Will Trump and Conway divorce?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by samcraig, Nov 28, 2016.

  1. samcraig macrumors P6

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    #1
  2. TheHateMachine, Nov 28, 2016
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2016

    TheHateMachine macrumors 6502a

    TheHateMachine

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2012
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #2
    Gonna' need a bigger pump!

    [​IMG]

    Meanwhile, reports surfaced from inside The Donald's camp about internal staff conflicts over who gets to operate the pump. Questions also came forth about who keeps turning off the darn thing.
     
  3. LizKat macrumors 68040

    LizKat

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Location:
    Catskill Mountains
    #3
    If she does, maybe she could have any job but she'll take any job, too, because that's as good as it will get. She certainly knows her way around politics so she's pragmatic enough to know a pair of jacks from three aces. We are sadly enough more shockproof than we used to be. (Take the job, Kellyanne, whatever it is. It's still gold to have White House anything on a resumé).

    Anyway trying to play a pair of jacks against McConnell, Ryan, Priebus, I dunno. They know where a lot of bodies are buried too. I guess that can be part of why Trump has Bannon on board. To have someone who knows a lot of people whose jobs are to dig up bodies even if there's no there there.
     
  4. 63dot macrumors 603

    63dot

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2006
    Location:
    norcal
    #4
    Conway is toast. She doesn't go and try to consult Trump through the media forcing his hand. Trump got what he needed from her and now he does as he likes and will listen to anyone privately but not take this:

    http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/28/politics/trump-conway-romney/

    While I agree Romney is a backstabber and lying politican of the highest order, it's not Conway's job to criticize Trump as if she were an angry reporter from Huffington Post.
     
  5. LizKat macrumors 68040

    LizKat

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Location:
    Catskill Mountains
    #5
    Who knows, Conway could have played those cards with the full knowledge of Trump (and, Bannon). It's more or less game over for Rudy but that's pretty awkward, isn't it, such a good bud. Yeah so maybe it's nicer to have Conway blast Trump and Romney and then someone else does the unkind cuts on Rudy. Then Romney's re-introduced as a guy who can help make America great again overseas or whatever. Too obvious a playbook? Consider who we are now. We just willingly elected a charlatan to our highest office because he has no experience in public office and majored in blowing other people's money on his projects but he will bring us needed change and drain the swamp in DC.
     
  6. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #6
    I find it fascinating that Trump is apparently considering David Petraeus for Secretary of State.

    Not that Petraeus isn't qualified (at least, way more qualified than Rudy Guiliani and most of the other jokers in the marked Trump deck). But the fact remains that David Petraeus career was destroyed, and he was actually convicted of crimes, because of his deliberate misuse of Classified Government Data. David Petraeus has a misdemeanor criminal record on that score. Some countries (Canada, for instance, specifically bar people with even misdemeanor criminal records from entering their country.)

    Having spent the past nine months excoriating Hillary Clinton for "careless" (but non-criminal) handling of Govt. Data while Secretary of State, Trump is now considering a man who actually, deliberately, and criminally shared CIA secrets.

    Apparently "irony" and "hypocrisy" are not words that mean much in Trumpland.
     
  7. PracticalMac macrumors 68030

    PracticalMac

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #7
    Wrong kind of pump
    [​IMG]
     
  8. jpietrzak8 macrumors 65816

    jpietrzak8

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    #8
    Well, I would think that makes him a perfect fit for Trump then, right? There is nobody, and I mean nobody, in politics today who lies more than Trump, or who can stab you in the back more effectively than Trump.
     
  9. LizKat macrumors 68040

    LizKat

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Location:
    Catskill Mountains
    #9
    What I find so alarming is the narcissism. Everything ends up being about him whenever he talks.

    Take that clip @samcraig had put up from the 60 Minutes interview when Trump started talking about how he'd be on Twitter... I'm going to embed it here again



    On Twitter: “I’m gonna do very restrained, if I use it at all.” I mean okay that line was highly comical as we can all probably agree, but the scary part to me was then how he talked about his power on social media, that

    "The fact that I have such power in terms of numbers with Facebook, Twitter or Instgram etc., I think it helped me win all of these races where they were spending much more money than I spent.... and I won. And I think that social media has more power than the money they spent and I think to a certain extent I proved that."
    Now he doesn't say anything about how the mainstream media were also meanwhile giving him a zillion bucks a day worth of free coverage of his "outrageous" or "cringeworthy" or whatver clickbait social media lines he had put out there, but that's not my point and it will never be something Trump emphasizes.

    And if I were a campaign manager in future, even Donald Trump's re-election manager, I wouldn't bet my client's last buck on a low-budget social media campaign. But that's for another thread, the blackswanness of this campaign with this candidate (all these candidates) in this country in this year.

    My point is how Trump is completely entranced by the solitary nature of his power, the power of "I".

    It was his power, the "it" that helped him win. Not his followers. His power expressed in numbers of followers.

    He's not just entranced but enhanced by his impression of his power. Trump seems to need to keep making it clear that he is central to every narrative in which he plays any part. The obsessive rants that he goes off on like the Machado woman ("where did you find that?!" = fury that he had lost control of a narrative in that debate and Clinton had introduced a motif that didn't at all fit his sense of how the debate was wrapping up)... and now the idea that he won the election, yes (sure, of course), but he could have won the popular vote and by all rights due him, should have won that too... are a prelude to the next four years of him in the White House.

    His focus on himelf is already so wearying. I haven't always agreed with what Obama had to say in his weekly addresses but I really liked those things. Who knows if Trump will do those. Not sure I can listen to them even if I want to give him the benefit of the doubt for at least awhile! But I'm not one to say a President-elect cannot be my president. We have one president at a time and he's the guy who's next up, so.. 53 days to get used to the idea.

    Meanwhile it would be great if Trump and Conway and Bannon quit with the games and got on with letting Priebus and the legislative leaders help him finish the cabinet appointments. He needs the help of those guys even if he does mean to drain the swamp. God knows the Koch Bros don't mean to drain the swamp. At least when the Cabinet is shaped up then we'd all have a better sense of the focus of a new administration. Better to know than to wonder.

    I love it that Jack Shafer of Politico has issued a manifesto of New Rules for Covering Trump. Good ol' Jack. He gets it that the way to deal with a troll is starve it. I don't know if it will work w/ Trump but it will be fun to watch if the press can actually make themselves give it a shot. Conway will have to take away his phone again for sure.
     
  10. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #10
    I wonder how the custody battle will go.
     
  11. Snoopy4 macrumors 6502a

    Snoopy4

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2014
    #11
    So....what if Conway runs the Twitter account and she made the tweets? I'm really perplexed by her commentary the last 24 hours.
     
  12. yaxomoxay macrumors 68000

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #12
    I hold Gen Petraeus in high regards, he's certainly a great man that made a huge mistake. However, the mistake is too big to forget it and give him the most important cabinet position. Having him as Secretary of State would be a huge political mistake.
     
  13. LizKat macrumors 68040

    LizKat

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Location:
    Catskill Mountains
    #13
    Well the last two or three hours are interesting, he's like totally hammering on CNN. "so presidential", not. is that Conway? doesn't seem like her.

    Her thing on TV: supposedly she said what she said w/ ok from Trump to diss Romney, I definitel ltake it as a play not really a dump on the guy's chances, just a floating of an idea to see what reaction it gets from which quarters. And as I said before maybe a cue for someone else to bash Rudy because really I don't think he could get confirmed, so it's time for someone to usher him offstage and it can't be Trump since Rudy was loyal helper in campaign etc.

    It's hard to find the marionette strings on this gig. I don't have a clue who's playing whom for what, and I think the fraud thing is just ludicrous no matter if it's Trump Stein or Clinton doing the wailing. Trump I don't get even mentioning the election results any more. He has the EC unless he keeps acting like such an idiot he scares off some electors in a big way or makes Congress interested in the fine print of throwing electors over. But all that stuff is so unlikely, so... he's... i dunno. You read the tweets now and it's cartoon time, bugs bunny, eh eh eh eh what's up doc.

    Anyway as far as SoS goes, I'd say Rudy out. Petraeus out, was Newt ever really in?, anyway out; Romney a maybe and probably favorite of the establishment Republicans? Romney to me's like Kerry light w/ sugar so I dunno but I'll take that over Giuliani.

    I mean Rudy might take Trump literally sometime out in the field, which could be really bad. Romney would take whatever Trump said and filter it enough to make it at least not boomerang on us in six minutes.

    What do you think about Corker? I lose track of who else besides these guys are still in the running. The Kochs might have suggestions they put forward through some Senator or even Priebus. Preibus will certainly listen. What is the difference between what libertarians like two of the Kochs might want in a SoS, and what a bunch of conservative Senators want? Not that all the GOP Senators are on the same page.

    And meanwhile Trump, not havingi picked an SoS, rants on about CNN and vote fraud for hours on end. Are we supposed to be cruising the streets of NY looking to see if someone new is sneaking into the buildling to be interviewed for SoS tomorrow? Or is the CNN rant the real unvarnished Donald of the evening and he's actually obsessed with the idea that there's a couple milliion extra popular votes waiting for him somewhere. I cannot decode the guy.
     
  14. PracticalMac macrumors 68030

    PracticalMac

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #14
    Priceless advice!
     
  15. LizKat macrumors 68040

    LizKat

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Location:
    Catskill Mountains
    #15
    LOL well I do kinda like this part...

    This isn’t a new rule, but an old, enduring one. Trump’s design from the beginning has been to delegitimize the press. There is no magic amulet that can protect journalists from his insults and his misinformation. Reporters have never been popular, and reporters will have to face our fate that we’re going to be less popular over the next four years. No whining, you guys!

    Source again: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/11/donald-trump-media-coverage-new-rules-214485
    There's political expediency in what a President's press minders say, and then there's... I dunno... weird stuff like Conway taking Trump to task on TV, and then Trump saying later that he had already said that was fine to do. So was that later remark from Trump the result of Conway feeding Trump a way to smooth over Conway's having temporarily lost it? Or was it just Trump relishing the joke that he and Conway had played on the media to begin with while they got the left-behinds used to hearing Romney trashed before they hear Rudy thrashed and Romney reinstated? And cui bono this kid of gig anyway? Somebody gets something out of this. I think it's not us.

    I pity reporters having to try to make any reportable sense of all this playacting and drama during the Trump transition to power. Especially since we're not likely to thank them anyway; we'd sooner kill the messengers. They must feel like they're in a minefield while choosing how to say "Trump alleged..." no... "Trump first said and then denied saying..." no... "Trump tweeted at 3.22am that..." yeah that will work, at least there's a screengrab...

    Shafer's right, we should stop reading Trump's tweets and start reading the newspapers of record that could be on our porch or laptop screen every morning. I'm starting not to care what Conway and Trump are playing at.
     

Share This Page