O'REILLY Progressive is good, conservative traditional, bad. 

HANSON The Democratic Party became like a pyramid, a little bit of a cone on the top of the professional and the billionaire classes. 

O'REILLY We are a nation now that is so distracted.  

HANSON They get this progressive message 24-7, and they have no analytical tools. It's frightening. 

O'REILLY Welcome, I am Bill O'Reilly, and this is our long-form podcast called We'll Do It Live, and it's done very well in the last, I guess it was like four or five months ago we started. So, now I routinely mix...all of the social media outlets, and once in a while straight television news picks up what we say here because we are serious people here. We don't go in to hammer other human beings, we don't make a living by besmirching people. That's not what we do. Sometimes I wish we did it, but not really. It's just cheap and easy, but that's the trend. Here you're going to learn something and we're not going to waste your time. I booked today Victor Davis Hanson, you probably know him if you are a conservative or an independent American that leans a little bit traditional. So Professor Hanson has made a huge name for himself at Stanford University, basically analyzing the news, what I do. But he does it from a point of view of being a farmer. I was never a farmer. I have trouble even buying farm products, but he came from the soil and then rose up to be, I think, one of the most effective educators and academics in the country. He joins us now from California. So what I got for you is this. The Democratic Party senses weakness in the Trump administration because of the high prices, the Iran situation, all of that. We know that. All the polls show that. What is holding the Democratic Party back is the progressive cadres who have taken the party over, almost completely aided by the media. So you're not just voting for Harry Truman anymore, you're voting for Nancy Pelosi's latest protégé, who wants open borders and free needles and everything else that traditional Americans are going, no. How did that happen, Professor? 

HANSON Well, I think you can look at the, it's a good question, but I think if you look at the break at the end of the Clinton administration, when they ran in '92 and '96, and Mark Halpern and Mark Penn wrote their agenda at the convention, it was pretty much closed borders, tough on crime, balanced budget, which he and Newt Gingrich did. But I think we underestimate globalization because that really took off at the Millennium. And it basically said, we're gonna westernize the whole market world, then people woke up in this century, and they said, you know, if I have skills that transcend the United States, law, media, university campuses all over the world, corporate boardroom, international sports, entertainment, Hollywood, you know, movies were 85% of the revenue in these... And they became rich. They had a $7 billion audience or clientele or consumer base. And then there were others that traditional farming, manufacturing, assembly, they didn't have those skills, and they were outsourced or offshored. So that was the background. And then they made a post facto exegesis: the Democrats, or the people in these global, not everybody, but most of them were on the left or the democratic liberal side. They said we were the winners and we have these skills, and now we've got more money than we've ever had. So when I was at Stanford in the 70s, Silicon Valley was affluent. But it has $11 trillion now in market capitalization. It's just insane. But they made a self-fulfilling prophecy. They said, we are the brightest, we're the best, and the guys in the middle, the deplorables, irredeemables, clingers, garbage, chumps, they're the losers. We don't want those people. They didn't code, or they didn't get on it. So we've got enough money now that we don't worry about food or transportation. So we're going to go into utopianism. And part of that agenda was to shut down fossil fuels and nuclear plants. Part of it was we're guilty of creating the criminal, not the criminal himself. Part of it was we don't believe in a utopian world that we need borders. And in that process, they also replaced race for class. The Democratic Party used to say, we're gonna protect and enhance everybody in the lower-middle classes. But then under Obama especially, it became...It's not 90-10 affirmative action, black-white. It's 30% the victimized, regardless of their income, regardless of the circumstances. If they're not white, they are victims. And we, the coastal elite, who were so wealthy and are never subject to the consequences of our ideology, we're going to champion these people. So the Democratic Party became like a pyramid, a little bit of a cone on the top of the professional and the billionaire classes. And then a large subsidized welfare state, and they didn't care about class. So they had these absurdities that you've, here you have Mamdani talking about he's gonna go after the white nicer neighborhoods- when, on the basis of per capita income, the wealthiest group in the United States are his own Indian Americans. So I think globalization enriched the Democratic Party, the people in it, the Harvey Weinsteins, take the Obamas, they got out of office. All of a sudden, Netflix hands them this contract; they plugged into it, they ended up with four mansions, and that was acceptable, and then they basically say, the white middle class or the deplorables, they're very racist, they're terrible people, we've gotta protect the poor, but they want nothing to do with the poor. They don't live with them. And then the other thing, very quickly, Bill, is they don't have any power. You were right that that message of these boutique issues that they've, in transgenderism, open borders, illegal... It never affects them, and that makes them psychologically feel good about themselves at no cost to themselves. But they lost power, so we're speaking now, they don't have the House, they may have the House. But right now they don't have the House, the Senate, the White House, or the Supreme Court. 

O'REILLY Or the goodwill of the traditional American. When you say they, is this a cabal? Do they meet in Switzerland? 

HANSON Well, you know, that's a very good question. Molly Ball, B-A-L-L, wrote a very revealing piece right after the election of 2020. She was so ecstatic that they had won. It was in Time magazine, February of 2020, and she said, she used that term, Bill, cabal and conspiracy. She said, now we can tell how we won. We got the corporate boardroom, we got the media, we ran commute, we suppressed what she called misinformation or disinformation. Twitter, Facebook stopped the story on the laptop. We changed the ballot laws in 28 states. We suppressed people who were trying to mislead you, and we partnered, we used the street people, the 2020 demonstration. And it just entailed it, and the left got very angry when she wrote it. But she was basically saying that a group of elite people got together and they said, even though we have messages that nobody really wants, we can find power. And one of the ways they got the White House, of course, they took old Joe Biden from Scranton and passed him off as something out of the 70s, that he was this conservative blue-collar champion of the working classes. And then he was that coaxing effigy, and behind it were the ex-Obama people, Jill Biden and others, who used him as a surrogate to push through, I think, the most radical agenda we'd seen since the New Deal. 

O'REILLY No, there's no doubt about it, and it was never explained, and the anonymity of the people still cloaks them to this day. The money is phenomenal that comes into the progressive movement. Now, we all know George Soros and these billionaires who interfere with local races now, with hordes of cash coming in to elect people who will carry out the progressive vision. Is it just individuals who are fueling the progressive movement financially, or are there other concerns that Americans don't know about? 

HANSON Well, there's a large professional class. Basically, in California, it's San Diego to Berkeley, 50 miles within the coast, and New England down somewhere in the Carolinas, and then places like Austin or places in the Midwest around Chicago. And they are people highly skilled or at least degreed and entitled. They have letters after their names, and they're in these, in the media, in law, in the corporation, and they make a lot of money. And that's part of it. 

O'REILLY And they just give the money to the Democratic Party or to various political action committees. 

HANSON Various political action committees and foundations. And so you get this situation where they sold us on solar wind. Here's California. We have the highest kilo, we're higher now than Hawaii in kilowattage. When you look at it, China's building three coal plants a month, and they are selling solar panels below the cost of production to destroy the US market. And we're all buying that. And we think that we're going to reduce global fossil fuel emissions when what we're saving is just a fraction of what China's contributing. And if you look at where Europe was, the same thing has happened in Europe, where Germany was the powerhouse of Europe, it's been absolutely decimated by these suicidal policies. And so these left-wing people in their utopia, they don't realize how easily manipulated by the Chinese, for one example. And by the universities, for another, they gave millions of, they've given billions of dollars to Harvard, Yale, Stanford, and they have no idea where the money is going except they want their name, the John Smith Professor of Middle Eastern Studies, the Bill Jones Professor of Environmental Studies. And then that money subsidizes these professors who are not subject to market reality as students, and they're turning out each year. Thousands of people on the left that takes them maybe 20 or 30 years to wise up. That's one of their strengths, so they feel that they don't have to govern. Even when they lose power, they're angry about it, but they have institutional power that transcends elections. Foundations media, as I said, corporate boardroom, sports entertainment, K through 12 teachers unions. And that's where the power is for them, the institutional. And that's why Donald Trump scares them so much, because he's the first president in my lifetime that didn't deal with the symptomology. He's actually going to, how do they fund the foundations? How do they use the university's work? Why do they get federal money? Are they racist in their admissions? And that's very alarming to them, that somebody's actually questioning, not the symptoms, but the cause of where their power is. 

O'REILLY You know, it's funny because they're...Most of these people have conventions, and they show up, you know, CPAC and all that, and they wave the flag. You never see that in the progressives. Never see that at all. They don't seem to have learned anything from the Trump second victory. So, yeah, they got Biden in there, and Biden did a lot of damage. They won't acknowledge the damage, and the press won't either. The press is a big factor here because it enables the progressive movement. But the folks went out and said, you know, we don't like this. We don't like what Biden and his hidden cadre are doing. So we're going to put Trump back in with all his idiosyncrasies, let's use that. I don't think there's one progressive in the country that learned anything from that at all. I don't t see them. 

HANSON No, they haven't, and so they are running in the midterms...I mean we have this candidate in Texas that says she wants to put Zionists in camps. We've got this Totenkopf, formerly tattooed person. They've even gone further. A rational analysis would have said you went way to the left. Their remedy is we lost the election because we weren't far left enough. They're running on basically two strategies: Donald Trump is the essential evil, and we've got to just say, in the debate on California, on the mayor, a gubernatorial base, if you watch them, it's nothing about the record of California. It's all Donald Trump. And then the second is, we don't like the system. We don't like the electoral college. We don't like the filibuster. We don't like the 169-year, nine-person court. We don't like the 50-state union. We don't like the electoral. We're gonna change all of this system because we have a message implicitly that people don't want. But if we can get power through these institutions, maybe we can still keep the progressive, hardcore, revolutionary fervor and get power again. And they have to be defeated at the polls one or two times. We saw a little bit, Bill, you remember, we're in the same generation, at the McGovern period. He really, he wanted to cut the defense budget in half and give this, and then he was wiped out. And Jimmy Carter came, and he had a Southern accent. It seemed like they could not nominate somebody without a Southern Accent after McGovern. I mean, it was Jimmy Carter, and then it was Bill Clinton, and then it was Al Gore. They understood that, that at least they had to seem moderate. And Clinton was, if we look back at him, he wasn't that much different than Mitt Romney or somebody. He was a...

O'REILLY No, he was a practical politician. 

HANSON He was, and so I think they learned their McGovern lesson, and then they got lax, and they said, now we've done this, and Obama said to them, I got elected as a black man from the North, and I'm very liberal. I hid my liberality a little bit and deceived people, but you can go build on what I've done. And they lost that lesson, and I think that they're gonna have to learn it by electoral defeat. 

O'REILLY Now, in the culture area, I want to know what you think about the...let's use the word preponderance of entertainment vehicles in the United States. They're all, I would say, 90 percent, maybe 80 percent, are progressive. So you get late-night TV across the board. Fallon doesn't care. But the others are very fanatically progressive. Morning shows don't matter anymore because they're just making omelets down there. They've kind of given up on any of that because women watch morning, and women don't want all this stuff. So they're out of the equation. The network news, the three of them, all tilt left. And then you have two very, very hard-left progressive cable outfits. And two, if you count Newsmax, conservative. But overwhelmingly, as the Saturday Night Live analysis this week shows, it is almost a monolith on social media, progressives good, conservative traditionalists, bad. How much effect does that have on individual voters, in your opinion, Doctor?

HANSON I think it has a lot, and it has a lot on issues. If we had had this conversation 15 years ago, and I would say to you, in Fresno, California, the champion of most of all of the regional high school track events is a man, a biological man, and he's competing, we would have thought we were crazy. Yet that has been normalized to the extent that if you object, you're a transphobe. Same thing about illegal immigration. We went from illegal aliens and then to illegal immigrants, and then you were not supposed to say legal or any prefixes, it was just migrants. And so all that came from NPR, PBS, the institutions that you mentioned, the Ford Foundation, Rockefeller, the whole bunch of them. So they have a very profound effect in shaping public opinion. When you have the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Mark Milley, saying before Congress, as he did after the George Floyd, that he recommended that people read Professor Kendi, and then you see the performance of the military and the Afghan withdrawal or the 50 billion in weapons that were left behind. It's very profound what these cultural institutions do. People make fun of the university, rightly so, but the time from a crazy idea in the faculty lounge to the implementation by the democratic orthodoxy is about three years, I think, three or four years. 

O'REILLY The distraction that this has brought to the world is profound. So that there are many people who have lost themselves in their own world now. I think we're seeing that with the Iran thing. You can't sell Iran having a nuclear weapon because number one, people believe what they want to believe, and if they don't believe that Iran has a nuclear weapon, they're not going to believe it. And number two, they go, well, they're over there. They don't bother me in Tulsa. We are a nation now that is so distracted based on TikTok or whatever they're consuming that millions and millions and millions of people don't know what's going on and don't care to know. How important is that to the progressive advancement? 

HANSON It's very important. When I pick up my phone, I had never asked to be a subscriber to Apple News or Smart News, but all of a sudden this stuff pops up with all of it, and it's completely left-wing. And then all these things on YouTube, TikTok, they all have a particular, they're either left-wing, or they're a crudity or a diminishing of the cultural standards of tradition that we grew up with. That's the sin of commission, but there's a sin of omission, because if you look at the curriculum now, K through 12, these people- and I have been an educator for 50 years- they don't know what the judicial branch is. If you said to these graduates of very good schools, can you name five of the Bill of Rights, of the amendments? They could not. So they don't really have the capacity or the tools to make empirical decisions or analyses anymore. I don't think the general public realizes that the level that we have diminished. Part of it was DEI and trying to say, you know, at Stanford we're going to give 80% A's to everybody, and we're gonna have remedial math. And then the employers in Silicon Valley after four years said, wait a minute, these kids, I can get a better graduate at Georgia Tech, what are you doing? And now they're trying to catch up, and I don't think they are. But what I'm getting at, this generation is the first that lives by these appurtenances, iPads, iPhones. They get this progressive message 24-7, and they have no analytical tools. They don't know anything, you know, and it's frightening. 

O'REILLY But what's interesting is the other side, the counter to the progressives, is the conservative traditional side. And what you are starting to see there is a fracture. See, there is no fracture in my estimation between the Democrats and the progressives. I don't know any mainstream Democrats anymore. Pelosi wiped them out by saying, if you're not a progressive, you're not getting any money to run for reelection. So you better be a progressive. That worked. That woman, she tamed that whole House. And every moderate surrendered right on the spot because they knew they were gonna be primaried, and they knew that they weren't gonna get any money from the Democratic National Committee, so they're gonna be a progressive. On the Republican side, conservative, traditional- you take what you want as a description- you're getting a fracture now between the Holocaust deniers, the anti-Semites, the people who will certify Donald Trump's actions no matter what he does, no matter what he doesn't, okay. So you're getting a fracture over there rather than a united front to logically take on a destructive progressive movement. Or am I wrong? 

HANSON Well, I think you're right, though I might nuance it. I think the majority of the Republican Party would say, we don't want to lose nobly with McCain and Romney, and now we're willing to win if it's ugly. And so they overlook what you, I think, aptly called idiosyncrasies of Donald Trump. They wish he wouldn't tweet. They wish you wouldn't make fun of Rob Reiner after he died. But the message that he conveys that we've got to build a wall, we've gotta stop illegal migration, we've got to deport...They feel that prior Republicans were not willing to do that. And in their view, he's sort of like a Shane or somebody out of the classic Western that had uncouth skills but a skill set, and he comes in, he solves the problem, he rides off, and then the townspeople don't give him credit. They don't admit they couldn't solve it, and they dwell on his crudity. The other thing, what you said, I'm more worried about because the number of people who are openly anti-Semitic has grown. It's still a small percentage, but they have much more audiences than their numbers reflect. And the problem with that is when you had antisemites in the past, you had...It used to be when I was growing up, every farmer in this area said that the Jews in New York, they'd never met a Jew in their life, but Let's see. Every Jew in New York is controlling the commodity market. That's why we're broke. Then the left said, no, no, no, go look at Gentleman's Agreement or Hollywood. The left was stopping that. Now it's flipped. The left is Hamas, anti-Semitic, but we don't have that right speaking out. Now we have a right that is almost 360 with them. Candice Owens is, you know, they...Tucker's going to have Graham Platner on his show. Candice Owens is interviewing Tom Massie. They're gone completely. So when you have both parties have elements, the majority of the Democrats and a growing little minority, it's very hard. The only people that are speaking out are the MAGA people. I don't mean the extreme MAGA. I mean the all-spectrum of MAGA that so far have been sensible to say, wait a minute, there is a difference between Israel and Hamas. Wait a minute. The Jews don't control everything. They're a very hardworking people. Stop that. Wait a minute, you're lying about World War II. That's the only group in America that I can see hasn't lost its mind. And they're traditional Republicans or traditional conservatives or MAGA people. And they are very worried about people within this traditional movement that seem in their zealotry, or maybe it's desire for clarity, I don't know what is motivating them, but they've almost gone completely to the left.

O'REILLY But their point of view is suppressed, as many points of view are, by the media. They suppress it. So it used to be that Jewish Americans, and about six and a half million of them, not many, were 80% liberal. The Steven Spielbergs of the world, Hollywood moguls. If you were a conservative person, and I've had four movies produced, so I know what I'm talking about, we got lots of stuff turned down because I wasn't liberal, by Hollywood. And this was before the progressive craziness. This was standardized liberal people, and they would always vote Democrat. And in New York City, which is the largest population of Jewish people outside of Israel, a Mamdani could never have been elected, even 10 years ago, 10, 15 years ago. The Jewish vote and media would have risen up and crushed him. Now the majority of Jewish New Yorkers voted for Mamdani, and very few people can understand why. I don't even understand why.

HANSON Well, I think there's a lot of reasons. One is we're now six, five, six, four generations away from the Jewish diaspora. Reminds me of the Greek lobby. When I was in college, when Turkey invaded Cyprus, there was a huge Greek lobby in Congress that tried to stop Kissinger from tilting toward Turkey. They don't exist anymore. They've all been assimilated, acculturated. And what's happened to the Jewish community is that a lot of the young people are secular. They don't identify. They're intermarried with non-Jews. But for them, Israel is not something that they worry about. In fact, it's the opposite. For them, it is an albatross around their neck on a university campus. So that's hurt the Jews. Then the Islamic people who identify as Muslim, it's been, it's rocketed, it's almost five million now. And when you look at the money from the Middle East, from Qatar and UAE and Saudi, it is in the multi-billions. These huge Middle East programs, and they're embedded in the general curriculum. So you're getting a much stronger message from the Middle East, a very radical message. You're getting a diminished Jewish population, a secularized Jewish population. And you put into the equation that Israel is not 1947, 1967, this tiny little country. It's got a technological revolution. You go to Haifa today, it looks so much better than San Francisco. It's a powerhouse, it's running the Middle East as far as technology and finance. And so it doesn't have that empathy as an underdog, and people just resent it now because it's powerful beyond its numbers. And you put all of those centrifugal forces together, and I think... Israel's, I think, it just, they were there, but it was like clouds in a perfect storm. They've all come together, and it surprised everybody the level of antipathy for what is the only democratic, consensual, and tolerant society in the Middle East. 

O'REILLY Yeah, and Donald Trump has been the most, the friendliest president toward Israel of any president we've ever had. And it is not even close. Truman would be second. And still, most Jewish Americans vote against him. And that's another thing. But I think your point about secularization watering down Jewish history. And Jewish traditional beliefs is probably the reason. And again, the industries that Jewish Americans dominate stem from financial to entertainment. They're in the big industries that affect people. Because I know them all. Believe me when I tell you, the Hollywood moguls, you can't get further left than these people. You cannot get further left. Now, they've got the gates, they've got the armed guards, the open border doesn't mean anything to them because you can get into their property anyway, but they're for it. They don't want any restraints on it. Homeless people, drug addiction, whatever, maybe they don't have to deal with it, but they're for it. 

HANSON I don't think they realize, though, that it's, they make the distinction that they're more secular or less observant or less concerned about Israel, or they're not, they're married to someone. But the people who hate them don't make that distinction, and they think they can negotiate that. But I can tell you that I know a lot of students who would not identify as Jews, who are considered Jewish by the Hamas people, the River to the Sea... 

O'REILLY By blood. 

HANSON Exactly. And so I think they're going to find out to their dismay, if this continues, that as it happens in history, people will say, well, why did they come from me? I had an Iron Cross in World War I, I was a hero. And why am I in Auschwitz? And nobody could really explain that to them, that they didn't, they don't care. And I think that's kind of a hyperbole to compare it to that period, but I'm a little worried that a lot of people in the Jewish community either want to get on the bandwagon and criticize Israel or their own community, or they think they can negotiate with these people, an Ilhan Omar or Graham Platner, they can't, or Darrell Cooper. 

O'REILLY You can't. It's like the Chinese. It's like going to China trying to negotiate with them. Yeah. Well, yeah, okay. 

HANSON You know, a lot of people, I know them and you know them, from Fox, who are not at Fox anymore, and if we were to look at what they said 10 years ago, five years ago when you were an anchorman, or when I used to peer on Tucker's a lot, and Megan Kelly's, and it's not, it's what they're saying now is a complete antithesis of what they've said before. 

O'REILLY Yeah, the economics are different there. 

O'REILLY Are you being lied to? They tell you to max out your 401k and IRA, and then they make you beg for permission to use your own money. It's time to get to the truth and discover a better way to grow and protect your assets. Bank On Yourself is the proven retirement plan alternative that banks and Wall Street desperately hope you will never hear about. Gives you guaranteed growth, tax-free retirement income, built-in inflation protection, and peace of mind. You can get a free report that reveals how you can bank on yourself and enjoy tax- free retirement income, guaranteed growth control of your money. Just go to bankonyourself.com/bill, get your free report. That's bankonyourself.com/bill. Bankonyourself.com/bill. 

O'REILLY I was looking yesterday at a survey. Both parties in Congress are below 20% approval rating. So Americans are like either party at this point. And the leadership of the Democratic Party is nil. There's no leader that I can see. Not one. Do you see any leader of the Democratic Party, anybody coming out a populist leader or a moderate Democrat or even a progressive? I mean, AOC gets all the ink, and now we got Kamala, you know, moving to Malibu saying she's going to give it a go again and this is it? Is that all they've got on the bench? 

HANSON Yeah, I think it is. I mean, I think Gavin Newsom is going to have to say, I'm going to do to the United States what I did to California. Look at Cory Booker, Pete Buttigieg. I mean there's nobody there in addition to the names that you mentioned. There are none. It's 2020. They had this problem in 2020, and then they basically had a coup, and they said Elizabeth Warren, you, Bernie, Cory, all of you, Buttigieg, you're out. And we'll give you certain prerogatives, but we're going to bring Biden in. And then Clyburn got the South Carolina primary in Nevada. And then all of a sudden, it was kind of like, they anointed him. And then when they wanted to get rid of him after the first debate, they got the same people to get rid of them. And they knew that, that they needed some kind of veneer, but I don't see a veneer that Fetterman, they would never run. So I don't know what they're going to do and accept and disguise their message. I mean, Kamala tried that. She said, she really didn't mean to, that she was against deportation. She said she wasn't really against fracking, but it just made it worse. Nobody believed her. 

O'REILLY And she's one of the worst campaigners I've ever seen. And I wrote Confronting the Presidents, I've seen some bad campaigners. I've never seen anybody as bad as Ms. Harris. And she's just inarticulate, and you can't teach that. I mean, you just can't. Going forward in this country, we're becoming more divided. And you see the race hustlers now starting to emerge again. Sharpton's day is over. He's through, and Jesse Jackson passed. So, what you have now is some of the younger a lot of them are Princeton, the guy I listened to is from Princeton, who are trying to divide race. The African-Americans in the progressive movement, I don't see it. Do you see that they'll go in great numbers over to the progressive movement, black Americans? 

HANSON No, and it's even worse than that because they have entirely lost the white working class. So we're not talking about, as we saw in 2024, you don't need 50% of the black vote. You need 15%, 17%, 45% of the Hispanic vote, and they can get that. And the problem that they're having is in those communities, and I'm speaking from a town that's 95% Hispanic. The issues that they're dealing with have nothing to do with the solutions that the Democratic left is offering. In my community, the police chief, all the policemen are Hispanic, the city council is Hispanic, and what do they do? They don't have any white racists to rebel against. They're dealing M-13, Norteña’s gang, Sereno's Gang, imported drugs, DUI's. Illegal aliens, they're very anti-illegal alien. They've swarmed the dialysis centers, the emergency rooms. That's what they're concerned about. When they look to the Democratic Party, all they tell them is, well, you're not very smart to know the insidious, covert racism all about you from white people. That's where Obama's message, remember in the 2024, he flew in, and he got some black democratic activists, young men, very proud people. And he said. You don't know what you're doing. I can tell you what's good for you. You have to vote for Kamala. And that was sort of what Joe Biden said, you know, you ain't black, or I'm gonna put you back in chains. That audience who said, put you all back in chains was very talented black independent CEOs and people. But their message is only for an elite like themselves, but it doesn't address the problems. That's why I think a lot of the hatred of Donald Trump was that he saw that, and he tried to substitute class concerns. So he was basically saying, if you're a Mexican-American electrician or a black truck driver or a white manufacturing assembly line worker, you all got screwed by terror, whatever the message he had. And that was a very radical message for the Democrats because they had wanted race, race, race, and he transcended that at least. And he also, as I said earlier, addressed the roots of their power. And it's, you know, if... Sometimes his message and his language and vocabulary hurt that message, but people were ready for it. They were tired of it. They were tired of the race, race, race, and they were interested in class, class, class, not in the Marxist sense, just sort of what the old Democratic Party appealed to and some parts of the Republican Party. And so, he doesn't need, you don't need, that's what the left doesn't, that's why they're so paranoid. They don't need large defections because They've lost the white working class, especially white working males, who vote in inordinate numbers greater than their demographics. 

O'REILLY Yeah, and I don't think they're doing well with Hispanics, and blacks, the men, are starting to wise up a little bit, women, you know, with the preachers and the Sunday sermons and all of that is a great effect on the women, African American women. 

I'm very excited to tell you about the world's number one expanding garden hose and their brand new product. The pocket hose ballistic. I used to have to buy a new hose every year. What a pain. Because it kinks and it tangles. But the pocket hose, ballistic, is the upgrade I've been looking for. It's the toughest pocket hose ever built. Reinforced with a liquid crystal polymer used in a bulletproof vest. So it's actually five times stronger than steel. And now for a limited time, when you purchase a new pocket hose ballistic, you'll get a free 360-day rotating pocket pivot and a free thumb drive nozzle. Just text BILL to 64000. Bill to 64000 for your two free gifts on purchase. Text bill to 64000. Message and data rates may apply. 

O'REILLY Last question, and we'll hold you over for a special comment for our Premium Members. Are you hopeful that this progressive movement, which I think is the most dangerous, even it's much worse than what we saw in Vietnam with the SDS and those people, those radical people back then. Are you hopeful that this is going to run its course, or are they going to get even more powerful? 

HANSON I think it'll run its course, but it requires everybody, according to their station, to speak out. There's no room or time left to just sit in the shadows and think it's going to pass. And you were really good to make that comparison with the 60s and 70s. The difference from those people, I was a conservative, but I was at a radical campus, UC Santa Cruz. Those people were demonstrating in really destructive, self-destructive, and destructive manners, but their message was Nixon and all the right have detoured from the Americans. We wanna go back to the founding. We wanna be the real Americans. These people never liked America. They didn't like the foundational date, 1619. They're year zero Jacobins. Change the names of the months like the Jacobins, or tear down statues. They wanna completely erase our heritage and traditions and start anew. They're really different than the 60s hippies, know, tune in, drop. Kind of Timothy Leary type people, you know, Whole Earth catalogue. That's not... These people are Stalinists. They mean business. 

O'REILLY They do mean business. But you think that their day is not assured. 

HANSON They don't have the numbers, and they're not very practical. So the biggest thing that gave me encouragement, I never thought they would turn on the billionaire class, the Mark and reasons, the Horowitzes, the Elon Musk, even, and they did. And now they're really going to town. So it's going to make it almost impossible for the Ken Griffiths or the Jeff Bezos to be with those people. And they were one of their chief sources of funding. But when you have a billionaire's tax or a net worth tax, or even a millionaire's tax, that's where their strength was, the millionaire professional classes. And when those people start to get gored, they're gonna see the revolution's coming after us. And the same way that I think a lot of liberal Jewish people are gonna say the revolution is coming...These things get more and more radical, the French Revolution or the Roman, they get very dangerous, more radicalized. The Bolsheviks, it doesn't mean that minorities can't take power like the Bolsheviks, but if everybody calls them out and tries to form a coalition against them, something like Fetterman or something like that, you can stop it because nobody wants that message. 

O'REILLY This is the best friend of the progressives, because it makes the accumulation of knowledge and perspective much, much harder when you live in a world of your own. So, Professor, I think you're one of the strongest voices in the country, and we know that you've had a little health thing going, and that makes it more extraordinary that you'd spend some time with us. I'm going to take a quick break here, then we're coming back with Killing Time for BillOReilly.com Premium and Concierge Members, and I'm gonna ask about the Pope.