Trump Rallies & Interviews Catch-All | Trump - “just stop talking about that”

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 3K
  • Views: 91K
  • Politics 
nycfan said:






Season 5 Nbc GIF by The Office
Click to expand...

So Trump is talking tough about Kamala not being willing to go on Rogan's show, but in truth he's been ducking a direct debate with her ever since their first debate, and has simply refused to debate her again and come up with every excuse in the book to avoid doing so. As usual, just meaningless tough talk from a guy who is really a gutless wuss.
 
I skipped ahead to the end for Trump’s discussion of how he stays in shape (around 22 minute mark)

ROGAN: How are you so healthy? Is it golf?

TRUMP: “No, it’s genetics. I’m a big believer [Rogan cross talk] I really am no mean my father was uhhhhh [Rogan cross talk — you do play golf a lot] Both of my parents, for me it’s good. [cross talk about fresh air, exercise] Even mentally.

[Talks about focus on three footers] And I go quick, I play fast. I’m in, I’m out.

Stormy Daniels Television GIF by VH1

But you know, it gives me, I was never one who could like run on a treadmill. And I can do it. You know when passing a physical they ask me to run on a treadmill and then they make it steeper and steeper and steeper. And the doctors said, it was at Walter Reed, they said it’s unbelievable [Rogan laughs] I’m telling you I could have gone, I felt I could’ve gone all day. But I said Doc, I can do this all day long. I have no problem …”

Donald Trump Ramp GIF by GIPHY News
 
nycfan said:
I skipped ahead to the end for Trump’s discussion of how he stays in shape (around 22 minute mark)

RIGAN: How are you so healthy? Is it golf?

TRUMP: “No, it’s genetics. I’m a big believer [Rogan cross talk] I really am no mean my father was uhhhhh [Rogan cross talk — you do play golf a lot] Both of my parents, for me it’s good. [cross talk about fresh air, exercise] Even mentally.

[Talks about focus on three footers] And I go quick, I play fast. I’m in, I’m out.

But you know, it gives me, I was never one who could like run on a treadmill. And I can do it. You know when passing a physical they ask me to run on a treadmill and then they make it steeper and steeper and steeper. And the doctors said, it was at Walter Reed, they said it’s unbelievable [Rogan laughs] I’m telling you I could have gone, I felt I could’ve gone all day. But I said Doc, I can do this all day long. I have no problem …”

Donald Trump Ramp GIF by GIPHY News
Click to expand...
1729958746793.gif
 
She's going to go on Rogan. They are just negotiating the terms of the interview. When he says, "I want to get to know her as a person," that's an invitation and a useful one. It's up to Kamala's people to pin him down on just what that means. I don't mean "you have to give her softball questions"-- more like, "don't ask her if she enjoys weed" (didn't she have some awkward discussion about getting high on a podcast a few years ago).

There are all sorts of things that Rogan could do during a three hour interview that could be a huge pain in the ass. What if he decides to Malibu Stacy her and try to talk about "girly" things ("let your hair down for a minute and just be real. Who's the hottest actor alive right now")? Just not taking her seriously as the VP and as a presidential candidate would be annoying as hell. Maybe she doesn't want to go on a show for three hours with a host who belittles her with the things he wants to talk about.

So her campaign's job is to get the commitments from him that he won't do that. And if Rogan won't give the commitments, he doesn't get the interview.
 
superrific said:
She's going to go on Rogan. They are just negotiating the terms of the interview. When he says, "I want to get to know her as a person," that's an invitation and a useful one. It's up to Kamala's people to pin him down on just what that means. I don't mean "you have to give her softball questions"-- more like, "don't ask her if she enjoys weed" (didn't she have some awkward discussion about getting high on a podcast a few years ago).

There are all sorts of things that Rogan could do during a three hour interview that could be a huge pain in the ass. What if he decides to Malibu Stacy her and try to talk about "girly" things ("let your hair down for a minute and just be real. Who's the hottest actor alive right now")? Just not taking her seriously as the VP and as a presidential candidate would be annoying as hell. Maybe she doesn't want to go on a show for three hours with a host who belittles her with the things he wants to talk about.

So her campaign's job is to get the commitments from him that he won't do that. And if Rogan won't give the commitments, he doesn't get the interview.
Click to expand...
But there’s zero way to control Rogan, once Harris is in the room. He can do the demeaning stuff, sure, but have a plan for pivoting every single fluff question into an attack on ttump’s weak pushover tendencies, inability to articulate a plan for your future, the danger of tariffs, and frrrreedom!

When Joe does his own disclosing and banter, banter back. But have no space for misogynistic bs, just don’t get antagonistic. Pivot pivot pivot. Remember, Joe loved Bernie.
 
HeelingAg said:
But there’s zero way to control Rogan, once Harris is in the room. He can do the demeaning stuff, sure, but have a plan for pivoting every single fluff question into an attack on ttump’s weak pushover tendencies, inability to articulate a plan for your future, the danger of tariffs, and frrrreedom!

When Joe does his own disclosing and banter, banter back. But have no space for misogynistic bs, just don’t get antagonistic. Pivot pivot pivot. Remember, Joe loved Bernie.
Click to expand...
Right. That's a huge ask at this stage in the campaign. The show is itself 3 hours. If she has to spend hours prepping -- well, time is scarce. I trust the campaign.

There is some way to control Rogan. I mean, there's no way to control any legislator who agrees to vote in favor of a bill, except that legislators are only as effective as their reputation. If Kamala's people agree with Rogan that X, Y and Z are out of bounds, and then Rogan brings up X, well, he's never going to get a Dem candidate on his show again. And that's not ideal for him.

Agreed that she needs to have some prep because you don't know exactly what Rogan will do. Again, though, these are the nitty-gritty details that the campaign staff is going to know how to do WAY better than any of us. People devote their careers to these nitty-gritty details. They have tons of experience. What do you think the billion dollars is being spent on? The campaign has a huge staff of really smart, knowledgeable people.
 

Trump says he’s open to eliminating income taxes and repeats ‘enemy from within’ rhetoric on podcast with Joe Rogan

IMG_3348.jpeg

“… In the interview, Trump also said he believed what he called “the enemy from within” poses a greater threat to the US than North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un, whom he said he had “no problem with” while president.

“I got to know him very well. We had no problem with him. If you have a smart problem, if you have a smart, really the right president, the smart president, you’re not going to have a problem. And I say it to people, we have a bigger problem, in my opinion, with the enemy from within, and it drives them crazy when I use that term. But we have an enemy from within. We have people that are really bad people that I really think want to make this country unsuccessful,” Trump said. …”
 
farce© said:
I have never had an issue with the concept of voter ID, the problem comes in the practice. Alabama passed a voter ID law and promptly shut down 31 of the 67 DMV locations in the state (where state-issued IDs are obtained.). Most of those 31 offices were in poor black-majority counties in the Alabama Black Belt although the state legislators assured us that race had nothing to do with determining which locations to close. I am sure they were sincere (and also wrong.)

I have no problem with requiring an ID to vote (and I certainly have no problem with allowing only citizens to vote) but obtaining those IDs must be simple, accessible, and free. That is not the case in most jurisdictions. This middle-class white notion of "everybody has a driver license" or "all you need is a birth certificate to get a state ID" doesn't apply to thousands of mostly older poor folks. My father never had a birth certificate. He and his twin brother were born at home to poor white sharecroppers in 1914 in Effingham SC with the help of some church ladies, and there were notations in a family Bible. That's it.

This same situation that my impacted my father over 100 years ago applied for decades afterwards to poor rural black folks across the south. Not having a birth certificate is unthinkable to people born in hospitals after WWII, but there are thousands of people who never had a birth certificate, or whose birth certificate was lost over the years, and the process of getting a copy is a mystery to many of these folks. I realize there are people who believe anyone unable to manage the process of getting a copy of their birth certificate has no business voting, but I don't believe that is how our right to vote should work.

Devise a simple, free system of providing a voter ID to every eligible voter, and I will be fully on board with requiring an ID to vote. Designing such a system should be part and parcel of any voter ID requirement.
Click to expand...
McCrory closed a bunch of DMV offices as governor. Stated it was an efficiency move. Improve the online registration and provide mobile registration vehicles for rural counties. In reality it was a behind the scenes precursor to the pubs enacting the current voter id legislation.

And of course this was just before the feds put out the call for Real ID which helped make going to the DMV that much more of a hellhole.
 
superrific said:
Right. That's a huge ask at this stage in the campaign. The show is itself 3 hours. If she has to spend hours prepping -- well, time is scarce. I trust the campaign.

There is some way to control Rogan. I mean, there's no way to control any legislator who agrees to vote in favor of a bill, except that legislators are only as effective as their reputation. If Kamala's people agree with Rogan that X, Y and Z are out of bounds, and then Rogan brings up X, well, he's never going to get a Dem candidate on his show again. And that's not ideal for him.

Agreed that she needs to have some prep because you don't know exactly what Rogan will do. Again, though, these are the nitty-gritty details that the campaign staff is going to know how to do WAY better than any of us. People devote their careers to these nitty-gritty details. They have tons of experience. What do you think the billion dollars is being spent on? The campaign has a huge staff of really smart, knowledgeable people.
Click to expand...
Why does she have to spend hours prepping to have a conversation with Rogan?
 
farce© said:
I have never had an issue with the concept of voter ID, the problem comes in the practice. Alabama passed a voter ID law and promptly shut down 31 of the 67 DMV locations in the state (where state-issued IDs are obtained.). Most of those 31 offices were in poor black-majority counties in the Alabama Black Belt although the state legislators assured us that race had nothing to do with determining which locations to close. I am sure they were sincere (and also wrong.)

I have no problem with requiring an ID to vote (and I certainly have no problem with allowing only citizens to vote) but obtaining those IDs must be simple, accessible, and free. That is not the case in most jurisdictions. This middle-class white notion of "everybody has a driver license" or "all you need is a birth certificate to get a state ID" doesn't apply to thousands of mostly older poor folks. My father never had a birth certificate. He and his twin brother were born at home to poor white sharecroppers in 1914 in Effingham SC with the help of some church ladies, and there were notations in a family Bible. That's it.

This same situation that my impacted my father over 100 years ago applied for decades afterwards to poor rural black folks across the south. Not having a birth certificate is unthinkable to people born in hospitals after WWII, but there are thousands of people who never had a birth certificate, or whose birth certificate was lost over the years, and the process of getting a copy is a mystery to many of these folks. I realize there are people who believe anyone unable to manage the process of getting a copy of their birth certificate has no business voting, but I don't believe that is how our right to vote should work.

Devise a simple, free system of providing a voter ID to every eligible voter, and I will be fully on board with requiring an ID to vote. Designing such a system should be part and parcel of any voter ID requirement.
Click to expand...
I just wanted to quote this to say this is a great, great response to the issue of Voter ID.

In fact, it's so good that if this topic ever comes back up, I'd want you to just copy and paste it and we can leave the discussion there.
 
My takeaway from the Rogan interview was that, while friendly and misleading a few times, Rogan came away unimpressed at the end. Trump made a joke about getting his endorsement and he immediately pivoted. At the end, Trump threw out a few compliments (trying to get some in return) and Joe didn’t return the favor.

I think Rogan would treat a potential Harris interview the same way - a few questions he wants to ask, but mostly let them talk and let the viewers make their own decision. I don’t think he would throw a bunch of gotcha questions at Harris.

ETA: I also think Harris could come away from a JRE interview much more favorably than Trump did. His interview was downright boring at times while Trump rambled on an on (Rogan had to steer him away from his “weaves” on multiple occasions). I would look forward to a 3-hour Kamala interview and expect it to be much more interesting and on-topic.
 
Last edited:
Have been thinking about something, but didn’t really want to start a new thread. Since most political threads eventually end up talking about Trump anyway, figured this was as good as any.

Harris wins. It’s close but not so close that there’s any true risk that anything gets reversed in the Courts. Trump will certainly rant and scream about it being stolen…there may even be some small scale violence…but at the end of the day, with Biden in office, there’s no serious threat to transfer of power.

What’s next for Trump, and the Republican Party? We know he won’t go quietly…that’s a given. Will the party finally abandon him? Will his legal problems finally catch up with him? With his declining mental health, I can’t imagine there’s any way a 2028 run is in the cards. 2025 will be very interesting.
 
RockyMtnHoo said:
Have been thinking about something, but didn’t really want to start a new thread. Since most political threads eventually end up talking about Trump anyway, figured this was as good as any.

Harris wins. It’s close but not so close that there’s any true risk that anything gets reversed in the Courts. Trump will certainly rant and scream about it being stolen…there may even be some small scale violence…but at the end of the day, with Biden in office, there’s no serious threat to transfer of power.

What’s next for Trump, and the Republican Party? We know he won’t go quietly…that’s a given. Will the party finally abandon him? Will his legal problems finally catch up with him? With his declining mental health, I can’t imagine there’s any way a 2028 run is in the cards. 2025 will be very interesting.
Click to expand...
I think the most likely case in this scenario is his legal issues catch up with him over the next four years
 
RockyMtnHoo said:
Have been thinking about something, but didn’t really want to start a new thread. Since most political threads eventually end up talking about Trump anyway, figured this was as good as any.

Harris wins. It’s close but not so close that there’s any true risk that anything gets reversed in the Courts. Trump will certainly rant and scream about it being stolen…there may even be some small scale violence…but at the end of the day, with Biden in office, there’s no serious threat to transfer of power.

What’s next for Trump, and the Republican Party? We know he won’t go quietly…that’s a given. Will the party finally abandon him? Will his legal problems finally catch up with him? With his declining mental health, I can’t imagine there’s any way a 2028 run is in the cards. 2025 will be very interesting.
Click to expand...
I think his closest allies (Vance, Vivek, Tulsi) will create some distance within a few weeks after Election Day, as they’re mostly aligning with him for a potential 2028 run with MAGA support. Once it’s over, it’s over.

Vance/Gabbard 2028 is my early prediction.
 
farce© said:
I think the most likely case in this scenario is his legal issues catch up with him over the next four years
Click to expand...
I think before that moment there will be simultaneous chaos in the courts and more overt promotions of terrorism.
 
Last edited:
RockyMtnHoo said:
Have been thinking about something, but didn’t really want to start a new thread. Since most political threads eventually end up talking about Trump anyway, figured this was as good as any.

Harris wins. It’s close but not so close that there’s any true risk that anything gets reversed in the Courts. Trump will certainly rant and scream about it being stolen…there may even be some small scale violence…but at the end of the day, with Biden in office, there’s no serious threat to transfer of power.

What’s next for Trump, and the Republican Party? We know he won’t go quietly…that’s a given. Will the party finally abandon him? Will his legal problems finally catch up with him? With his declining mental health, I can’t imagine there’s any way a 2028 run is in the cards. 2025 will be very interesting.
Click to expand...
First, I ain't about tempting fate by having too much of this discussion before we know that Harris wins.

Second, I'm not sure we can know exactly how that would go at this point. I think it's fairly safe to say that Pubs will have to start the process of moving away from Trump the candidate. But it's hard to know what that will look like as a lot would depend on Trump moving to a different role and it would be hard to guess exactly what that would look like. I'm guess Trump starts off on a rage tour of conservative media for the near future that the election was rigged, but at some point he'll likely transition to being a kind of kingmaker for future elections...but I have no idea how that will go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top