Kellyanne Conway, the prominent conservative strategist and former campaign manager for Donald Trump during his victorious 2016 election, recently delivered a scathing critique of the so-called ‘Never Trump’ movement and its impact on the Democratic Party. Engaged in lively discourse at the New York Times’ DealBook Summit, Conway's remarks highlighted her view of the shifting political winds as the 2024 elections approach.
During the panel discussion, various political figures weighed the reasons behind the perceived failures of the 2024 Harris campaign and examined how the Trump campaign managed to connect with the growing cultural shifts within America. Conway began her remarks with pointed observations about the state of the Democratic Party. “The Democratic Party right now, every day they wake up, it’s still January 6, 2021, on the calendar,” she exclaimed, which set the tone for her tirade against opposition politicians who, she suggested, were detached from the realities and desires of everyday Americans.
According to Conway, the outcome of the elections showed clear signs of rejection against what she described as “wokeness.” She pointed out, “Every state went more red except Nebraska and Washington state. That is a sweep. That is a mandate.” Her passionate rhetoric underscored the belief among some conservatives: America was signaling for changes to policies and leadership, echoing sentiments from her time managing Trump’s campaign and her long-standing support for him.
Conway didn't hold back on her criticism of the Never Trump faction—Republicans who criticize Trump and the direction he’s taken the party. “I think the always-wrong Never Trumpers, who had unlimited money, cost the party, cost the Democratic Party, which they say they’re not even members of, another presidential election,” she asserted. These remarks led to heated exchanges with Sarah Longwell, publisher of the Never Trump news outlet, The Bulwark, as well as the host of the podcast “The Focus Group.”
The debate heated up as Longwell responded to Conway's accusations, challenging the ethics and impacts of Trump supporters on national discourse. “You have stage 5 Trump Derangement Syndrome,” Conway shot back, propelling their conversation from critique to confrontation. Longwell didn't shy away from calling Trump supporters bad for the country, emphasizing their attacks on the Constitution and their role within the political divide.
The summation from Conway’s perspective painted Trump as someone who touched on the cultural zeitgeist. She remarked on how Trump capitalized on platforms like TikTok and how he was present for the American public during tough times, contrasting him against President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris. “He goes to East Palestine before any official from the Biden-Harris administration,” Conway said passionately, emphasizing Trump’s hands-on approach compared to what she viewed as the Democrats’ aloofness.
This exchange speaks to broader sentiments within segments of the Republican Party where figures like Conway express frustration with any internal faction considered as straying from the mainline Trump ideology. She noted the Democrats made missteps by focusing too heavily on party identity rather than the real challenges facing voters. “The Democrats would have won if they got away with convincing Americans to believe what the Democrats told them was real and true and authentic rather than what they saw with their own eyes,” she claimed.
Throughout the discussion, Conway's focus wasn't just on the failures she perceived within the Democratic establishment but rather on what she believes to be the misreading of public sentiment overall, especially when it came to the Biden administration. “They misread the mandate, Maggie, in 2022 of the midterm,” she stated confidently, underscoring her belief Republican victories were driven by genuine frustrations among voters. The discussion then turned to how Democrats were perceived as being out of touch, particularly over their handling of immigration and the general sentiment prevailing among constituencies.
This back-and-forth showcased the rift within Republican ranks and cast doubt on the potential strategies for the upcoming election cycles. Among the critics of Conway’s remarks, there's palpable concern about the divisiveness of the rhetoric and whether this approach can genuinely galvanize the party base needed to win broader national support.
Interestingly, Conway expressed confidence about the potential for Trump’s candidacy and the elevated traction he carries due to the current dynamics on the ground. By positioning both Trump and his supporters as clearly grasping popular sentiment, she reinforces the notion of Trumpism as more than just political preference; it’s seen as embodying the ethos of a large section of America yearning for security and stability.
At the crux of Conway’s remarks lies the tension between what she perceives as the authentic voices of average Americans versus those of the political elite. This narrative connects deeply to her assertion concerning why some Republicans, labeled as Never Trumpers, pose not just as political opponents but as barriers to the progress Trump and his base aim to secure.
By the end of the debate, it became quite apparent Conway's crusade against what she termed as ‘out of touch’ Democrats resonates strongly within certain circles. Yet, this very approach raises questions about the efficacy of divisive rhetoric among Republicans themselves. The political scene continues to be fraught with real debates over the direction, unity, and future of the party as they approach the anticipated 2024 election.
Whether Conway’s fiery assertions during the summit will unite the Republican constituents or deepen the divisions remains to be seen. Her perspectives contribute significantly to the conversation surrounding the Republican party’s identity crisis and the challenge of reconciling traditional conservatism with the contemporary populist movements driven by figures like Trump.
Conway’s performance offers insight not just on the political maneuvers of her preferred party but invites broader scrutiny on the reactions to cultural changes shaping political ideologies and loyalties, as well as what it means to lead during times of transformation.
