’re in neither camp?

This dynamic is something that Kat Timpf, comedian and New York Times bestselling author, has contemplated deeply. Timpf, who co-hosts the popular late-night show “Gutfeld!” at Fox News, identifies as a small-“l” libertarian and independent voter, often facing backlash from audiences expecting a more conventional conservative viewpoint from someone associated with Fox. Nonetheless, her consistent views have garnered her respect and a dedicated following.

I recently spoke with Timpf about her upcoming book, “I Used To Like You Until  (How Binary Thinking Divides Us),” which is set to release on Tuesday. I have known Timpf for a long time; I was her journalism instructor at Hillsdale College, my own alma mater, quite a while ago. It’s been exciting to witness her journey.

Our conversation has been edited for brevity and clarity.

Less than a year ago, I interviewed you about your first book, ‘You Can’t Joke About That.’ Now, you have a second one. Do you consider yourself a workaholic?

Absolutely, I am definitely a workaholic. The inspiration for this book largely stemmed from my tour last year, where I met so many different people in various places and realized how much more we actually share in common than the mainstream narrative suggests.

I felt motivated to explore this topic and confirmed my suspicions. Some have asked, “Why release this book during such a tense election period?”

But it’s not in spite of that tension; it’s precisely because of it. We must not let politics prevent us from recognizing each other’s humanity.

In your book, you discuss binary thinking and its role in our current political divide. For example, you note that if someone critiques Trump, they are labeled a far-leftist, and if they criticize Biden or Harris, they’re deemed a MAGA supporter. How can we move past these binary stereotypes?

We would benefit from more independent thought. However, as you and I point out in the book, we’ve reached a stage where people not only don’t think independently but struggle to recognize independent thinking altogether. If you poke fun at Biden or Kamala, people assume you support MAGA; if you mock Trump, they assume you’re a communist, rather than simply holding specific views about certain policies or statements. Just because someone has one opinion doesn’t mean they possess an entire catalog of others.

Binary thinking is detrimental to critical thinking. Once you choose a side, the contemplation ceases because the thinking has been completed for you, which can be tempting. If all the hard work is done for you, it’s easy to follow along and accept whatever your side endorses without further consideration.

Plus, having a team backing you is comforting, but when you stop thinking, that’s when foolish actions occur.

You also discuss how the government often incites division among us through politics and strategic narratives. What’s the government’s gain from this?

If you think about it, it’s clear what the government stands to gain. Politics can seem tedious. Yet, when it’s framed as a fight between good and evil, as it has been from both sides, it becomes much more engaging.

During elections, if your vote isn’t merely a reflection of your beliefs and policies, but a stand against evil, it’s not only a stronger motivator for people to vote but also gives them a sense of being “warriors for goodness.”

When individuals gain power, it often drives them, serving as a useful means to seize more control. During emotionally charged moments, people often fear opposing views, perceiving them as malevolent. As a result, they may willingly sacrifice their personal freedoms.

I’ve gained considerable insight into your life through your book over the years. You candidly share some deeply personal experiences including your mother’s passing, past relationships, and battles with depression. In a time when negativity abounds, what motivates you to be so open?

I truly believe that being open in the face of hostility can help navigate through these challenging times. In this book, I discuss difficult topics like my experience with an abusive relationship and mental health challenges I’ve never mentioned publicly before. It’s important to acknowledge that many others share similar struggles.

Everyone you interact with has encountered difficult moments in their lives. They may have made mistakes they regret, or they may have needed support at some point. I feel that showing my vulnerability can disarm others and foster connection.

If I want others to view me as human, I must first reveal my humanity. It’s essential to recognize that we can never fully know what someone else is experiencing.

In both the opening and final sections of your book, you include a quote from John Updike suggesting that hate can act as a sanctuary. Could you elaborate on how this idea relates to your work?

Research indicates that when individuals express outrage over an issue, they might feel better if they direct that anger toward someone else. The downside, of course, is that this approach does nothing to address the actual problem. But I understand why it can be comforting, right?

For instance, if you identify as a Democrat and label Republicans as the enemy, you might feel justified simply because you’re part of the Democratic team. Both political sides engage in this behavior, not just Democrats. This mentality can create a false sense of security, making one feel virtuous merely by belonging to a specific group.

However, voting for one party over another does not inherently make someone a good person.

This perspective limits our opportunity to cultivate meaningful connections and collaborate on finding solutions to issues affecting us all.

In your book, you express several concerns regarding motherhood. Now that you’ve publicly revealed your pregnancy, how do you feel about this transformative experience?

I am genuinely thrilled about my pregnancy. While I still experience moments of fear, it’s fascinating to observe how my body adapts, and I realize I’ve been so fatigued that I haven’t experienced as much anxiety as I anticipated. I adore my husband, and I know my life is about to change dramatically, making it impossible to foresee every feeling I’ll encounter.

So I haven’t focused much on trying to predict my future feelings.

Ingrid Jacques is a columnist at YSL News. You can reach her   on X, formerly Twitter: @Ingrid_Jacques.