After Vice President Kamala Harris’s Thursday interview with CNN, the cast of MSNBC’s 11th Hour could not defend her against accusations of flip-flopping on issues such as fracking, so instead they decided to portray such reversals as “clever” while wondering if she is the victim of a double standard.
Guest host and former Harris spokeswoman Symone Sanders-Townsend teed up a clip of the interview, “Vice President Kamala Harris has been accused—not even accused, like, it is a fact that she said a number of things in 2020, in her 2020 campaign that she has now shifted her stance on, and she responded to a number of those criticisms tonight. Watch this.”
The clip showed Harris telling Dana Bash, “I think the most important and most significant aspect of my policy perspective and decisions is my values have not changed. You mentioned the Green New Deal. I have always believed, and I have worked on, that the climate crisis is real, that it is an urgent matter to which we should apply metrics that include holding ourselves to deadlines around time.”
Sanders-Townsend then turned to senior national politics reporter Natasha Korecki and asked, “What do you think the voters will think of that answer, Natasha?”
Korecki loved it, “Well, I thought it was, you know, a clever answer, you know, relying on her values, and, you know, the other thing she did, when you watch the rest of her answers, is saying what she ended up doing when she was elected, you know, in terms of fracking.”
She added, “You know, what did you do? She cast the tie-breaking vote to allow more fracking leases and she said, 'Look, I ultimately said this is what I was going to do. I kept my word, and I will keep my word again,’ and I thought that was the strongest argument she could put forward right now. With what she's going to do if elected.”
Even CNN’s fact-checker, Daniel Dale, was unimpressed by such alleged cleverness. As vice president, Harris supports whatever Joe Biden supports. Citing what she did as vice president does not answer questions on how she would govern as president in her own right.
Sanders-Townsend then turned to Reuters White House correspondent Jeff Mason and backtracked on her earlier statement that Harris had flip-flopped, “You know, Jeff, it was interesting because Dana said, ‘Well, is there something that you saw, a policy that made you change?’ and she’s like, she reasserted, yet again, her same answers that, you know, she does not believe banning fracking, you can get the things out without having to ban fracking. So, didn’t give any inches there.”
She then shifted to Donald Trump, “I juxtapose that with the fact that, like, just today Donald Trump has now changed his position on IVF, it seems. The platform of the Republican Party apparatus says one thing, yet Donald Trump is now saying another thing on it. He shifts his positions all the time. I think this—there is a contingent here of— because Donald Trump is just, he is playing fast and loose with the truth often. Is this a standard that we are holding one candidate to and not the other? Because Donald shifted today and folks are writing it up as though, as though it is just commonplace.”
For his part, Mason claimed politicians on both sides frequently change their positions, so he does not know if there is a double standard. However, there is a double standard, just not the one Sanders-Townsend thinks there is, for MSNBC would never describe Trump’s IVF stance as “clever.”
Here is a transcript for the August 29 show:
MSNBC The 11th Hour with Stephanie Ruhle
8/29/2024
11:09 PM ET
SYMONE SANDERS-TOWNSEND: Let's play one of those exchanges. Vice President Kamala Harris has been accused—not even accused, like, it is a fact that she said a number of things in 2020, in her 2020 campaign that she has now shifted her stance on, and she responded to a number of those criticisms tonight. Watch this.
KAMALA HARRIS: I think the most important and most significant aspect of my policy perspective and decisions is my values have not changed. You mentioned the Green New Deal. I have always believed, and I have worked on, that the climate crisis is real, that it is an urgent matter to which we should apply metrics that include holding ourselves to deadlines around time.
SANDERS-TOWNSEND: What do you think the voters will think of that answer, Natasha?
NATASHA KORECKI: Well, I thought it was, you know, a clever answer, you know, relying on her values, and, you know, the other thing she did, when you watch the rest of her answers, is saying what she ended up doing when she was elected, you know, in terms of fracking.
You know, what did you do? She cast the tie-breaking vote to allow more fracking leases and she said, “Look, I ultimately said this is what I was going to do. I kept my word, and I will keep my word again,” and I thought that was the strongest argument she could put forward right now. With what she's going to do if elected.
SANDERS-TOWNSEND: You know, Jeff, it was interesting because Dana said, “well, is there something that you saw, a policy that made you change?” and she’s like, she reasserted, yet again, her same answers that, you know, she does not believe banning fracking, you can get the things out without having to ban fracking. So, didn’t give any inches there.
I juxtapose that with the fact that, like, just today Donald Trump has now changed his position on IVF, it seems. The platform of the Republican Party apparatus says one thing, yet Donald Trump is now saying another thing on it. He shifts his positions all the time. I think this—there is a contingent here of— because Donald Trump is just, he is playing fast and loose with the truth often. Is this a standard that we are holding one candidate to and not the other? Because Donald shifted today and folks are writing it up as though, as though it is just commonplace.
