When Stephen Colbert asked Bill Clinton to explain ’s political success, the former president responded that Trump has a “macho appeal.” Trump has great and gets things done, or at least appears to, not least of which is winning the Republican nomination despite the odds against him.

Source: Wikimedia

President George W. Bush also had a great deal of confidence, which many people found attractive and reassuring, but, for all that, he lacked manliness. GWB was not a football player; he was a cheerleader. By contrast, his father was a star baseball player at Yale and a war hero. Nonetheless, George H.W. Bush lacked manliness as well. He often came across as sniveling, and had to overcome the “wimp factor” to win election in 1988.

Despite his masculine charms, manliness is not the word that comes to mind when we think of Bill Clinton. He is a lothario, who has perhaps aged into being a lovable rogue. Despite his penchant for dirty tricks, he is a lover, not a fighter.

Barrack Obama has many admirable qualities, but manliness is not among them. He is cool, smart, and likable, but his slight build and of leading from behind are not manly.

Not since Ronald Reagan has America had a manly president, and maybe that’s a good thing. If you’re at all confused by what I mean by manly, just think of Reagan. He was a physically imposing, tough-talking, cool, calm, and collected character. Of course, women can be manly too, none more so than Reagan’s friend, Margaret Thatcher.

This brings us to Donald Trump, who, unlike Bill Clinton, boasts of his affairs. The Donald is a broad-shouldered, aggressive alpha male, who could refer to a former college football player as “little Marco.” Although he got a deferment from serving in Vietnam, Trump is warlike, ready to fight in reaction to any perceived insult. When his campaign manager, Corey Lewandowsky, was accused of assaulting a reporter, Trump didn’t fire him. Asked why in an interview, Trump said that he backs up his friends and that he will back up America. Asked for his favorite Bible verse, Trump told an interviewer “an eye for an eye.” Trump represents not the Christian Golden Rule of love your neighbor but the pagan golden rule of help your friends and harm your enemies.

Trump’s “us vs. them” mentality appeals to our visceral, unthinking instincts. In that respect, he has the manliness we tend to look for in a . Appealing to biology to explain is anathema these days, but my favorite example of this Jonathan Gottschall, who has made himself persona non grata in literary studies for arguing that biology and evolution should inform the study of literature. In particular, men’s tendency to fight should inform the way we read the Iliad and other great works. Because he argues that masculinity is biologically real and that it has some value, Gottschall finds himself teaching only part-time at Washington and Jefferson College despite a string of highly acclaimed books.

But manliness is real and appealing. In moments when Trump sucks me in, I find myself thinking that he could make ideas work through the sheer force of his . I quickly shake off that notion, however.

I retreat to thinking that Trump would be a good football coach but not a good president. But then I reconsider that. Trump could perhaps build team spirit and fire up the players, but I wouldn’t want my son to play for him. Trump’s misogyny, , immaturity, and illogic make him the kind of man, who, despite his manliness, I wouldn’t want my son to emulate. Better to look elsewhere for models of manliness. Where have you gone Joe DiMaggio?

William Irwin is the author the political novel Free Dakota.