Word to the wise: I personally recall rumors swirling around in early November 2005 that Munich was something resembling a mess and that Spielberg and Friends were struggling to put it all together as both a coherent and enjoyable film in the editing room.
A lot of those rumors were based on... I have no idea today. But taking the issue of the latter point, Munich was never intended to be "enjoyable" the way an Indiana Jones adventure's supposed to be, or even a dark sci-fi film like Minority Report was designed to be. I also recall one of the first critical blurbs online saying, "There are no tears, no one cares, it's not Million Dollar Baby..." (the comparison came because Eastwood's boxing drama was the previous year's big "late entry" into the race as Spielberg's political thriller was) and I specifically recall several people in the industry poo-pooing it, saying, "It might not even get nominated for Best Picture."
To me Munich was (along with War of the Worlds) the film event of that year, along with pictures like Jim Jarmusch's Broken Flowers and others, but the point is, I wouldn't get too concerned about this.
Of course maybe there's actual truth to these rumors. Maybe The Post makes Amistad look subtle (I love that film in some areas but its understanding of politics is a mess).
A lot of average moviegoers these days aren't really interested in films where characters spend most of their time talking. Every day online I see people call Lincoln boring, for instance, and to some extent this is true of Bridge of Spies and even The BFG as well.
The Post was considered one of maybe the top-five non-produced screenplays out there a mere year or so ago, so unless it was butchered in rewrites or whatever, I find it difficult to believe it was just picked up because of its political content.