When former President Donald Trump took aim at the hosts of The View during a campaign rally last October, it was a familiar dynamic in an increasingly symbiotic relationship between political power and daytime television.

At the rally in Reading, Pa., held as Hurricane Milton moved across Florida, Mr. Trump veered from prepared remarks to criticize the ABC talk show and its panelists. He described the hosts as “dumb people” and singled out Whoopi Goldberg, revisiting decades-old grievances from her past performances at his casinos. He characterized her comedy as offensive and suggested he had once employed her despite disapproving of her style.

By the following morning, “The View” had crafted a response that blended satire with rebuttal. As the studio audience applauded, Ms. Goldberg and her co-hosts entered to Christina Aguilera’s song “Dirty,” a pointed nod to Mr. Trump’s language. Ms. Goldberg addressed the camera directly, asserting that her comedic persona had never been a secret and that Mr. Trump had knowingly hired her multiple times.

“How smart is it,” she asked, “to criticize someone you hired not once but four times?”

The exchange was emblematic of a broader pattern that has defined Mr. Trump’s relationship with late-night and daytime television. Figures such as Jimmy Kimmel and Ms. Goldberg have frequently used their platforms to scrutinize his statements and conduct, while Mr. Trump has responded in kind — often elevating their commentary by addressing it at rallies or on social media.

In recent months, both Mr. Kimmel and Ms. Goldberg have openly questioned Mr. Trump’s public statements, citing fact-checking reports that document repeated inaccuracies. On air, Mr. Kimmel remarked that Mr. Trump had averaged dozens of false statements per day during certain stretches of the campaign — a figure derived from media tallies that tracked his remarks. The comment was delivered in a comedic frame but reflected a broader critique that has shadowed Mr. Trump since his first presidential campaign.

Ms. Goldberg’s criticism has, at times, been more personal and more direct. During one segment, she suggested that it was notable Mr. Trump appeared to react so strongly to commentary from a daytime talk show while the country faced significant challenges, including severe weather and legislative disputes in Washington.

The pointed exchanges are not new. Ms. Goldberg confronted Mr. Trump as early as 2011, when he promoted the false “birther” conspiracy questioning whether Barack Obama had been born in the United States. During Mr. Trump’s appearance on “The View” that year, Ms. Goldberg challenged his claims on air, calling them unfounded and urging him to move beyond what she described as misinformation.

That history resurfaced last fall after podcast host The Joe Rogan Experience host Joe Rogan suggested that Mr. Trump had once been warmly received by the show’s panel during a 2015 appearance. Ms. Goldberg responded by clarifying that Mr. Trump’s visit had taken place in 2011, years before he declared his candidacy, and that the conversation had included sharp disagreements over the birther issue. Producers replayed archival footage to support her account.

For Mr. Trump, criticism from television personalities has often served as both irritant and opportunity. Media scholars note that his willingness to respond publicly to entertainers — sometimes by name — helps sustain a cycle in which television commentary becomes rally material, and rally remarks, in turn, fuel additional segments.

“Conflict drives attention,” said Lara Whitman, a professor of political communication at Northeastern University. “When political leaders and entertainment figures engage each other directly, it blurs the line between governance and spectacle.”

The interplay can also underscore contradictions. Mr. Trump has at times claimed he does not watch certain programs that criticize him, yet his responses often suggest familiarity with their content. Critics argue that such reactions amplify voices he seeks to diminish; supporters contend that confronting detractors demonstrates strength.

Representatives for Mr. Trump did not respond to requests for comment about the recent exchanges. In previous statements, he has characterized late-night hosts as biased and politically motivated.

The broader media environment has evolved since Mr. Trump first entered national politics. Daytime and late-night shows now operate within a fragmented ecosystem of streaming clips and social media distribution, where short segments can reach millions of viewers within hours. A pointed monologue from Mr. Kimmel or a rebuke from Ms. Goldberg can quickly circulate beyond its original broadcast audience.

For viewers, the clashes offer a form of political theater that merges humor with substantive debate. For the participants, they present both risk and reward: the potential to energize supporters while deepening polarization.

As the 2024 and 2025 campaign seasons unfolded, the exchanges between Mr. Trump and his television critics illustrated how modern political discourse often unfolds not only in legislative chambers or policy speeches, but also on studio stages. Whether these moments shift public opinion in measurable ways remains uncertain. What is clear is that the boundary between politics and entertainment continues to erode — one segment, and one rally remark, at a time.