History on the Run is much less a history podcast than an audio blog in which the hosts, mostly a guy named Daniel Froehling expresses his views. Even though his historic sense plays an important role and there are a handful of episodes labeled 'History Lesson', the opinions and observations are the most important part.
What makes me downplay the history quality of the show is also the large amount of freedom the host allows himself to overly generalize or be quite inexact about his history. To have Napoleonic France make war on 'Germany' is not completely wrong, but inaccurate and basically anachronistic. To talk about the Dutch Tulip craze in the 17th century and not come up with exact figures, while they are readily available, is also not wrong, but certainly moves the focus from the history to the point that is being made. Another thing that struck me is that in one show Daniel proclaims to be of Belgian descent and in another of French descent.
So, the real value of following this podcast is if you find connection with the positions that are taken or if you find entertainment in the broad sweeps with which historic and current affairs are painted.