In his ubiquitously calm, reasoned, non-ad-hominem, and ruthlessly fact-driven few minutes, Victor Davis Hanson dives into the left’s apparent hysteria at the looming shadow of Donald Trump’s potential return.
Hanson articulates a sense of deep-rooted fear among Trump’s opponents, summed up perfectly as follows:
“they look at Trump as a vampire and they put a stake in his heart but they’re afraid that that stake could come out any time.”
This vivid imagery sets the stage for a discussion about the intense paranoia and strategic maneuvering in the political arena, particularly among those who view Trump not just as a political rival, but as an existential threat to their vision of America.
Hanson argues that there is a perception among Trump’s adversaries that he is now more formidable and justified in his anger due to perceived injustices against him:
“They are terrified of him because they think he’s smarter this time and he has just cause to really get angry because of what they did to him.”
They rightly fear that Trump’s potential comeback would be fueled not just by political ambition, but by a personal vendetta, which could make him a more unpredictable and determined opponent.
“…if a MAGA candidate wins and they win the house and the Senate, we’re cooked.”
They are likely right! And Hanson posits a political landscape where power dynamics could shift dramatically, leading to aggressive investigations and possibly even retribution against figures in the current administration.
It’s hard to argue that Trump’s retribution would be unjustified. As Hanson points out in detail, the Democratic party’s strategies and policies – prioritizing ideology over practical governance – are detached from reality and any concept of effectiveness.
He asserts, “nobody in their right mind would do that,” referring to a range of policy decisions from border control to economic management.
In a broader reflection on the state of American politics, Hanson portrays a polarized environment where allegiance to party ideology trumps objective assessment of policies:
“They start with a deductive principle we are better… and therefore the following must happen.”
This reinforces the perceived dogmatism in the political process, where decisions are driven more by ideological conformity than by rational deliberation or public interest.
Rather ominously, Hanson concludes a bleak picture of the current political climate, drawing parallels to authoritarian regimes, suggesting a mentality of ‘us versus them,’ where belonging to the right political faction offers protection and benefits, while dissent leads to persecution.
Indeed, the political landscape is now a battleground of ideologies, with high stakes for those who choose to engage in it.
“Join the winning side, it’s sort of like in the Soviet Union, if you’re part of the nomenclature and you join the party, you’re exempt; if you’re not, well, you’re on your own.”
Watch the full clip below: