If you thought this book was puff piece on Trump, you would be mistaken. Although Hanson does agree with some of Trumps accomplishments, he does not hold back on Trump. Equally, he does an amazing job analyzing Hillary Clinton and why she did not win. Hanson is not a shill for Trump.
Hanson is an intelligent man and if you have ever heard him speak, he is soft spoken and very smart. I tend to read books by authors and not so much pundits or politicians. This book covers the rise of Trump in the Presidential aspect. Obviously written before the Muller report was released (just last week), but does talk about the process that led to the investigation in the first place. I think that now that the Muller report is released, you will see a release of the information that led to the appointment of the special council. If Trump wins again, you are going to see the Democratic controlled congress have to deny the special council into the investigation of Obama and Clinton and their actions during the warrants obtained during the 2016 election. They will wither need to obstruct or fall on their swords and run the gauntlet to see what comes out.
It is truly amazing to me the hypocrisy we are seeing today.
Let me begin by refuting everything that I may be accused of; I am not a Republican or a Democrat, I do not watch Fox News, and I am not a Tea Party Member. I live by a mantra of "No groups, no colors, no hyphenations and no labels", I am not a Neo-Nazi, a White Nationalist, or a Racist. My parents are Cuban as are all my family members so I am not against hispanics either. I think women are 100% equal to men, however feel that shivery is not dead, and I like to hold doors, give up my seat, and other things that a gentlemen should do. Here we go.
I truly believe that the Democratic Party (herein Democrats or dems.... I know it a sore spot for some) has a challenge this election. Aside from the lackluster candidates it has here are a few issues I see. There is no consistency in that party. They have strayed away from the original Democrat Party. It has been overrun and taken over much like the Republicans were taken over and overrun by the Tea Party.
Issue with women
Democrats will tell you that Trump should have been disqualified as a presidential candidate because of his remark of "grab them by the pussy", however you had Bill Clinton, still lauded by their side and the husband of the Presidential hopeful of Hillary Clinton, accused, multiple time for actually doing what Trump "SAID" he COULD do as a "Famous Person". I disagree with what he said and think it is disgusting to do that. However, being a man, I know a thing or two about how men talk. Behind the scenes, that is the talk that goes on. Sexual exaggerations, talk about how large their genitalia is, how women are secretly in love with them, and the performance; past, present and future which usually is a bunch of falsehoods. How does Clinton get a pass?
The other piece, is that Democrats have adopted a "Enemy of my enemy is my friend" mindset. Here we have a political party that purports to be staunch supporters of women and for equality for women, however they support and constantly defend a religion that is open about its "discrimination" (not in their view (the religion) of course because they believe and support it), the value that gays and women have in their views and how they want to bring that structure to the U.S. How do the Democrats wrap their arms and head around this? How do they morally accept this as acceptable? Additionally, even my comments in the beginning of this writing, could make me a target for feminist groups that supported Hillary, but apparently "WOMEN" are not equal in these group's eyes. I wrote another review talking about the shirts that Liberal women were wearing in 2008 that said "Sarah Palin is a Cunt", they decimated her in the media and every opportunity they could get, even her daughters were targets of the vitriol, and yet NONE of the women's groups came out agains this. Recently, you had women and men attacking Huckabee-Sanders, Kelly Ann-Conway and others of Trump's administration, and crickets from the same. How is this possible? Is it a a women's group or a Democratic Party Women's group?
The Democrats will tell you that climate change is a settled issue. "The Science is in and it is final". They tell you that the Scientist have weighed in and there is no room to even have a discussion about it. However, with the same breath, they will tell you that even though "SCIENCE" has stated that there are two genders (male and female) that somehow, that is Science 1.0 and should be ignored for the more progressive thought process of, "you can be any gender you want and even make up your own". Apparently the "Climate Change Science" is v2.0 and is somehow "new and improved" than its predecessor, v1.0 which had flaws.
Apparently, now you do not have to be worried about being "semantically correct on the facts" but more importantly, you need to be "morally correct". In my opinion, Morality is a dirty word. Morality is subjective. You can ask 100 people, 100 questions trying to gauge their morality and you would get 100 different answers. To think that someone in D.C. that does know me, nor care about me save my vote, somehow knows what is moral to me is offensive. Additionally, the Democrats support abortion, some even late term and even after birth (supported by some of the Democratic Party). How is this moral? I am not against abortion, but for the most part, a women should know she is pregnant early on and should take steps if she wants to terminate. I am for better test being developed that would be able to identify pregnancy earlier.
The other piece is, women have a right to their reproductive process and decisions. This is true and I agree, but if we are talking about "EQUALITY" why is it that the man has NO SAY in that decision. Understandably on the termination side, I could see how a woman would have that decision, but why is it that the man will have to live with said decision. Here is what I mean. If a women decides to terminate the pregnancy, the man has zero right to say or do anything. However if the woman decides to have the child, the man is compelled, by law and fear of jail to support the decision made by the woman. Why then does the man not have "equal" opportunity to make that decision? "Equal" is a double-edged sword. Not only that, but we should then make prostitution legal. I am for that by the way. I do not partake but to each their own. But if a woman has the full and unconditional right to her reproductive process, we can easily argue that the vagina is a major portion of that process and as such, a woman can decide to give it away freely, rent it, sell it etc.
Rich White Men
So it goes that Trump was bad and the Republicans are bad because of the "Rich White Men" however looking at the 2020 hopefuls on the Left, the tope three runners are..... yes Rich White Men. Again the party is going to either have to convince the public that THESE Rich White Men are the RWM 2.0 and not the old v1.0 of the Republican Party.
The Democrats will tell you that they are for immigration, as am I an I believe most of the US. However the democrats have gone a step further and said that they condone illegal immigration and some cities and states have made a conscious effort to vote on state and city legislation about their "Sanctuary" status. They will tell you a ridiculous story of how illegal immigrants (or undocumented as they like to call it) actually increases and enhance the local economy and that it is good for the economy in general, however when faced with a recent Trump threat of releasing thousands of "undocumented" people into these very same cities and states, they call foul and say it is "illegal" for Trump to do this, surely they meant to say "Undocumented".
Trump says some insane things and is many times hurtful and can sound disgusting with some of the things he says. However, when Robert DeNiro comes out on national television and the first words out of his mouth is "Fuck Trump" then proceeds to say that Trump is rude and disgusting? This is somehow better? Is DeNiro's hatred towards Trump the new and improved 2.0 while Trumps is 1.0? The things that are constantly said about Trump, his wife, young son, and the other family members is lower and more vile than anything Trump has said, even the "pussy" statement. Why is it OK to have so much hate, anger, disrespect, vitriol and spitefulness for someone and then when asked why you hate him, say that he is everything you feel about HIM. He is either not that bad, or you are as bad as he is. There is no other option. If you do not take off your partisan glasses, you will not see it. I remember years ago, I posted a picture of a baby Obama crying in a diaper. I posted it with a comment about Obama crying that something did not happen or something stupid like that. I was summarily blasted by hundreds of people calling me racist and other pejoratives. George Bush was the official punching bag during Obama's 8 years and even during the Bush administration. It was OK for people to bash him (BTW I think a lot of it was well deserved), but NOT Obama but yes on Trump? Do you see a pattern? The behavior I have seen from law makers on the left as well as the leftists in general pail in comparison to anything Trump has said or done. Really analyze that.
These are just a few things that I struggle with. When people stop blindly supporting their party and start demanding that the lawmakers act the way they should, then and only then will things change. If you follow the Democrat primaries or the candidates that are going around the country today, it feels as though anyone heckling anything at them gets support. I want to go to a rally and yell out "We should all have free pickles" and see how many candidates say "Yes, I am for that. We should have free pickles for all. Too much time has gone by without them". It is absurd.
About the Author
Victor Davis Hanson is the Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution; his focus is classics and military history. Hanson is the author of hundreds of articles, book reviews, and newspaper editorials on Greek, agrarian, and military history and essays on contemporary culture. He has written or edited twenty-four books, the latest of which is The Case for Trump (Basic Books, 2019). His other books include The Second World Wars (Basic Books, 2017); The Savior Generals: How Five Great Commanders Saved Wars That Were Lost - from Ancient Greece to Iraq (Bloomsbury 2013); The End of Sparta (Bloomsbury, 2011); The Father of Us All: War and History, Ancient and Modern (Bloomsbury, 2010); Makers of Ancient Strategy: From the Persian Wars to the Fall of Rome (ed.) (Princeton, 2010); The Other Greeks (California, 1998); The Soul of Battle (Free Press, 1999); Carnage and Culture (Doubleday, 2001); Ripples of Battle (Doubleday, 2003); A War Like No Other (Random House, 2005); The Western Way of War (Alfred Knopf, 1989; 2nd paperback ed., University of California Press, 2000); The Wars of the Ancient Greeks (Cassell, 1999; paperback ed., 2001); and Mexifornia: A State of Becoming (Encounter, 2003), as well as two books on family farming, Fields without Dreams (Free Press, 1995) and The Land Was Everything (Free Press, 1998). Currently, he is a syndicated columnist for Tribune Media Services and a weekly columnist for the National Review Online.
Hardcover: 400 pages
Publisher: Basic Books (March 5, 2019)