Victor Davis Hanson \/\/ National Review<\/p>\n
Trump creates hysteria, both rabid antipathies and fervent support.<\/span><\/p>\n G<\/span>eneral chaos surrounds President Trump. Few dispute that. All argue over the origins, causes, and nature of these wild reactions to our president.<\/p>\n The Left\u2019s Hatred<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n Take the Left\u2019s loathing of Trump that arises from three sources.<\/p>\n First, Trump supposedly has no shame. The traditional leftist use of invectives such as \u201cracist,\u201d \u201csexist,\u201d \u201chomophobe,\u201d and \u201cnativist\u201d appears to have had little effect on Trump \u2014 as it seems to have done on McCain (who in 2008 ruled out attacks on Obama\u2019s personal pastor, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright) and Romney (who passed on standing down debate moderator and rank partisan Candy Crowley).<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Trump seems to enjoy the tumult, on the strange principle that only fire can tamp down the bias and unprofessionalism of a mostly pampered and overrated media. Does he do so by diminishing the aura and grandeur of the presidency, at least as the office is traditionally defined? Maybe, but half the country is likely to think \u201cHow dare the media\u00a0<\/span>smear the president?\u201d rather than \u201cHow dare the president of these United States stoop\u00a0to reply in kind to petty CNN reporters?\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n Second, of course, Trump is politically dangerous to progressivism. In military terms, he is a strategic B-52 on a deep mission. Trump targets the enemy\u2019s homeland, even as his opponents\u2019 far-flung and attenuated expeditionary armies bog down abroad.<\/p>\n The Obama era gave us the conventional banality that \u201cdemography is destiny.\u201d A supposedly 67 percent so-called white population would inevitably shrink into electoral insignificance, gnashing its teeth in its \u201cwhite privilege\u201d irrelevance.<\/p>\n All who declared themselves nonwhite (to the extent that is still possible in a racially mixed, intermarried, often assimilated and integrated America) would grow in number. And they would purportedly vote in accordance with their perceived appearances and tribal affiliations. That calculus would inevitably mean that states such as Georgia and Arizona would soon follow the paradigm of California, Colorado, Nevada, and New Mexico: They\u2019d flip blue.<\/p>\n Democrats accordingly pushed open borders and identity politics to ensure such an electoral utopia. But Trump overflew them and start bombing Democratic strongholds to the rear in more important swing states: Florida, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.<\/p>\n By emphasizing class more than race, Trumpism itself was a potentially more dynamic idea than proportional representation on the basis of superficial appearance. When a Latino landscaper, poor white machinist, or inner-city African-American clerk considers voting for Trump (if as much for cultural or protest reasons as from empathy for his person or approval of his message), he subverts some of the basis of the present progressive party \u2014 a pyramid of enlightened elites at the top adjudicating what is necessary for a broad foundation at the bottom, made up of nonwhites and the supposedly dependent poor. It does not take much of a defection of minority and poor voters to weaken the progressive project, when the percentages of white and working-class voters alienated from it are so large.<\/p>\n Equally explosive is the syndrome in which middle-class moderates and independents are tired of being damned as privileged and biased, on the basis of their appearance \u2014 often by those who enjoy far more privilege and exhibit far more bias. For all the hype that the stereotypical Trump voter was uneducated and without a degree, Trump appealed as much to the college educated and professionals for what he at least was not, rather than for what he was.<\/p>\n Third, Trump earns leftist disdain for being the anti-Obama, much as conservatives feared Obama for being the anti-Reagan. In other words, just as a charismatic Obama sought to overturn the entire Reagan revolution of low taxes, deregulation, smaller government, and strong defense by the sheer force of his person, so too Trump really does threaten to undo Obama\u2019s foreign policy, and energy, tax, regulatory, and education agendas.<\/p>\n But whereas Obama rammed down an unpopular Obamacare and lost the House in the 2010 midterms, it may be that Trump rammed down a\u00a0popular<\/em>\u00a0tax cut that will not result in a 2010-like backlash. Under Obama, the Democratic party has become the progressive resistance. While heading hard left, it has left the center free to be reclaimed by opportunistic Republicans, as evidenced by substantial gains at the local, state, and congressional levels. Trump could make Obamism irrelevant \u2014 a historical footnote by the end of his first term. That would be especially ironic, given that Obama\u2019s \u201cpen and phone\u201d executive-order mode of governance proved so toxic for progressives in the tit-for-tat hands of Trump.<\/p>\n Trump Voters<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n Never Trumpers often feel that Trump\u2019s latest escapades are embarrassingly excused as sophisticated \u201cthree-dimensional chess\u201d by Trump supporters. I have rarely found many Trump voters who believed that. More often, they shrug, saying they wish Trump would curb his tweets, rallies, and ad hominem outbursts.<\/p>\n To the extent that they do not object enough to Trump\u2019s behavior, it is not because they believe he is a chess master of political strategy. Rather, they assume that, for strange reasons, no one can quite predict the effects of Trump\u2019s weirdness, in a stifling politically correct society. More than half the nation has lost confidence in progressivism, the administrative state, and the Republican hierarchy and establishment. In the past, experts erred in thinking that Trump had so debased the candidacy, or the office, of the presidency that he was sure to implode. In that climate, his supporters are not about to believe that anyone can accurately fathom the ultimate effect of his so-called unpresidential behavior.<\/p>\n Other Trump voters no doubt enjoy the ensuing blood sport. They feel that most of his targets have it coming and that the resulting chaos, within limits, is much-needed purging. Out of the daily conundrum, Trump nevertheless has managed so far to achieve greater prosperity at home and stability abroad than did Obama, while the reputation of a habitually prejudiced media is plummeting fast. Where critics see chaos, some voters are likely to see clarity and comeuppance.<\/p>\n What would lose Trump his strategically located, and thereby winning, 46 percent of the voting public?<\/p>\n First, Trump cannot abandon signature issues that separated him from his 16 primary rivals and helped him defeat Hillary Clinton in key swing states that Democrats had mostly taken for granted since 2008 and in many cases since 1992. For example, Trump cannot embrace amnesty and open borders masquerading as \u201ccomprehensive immigration reform,\u201d or optional overseas interventions, or major new restrictions on the Second Amendment, or new expansions of pro-abortion laws. If he became a so-called globalist open-borders centrist, Trump could still win 46 percent of the 2020 vote but lose the purple belt from Ohio to North Carolina and with it the Electoral College.<\/p>\n Second, if Trump keeps boomeranging his own side, at some point his invective could become suicidal. His supporters don\u2019t mind if he descends to spar even with Alec Baldwin or the NFL. They will eventually tire of him if he cruelly continues to dog Jeff Sessions or H. R. McMaster. If his own messengers are the enemy, then at some point he\u2019ll lose the resonance of his message as well.<\/p>\n Never Trump<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n Forget for a moment the ethical and moral dimensions of the Never Trump conservative argument, and concentrate on its practical effect. Why did the conservative establishment that loathed Trump \u2014 much of it influential as measured by print and television exposure and by state and federal political offices \u2014 have so few consequences in 2016?<\/p>\n About the same percentages of Republican voters chose Trump when the Republican elite was fragmented as went for McCain and Romney, when it was united. That raises unpleasant scenarios.<\/p>\n Were Never Trumpers simply fewer in number and far less influential than they had supposed? Or was the small number of voters swayed by their antipathy more than offset by the greater number of voters energized to oppose Never Trumpism? Did those Tea Party or Reagan Democrat conservatives who did not turn out for a much-praised Romney cost Romney the election, while their enthusiasm in 2016 ensured victory for the much-attacked Trump?<\/p>\n Did Trump\u2019s ascendance snap Never Trumpers into self-realization that they were not of the same ilk as even his reluctant supporters? Or did their frenzied loathing spark Trump\u2019s voters into seeing that his Republican haters were more interested in the style and class of conservativism than in its message and pragmatic ramifications for the American public?<\/p>\n There are other questions not fully addressed.<\/p>\n One: Is Trump\u2019s crudity really without precedent in the past? We know that prior presidents on occasion were as gross or grosser than Trump: JFK\u2019s callous seduction of teenage staffers in officio, LBJ\u2019s genitalia exposure, Clinton\u2019s Oval Office bathroom-sex antics, Obama\u2019s crude jokes about \u201ctea-baggers\u201d and the Special Olympics. Then there are the many scandals, from lying about Vietnam, to Watergate, to the recent weaponizing of the IRS, DOJ, and FBI.<\/p>\n So is the writ that even if Trump\u2019s buffooneries are no more crude than those of past presidents, they are uniquely daily events, rather than infrequent episodes? And is that frequency, rather than the degree of controversy, the reason that conservatives who once pushed Trump\u2019s agendas now condemn those policies as tainted \u2014 because of Trump\u2019s fingerprints on them? Were Clinton\u2019s agendas less of a danger than Trump\u2019s person, as if a hard progressive\u2019s Ivy League background and administrative-state comportment mattered more than the populist conservatism of a combed-over rabble-rouser?<\/p>\n Second is the matter of media emphases. We\u2019ve never had a president whose media coverage was 90 percent negative. In the past, it would have been unthinkable for a Walter Cronkite to report that LBJ had used the n-word in a private White House conversation or dictated to aides while defecating. The media from 2008 to the end of 2016 simply would have thought it racist to report in detail that Obama as a senator did a smiling photo-op in 2005 with anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan in the basement of the Capitol or that he had damned Israel in a long-suppressed speech in praise of pro-Palestinian advocate Rashid Khalidi.<\/p>\n It may be the case that Trump is deemed unpresidential and unfit because his bad behavior is more frequent and extreme than that of past presidents, and that this assessment is not a result of virulently anti-Trump media bias. (If an Obama scandalous tree fell loudly in a forest devoid of media, did it really make a sound \u2014 or fall at all?) But so far, the Never Trump movement has not made such an argument convincingly. Trump voters now still believe that the mostly positive message matters more than the flawed messenger.<\/p>\n Third, there are understandably legitimate differences in conservative attitudes toward Trump, the first U.S president without prior political or military experience and service. But should such acrimony extend to the Trump voter?<\/p>\n In attributing moral or ethical laxity to Trump voters, Never Trumpers sidestep the argument that in a Manichean world, not voting for Trump was a de facto vote for the alternative \u2014 a likely 16-year Obama-Clinton continuum. Is condoning Trump\u2019s antics by default the moral equivalent of its practical antithesis: ensuring a Supreme Court, economy, and foreign policy that would, in conservatives\u2019 views, radically injure millions of Americans for a generation?<\/p>\n If it were really unethical or foolhardy to vote for Trump, is it by extension far more unethical to\u00a0serve\u00a0<\/em>Trump? In other words, are H. R. McMaster, Jim Mattis, John Kelly, Betsy DeVos, Nikki Haley, and Mike Pompeo far more morally suspect for empowering such a president, in a fashion that outweighs their principled notions of serving the country?<\/p>\n Is it still sustainable to suggest that Trump is not a conservative but a dangerous liberal or demagogic wolf in conservative sheep\u2019s clothing? The doctrinaire conservative Heritage Foundation now claims that two-thirds of its proverbial 334 conservative agenda items have been already met by Trump \u2014 and at a pace far faster than that achieved even by former president Reagan.<\/p>\n Fourth, are there Never Trump formulas for presidential candidates and issues that can translate formidable conservative local, state, and congressional successes to the White House, in a way that dozens of past Republican primary and general presidential candidates seemed unable to?<\/p>\n Finally, is there any serious introspection as to\u00a0why<\/em>\u00a0so many misjudged Trump\u2019s trajectory? After Trump\u2019s supposedly impossible election, many doubled down and suggested that he would soon be impeached, or quit, or prove non-conservative or impotently conservative. And the critics continue in this vein today. What was continually missed, and why, and how is such acknowledgment critical in offering believable assessments to come? Finally, if 10 percent of the party might threaten to sit out or leave due to either Trump\u2019s message or his person, would that matter to the 90 percent, given that the party has both won and lost presidential elections with a 90 percent Republican majority but not without voters in Midwest swing states?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Victor Davis Hanson \/\/ National Review Trump creates hysteria, both rabid antipathies and fervent support. General chaos surrounds President Trump. Few dispute that. All argue over the origins, causes, and nature of these wild reactions to our president. The Left\u2019s Hatred Take the Left\u2019s loathing of Trump that arises from three sources. First, Trump supposedly […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_is_tweetstorm":false,"jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","enabled":false}}},"categories":[1166,1161,1],"tags":[],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p466Sb-2S3","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":10874,"url":"https:\/\/victorhanson.com\/wordpress\/its-worse-than-a-crime\/","url_meta":{"origin":11039,"position":0},"title":"It\u2019s Worse Than a Crime . . .","author":"victorhanson","date":"January 10, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"The Corner The one and only. by Victor Davis Hanson\/\/ National Review \u00a0 I agree with most commentators that Michael Wolff\u2019s sensational mythologies in Fire and Fury will be largely forgotten within three weeks \u2014 with one caveat (see below). \u00a0 Wolff confirmed what most already knew about the Left\u2019s\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Trump"","block_context":{"text":"Trump","link":"https:\/\/victorhanson.com\/wordpress\/ahref=\/index.php\/categories\/angry-reader\/categorylink\/a\/trump\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":11721,"url":"https:\/\/victorhanson.com\/wordpress\/when-cabin-boys-attack\/","url_meta":{"origin":11039,"position":1},"title":"When Cabin Boys Attack","author":"victorhanson","date":"March 17, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Julie Kelly \/\/ American Greatness Victor Davis Hanson is about as accomplished and\u00a0credentialed\u00a0a commentator you can find. He\u2019s an author, a military historian, a senior fellow at Stanford University\u2019s Hoover Institution, and a farmer in California. President George W. Bush awarded Hanson the National Humanities Award in 2007. By all\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "The Case for Trump"","block_context":{"text":"The Case for Trump","link":"https:\/\/victorhanson.com\/wordpress\/ahref=\/index.php\/categories\/angry-reader\/categorylink\/a\/the-case-for-trump\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":11196,"url":"https:\/\/victorhanson.com\/wordpress\/the-trump-rationale\/","url_meta":{"origin":11039,"position":2},"title":"The Trump Rationale","author":"victorhanson","date":"May 22, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Victor Davis\u00a0Hanson \/\/ National Review His voters knew what they were getting, and most support him still. Why exactly did nearly half the country vote for Donald Trump? Why also did the arguments of Never Trump Republicans and conservatives have marginal effect on voters? Despite vehement denunciations of the Trump\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Donald Trump"","block_context":{"text":"Donald Trump","link":"https:\/\/victorhanson.com\/wordpress\/ahref=\/index.php\/categories\/angry-reader\/categorylink\/a\/donald-trump\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":9599,"url":"https:\/\/victorhanson.com\/wordpress\/braver-new-world-for-now\/","url_meta":{"origin":11039,"position":3},"title":"Braver New World \u2014 for Now","author":"Megan Ring","date":"November 11, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"The Corner The one and only. By Victor Davis Hanson\/\/ National Review Given the status of the post-election state legislatures and executive offices, the Republican-controlled House and Senate, a Republican president, and a Supreme Court that will not go leftward for a generation, it is hard to see how conservatives\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Trump"","block_context":{"text":"Trump","link":"https:\/\/victorhanson.com\/wordpress\/ahref=\/index.php\/categories\/angry-reader\/categorylink\/a\/trump\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":12608,"url":"https:\/\/victorhanson.com\/wordpress\/trump-race-and-class\/","url_meta":{"origin":11039,"position":4},"title":"Trump, Race, and Class","author":"victorhanson","date":"September 10, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Victor Davis Hanson \/\/ National Review There\u00a0are some stunning indications that the supposedly satanic racist Donald Trump could be polling in some surveys around a 35-40 approval rate among Latinos and 20\u201330 percent among African Americans. Other polls are more equivocal but suggest an unexpected Trump surge among minority voters.\u2026","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":9491,"url":"https:\/\/victorhanson.com\/wordpress\/angry-reader-6\/","url_meta":{"origin":11039,"position":5},"title":"Angry Reader","author":"Megan Ring","date":"October 10, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Comment on: Is Trump Admiral Bull Halsey of Captain Queeg? October 4, 2016 So\u2014you tuned in hoping to see \"Bull\" Halsey? I suppose that was a reasonable expectation if the following propositions were true: \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 1. \"Bull\" Halsey was a draft dodger. \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 2. \"Bull\" Halsey was a cheat. \"Bull\"\u2026","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/victorhanson.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11039"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/victorhanson.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/victorhanson.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/victorhanson.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/victorhanson.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=11039"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/victorhanson.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11039\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":11040,"href":"https:\/\/victorhanson.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11039\/revisions\/11040"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/victorhanson.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=11039"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/victorhanson.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=11039"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/victorhanson.com\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=11039"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}