Morning Joe - Morning Joe 8/30/24

Episode Date: August 30, 2024

Harris defends her policy changes in first interview: 'My values have not changed'

I think sadly, in the last decade, we have had in the former president someone who has really been pushing an agenda and an environment that is about diminishing the character and the strength of who we are as Americans, really dividing our nation. And I think people are ready to turn the page on that. Vice President Kamala Harris in her first major television interview as the Democratic nominee. We'll have much more from that sit down conversation in just a moment. It comes as the vice president is gaining ground on Donald Trump and polling through key battleground states. We'll go through those numbers. Plus, we'll have the latest on the altercation between an aide to the former president and an employee with the Arlington National Cemetery. An update on that story. Good morning. Welcome to Morning Joe. It is Friday,

August 30th, the Friday of Labor Day weekend. With us, we've got Professor at Princeton University, Eddie Glaude Jr., National Reporter for The New York Times, Jeremy Peters, managing editor at The Bulwark, Sam Stein, and NBC News Capitol Hill correspondent Ali Vitale, Joe and Mika have the morning off. A great group assembled on this Friday, so let's dive right in. Vice President Harris yesterday did sit for that first TV interview as the Democratic nominee for president. Harris and her running mate, Governor Tim Walz of Minnesota, spoke with CNN while campaigning in Georgia. The vice president was asked about day one of her presidency and was pressed on criticism that she has shifted away from some of her more liberal policy

positions. Day one, it's going to be about one implementing my plan for what I call an opportunity economy. I've already laid out a number of proposals in that regard, which include what we're going to do to bring down the cost of everyday goods, what we're going to do to invest in America's small businesses, what we're going to do to invest in families, for example, extending the child tax credit to $6,000 for families for the first year of their child's life to help them buy a car seat, to help them buy baby clothes, a crib. There's the work that we're going to do that is about investing in the American family around affordable housing, a big issue in our country right now. So there are a number of things on day one. 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 it, 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. We did that with the Inflation Reduction Act. We have set goals for the United States of America and, by extension, the globe around when we should meet certain standards for reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, as an example. That value has not changed. My value around what we need to do to secure our border, that value has not changed. I spent two terms as the attorney general of California prosecuting transnational criminal organizations, violations of American laws regarding the passage, illegal passage of guns, drugs and human beings across our border. My values have not changed.

One, I am so proud to have served as vice president to Joe Biden. And two, I am so proud to be running with Tim Walz for president of the United States and to bring America what I believe the American people deserve, which is a new way forward and turn the page on the last decade of what I believe has been contrary to where the spirit of our country really lies. But the last decade, of course, the last three and a half years has been part of your administration. I'm talking about an era that started about a decade ago, where there is some suggestion, warped, I believe it to be, that the measure of the strength of a leader is based on who you beat down,

instead of where I believe most Americans are, which is to believe that the true measure of the strength of a leader is based on who you lift up. That's what's at stake as much as any other detail that we could discuss in this election. So, Eddie Glaude, one of the big questions going into this first interview was how she would answer some specific questions about clear policy differences, her positions from the 2020 campaign,

when she was campaigning in 2019, and where she stands now as the nominee. And we're going to get to some of those specifics in just a moment. Her overarching response to that was was my values haven't changed. I've come to understand some of these issues a little bit differently. And therefore, I've landed in a different place on issues like fracking. But I'm just curious, given that this was her first sit down interview as a Democratic nominee, your impressions.

Well, well, it's great to see you, Willie. I think I think I think she did well. She didn't do any harm. That's important. But I also thought the answer about the shift in the positions between 2019 and today was really, really spot on. You know, we could have consistent we could have values that constitute the through line of our positions. But the context changed, the situation changed, our experiences changed. And by virtue of that, we make decisions. You know, it's early in the morning to be quoting Ralph Waldo Emerson. But, you know, he says a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, a foolish consistency. And that has everything to do with judging your commitments over and against the changing circumstances.

So I thought she answered that question really, really powerfully. And there were some other powerful moments, too. So the final judgment for me, she did no harm. She set the stage for for the next time she sits down. Eddie, we'll take Emerson or James Baldwin from you at any hour of any day. So you get a pass on that. Oh, it's Jeremy Peters. This obviously was a big moment for the vice president, her nominee to be vice president at her side. Tim Walls was there as well. But this really was an interview about the candidate, about who she is, because there are open and fair questions about why she has changed so dramatically on so many key issues. What is the sense inside the campaign about how that interview went yesterday? I think, Willie,

the most telling phrase and probably the most important to Kamala Harris's appeal to the kind of voters she'll need to win was that phrase that she used about where most Americans are. I think overall what we heard from her last night really was a repudiation of the politics that dominated the Democratic Party in 2020 when she was, of course, running in the Democratic primary and had to stake out some positions that were not popular with most Americans. I mean, you know, she said that she was, you know, she reversed herself on the decriminalization

of border crossings. She said that, you know, she would support fracking. She said that she would appoint a Republican or that she might she would consider appointing a Republican to her cabinet. I mean, this is about as far from the Kamala Harris of 2019, 2020, as I could have imagined. And it's much more in step with where the kinds of voters are that she will need to win over in Michigan, Pennsylvania, suburban Atlanta, suburban Phoenix, because the policies that most Democrats, that a lot of Democrats were trying to embrace because they thought that's where the party was in 2020, were really out of step with the concerns of most

Americans. And that became evident when the Democratic Party rejected candidates like Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren in 2020 and went with the centrist Joe Biden. So I think she's she's really positioned herself in a way that should scare Republicans. I know that Republicans were scrambling yesterday to try to figure out how to push back on this interview. They once again have kind of failed to land a punch on Harris. And what you see, I think, is the kind of soaring rhetoric from her about uniting the country that a lot of people are really hungry for. And the criticism you hear from the Trump campaign and Republicans that they hope will take hold of independent voters is that Vice President Harris doesn't quite know who she is.

She was someone in 2019 and in the Senate that she's saying she's not now. But she answered specific questions to get into it a little bit more closely here. Vice President Harris pressed on those evolving policy positions, including on the question of fracking. Do you still want to ban fracking? No. And I made that clear on the debate stage in 2020 that I would not ban fracking. As vice president, I did not ban fracking. As president, I will not ban fracking. In 2019, I believe, at a town hall, you said, you were asked, would you commit to implementing a federal ban on fracking on your first day in office? And you said, there's no question I'm in favor of banning fracking. So,

yes. So, it changed in that campaign? In 2020, I made very clear where I stand. We are in 2024, and I've not changed that position, nor will I going forward. I kept my word, and I will keep my word. What made you change that position at the time? Well, let's be clear. My values have not changed. I believe it is very important that we take seriously what we must do to guard against what is a clear crisis in terms of the climate. And to do that, we can do what we have accomplished thus far. The Inflation Reduction Act, what we have done to invest, by my calculation, over probably a trillion dollars over the next 10 years,

investing in a clean energy economy, what we've already done, creating over 300,000 new clean energy jobs, that tells me, from my experience as vice president, we can do it without banning fracking. In fact, Dana, Dana, excuse me, I cast the tie-breaking vote that actually increased leases for fracking as vice president. So I'm very clear about where I stand. And was there some policy or scientific data that you saw that you said, oh, OK, I get it now? What I have seen is that we can we can grow and we can increase a thriving clean energy economy without banning fracking. So Sam Stein, pretty clear there. She says in 2019, I said I was I wanted to ban fracking in 2020 when I became the vice presidential nominee. I came on board with the position that we were not going to ban fracking.

And I hold that position today. The subtext, because Dana Bash did a good job asking specific questions then about immigration, how she's changed on a series of policies. The subtext is forget everything I said in 2019 when I was running in the Democratic primary. The person you should look at is the one sitting before you today and the one who was on the stage with Joe Biden in 2020. I mean, yes, that is the subtext. I've always wondered in these situations, could someone go full Bullworth, not Bullwork, Bullworth, and just be like, look, I was running in the Democratic primary. I needed to get some progressive votes, and now I'm not. Would that work? Probably not.

But that is probably the truth or close to it. I mean, there is some validity to the idea that the IRA, the Inflation Reduction Act, did spend historic amounts of money to prop up the clean energy economy. Obviously, that's helped pursue that economy and grow it in a way that allows for fracking. But, you know, if we're being frank about it, fracking is a huge industry or a relatively huge industry in a critical swing state of Pennsylvania. And you don't want to offend that industry. There's no good answers really to give to that question. I thought she, you know, did what she had to do, which is assert her position, explain as best she can and move on.

And this is, again, I am a broken record here. But, you know, this is why you probably should do more interviews, is that you get these things out of the way so that you can move on to more favorable terrain. And I imagine this will come up again during the debate. And I'm sure she'll have the same exact answer. So, Ali, I'm curious. You've covered then Senator Harris. You've covered Vice President Harris and now candidate Harris. In terms of her evolution on some of these positions, how do you see what you heard yesterday?

And again, what some of the criticism has been from Republicans, which is, well, of course, she's coming around to these positions now as a presidential candidate because she knows the people she needs to win sit where she says she sits now. What do you make of her evolution? How should voters look at it? I think, first of all, on policy, it makes sense that she spent so much of that interview focused on the accomplishments of the Biden-Harris administration, whether it was capping the costs of insulin, whether it was taking down overall prescription costs for seniors. Those are cornerstones of what they viewed as their first two years in office and their legacy going forward. It makes sense that that was a lot of the focus. I thought she was smart to explain her policy positions as not a change in values, not a change in her deep inner mooring and the way that she views things should change, but instead

something almost situational in terms of taking in more information. I will also say, as I put on my my gender in politics hat for a brief moment, it was a smart way to go about it because attacks on flip flopping and not being honest about your positions are in some ways more lethal to female candidates, because it is seen as in some ways being more duplicitous, more like they're lying. We saw it be very effective against someone like Hillary Clinton, in addition to Trump calling her crooked. That's Harris, I think, even though she doesn't talk about the gender role of this. It's her employing some of the studies and the data and the knowledge around how do you tackle the fact that her policy positions have in some ways changed and evolved. And how do you explain them in a way that's not going to feed into the most negative characterization that voters and people who are running against her could possibly give it? That definitely struck me as one. But look, as someone who's covered her

over the course of really the breadth that she's been on the national stage, this is a different person. And I'm sure that Sam and the rest of the folks on the panel who have covered her agree. She has a different kind of confidence. She is leaning into bipartisanship in a very Biden-esque way, in a way that really makes you wonder if that might not be the key thing that might have rubbed off on her over her time as the number two in the Biden-Harris administration. And I think that's the thing that she's going to try to use and leverage continuously, in addition to the fact that she's been the administration's strongest messenger on another key issue that is in the minds of voters, which is reproductive access and abortion care. And that's something that she's been leading on. That's kind of a softball for her

at this point. The rest of the harder policy stuff, of course, there should be more questions on. I'm interested in hearing more on. But in terms of this, I think the explanation tracks with where I think they're happy with it. I'll just say very quickly to Ali's point, I went back and watched the sort of infamous Harris interview with Lester Holt after this one. And what was remarkable was just how much more confident she was, how much more steady she was last night versus that one. I will say the other thing that sort of stood out for me last night was, you know, Dana Bash did ask her a question about the historic nature of her candidacy. First female candidate trying to break the glass ceiling.

Pointed to that picture, that now famous picture from the convention stage. And what was telling was that Harris just didn't take the bait at all. She said, yes, I'm aware of the picture and it means a lot to me. And that was it. And it's very evident in that answer that she knows the things that she needs to emphasize. And it's not, in her estimation, the historic nature of her candidacy. It's trying to sell herself to voters across the spectrum. And that was evident at the convention last week, too. That was not a theme of that week

in Chicago at all. One of the themes of that interview yesterday and at the convention last week was this turning of the page that we heard the vice president talk about in the interview. The refrain, we're not going back, talking about the dark years in her view of Donald Trump. Well, as you may have expected, Donald Trump weighed in on the interview yesterday. In fact, even before the interview, it was a prerecorded conversation with the Daily Mail. Trump criticized Harris for not doing her interview live, claiming it shows she is, quote, not very smart. Here's what Trump said. Why isn't it live? It's not a live interview.

It's an interview that's going to be taped and then edited and then put out. So that's not even an interview. Then she's doing it with her vice president sitting there. So she's not very smart. When they ask her a question that she can't answer, she'll just look at him. You answer it. In a fundraising email after Harris's interview, the Trump campaign called her, quote, the biggest liar ever to run for president. Some irony there, of course. The email also accused Harris of flip-flopping on those positions, something Trump has done repeatedly himself,

including yesterday on abortion and IVF. We'll get into that in just a moment. So, Eddie, as we think about this campaign as a study in contrast, you couldn't help but think in a nonpartisan way, just watching Vice President Harris have a conversation with an interviewer that did not include insults, cheap shots, that did not include his personal, her personal vendettas, her personal grievances. She answered questions about policy soberly. You can agree or disagree with the policy positions, but you talk about contrast. Watch Donald Trump speak and post on social media and watch Vice President Harris do that interview. Willie, that's that's such an important point. I mean, you're right. During the interview with Vice President Harris, there were positions that we

could sink our teeth in. There were positions where we could decide where where do we stand? We can we actually had an adult in front of us. And then there's Donald Trump. And what Donald Trump requires of the American voter is that we get down in the mud, that we kind of go to our lesser angels, that we go to our base instincts. And we saw that in sharp contrast. And I think when Vice President Harris said that we wanted to leave behind an error, I think it's actually embodied and represented in the contrast in those interviews, Willie. One, trying to get us to think about our future and our present, and the other, trying to get us to think about our future and our present and the other trying to get us to think about our more base instincts, our fears, our grievances. And that's a contrast. I think she continues. She should continue to make moving forward. And what she's doing critically

is not attacking Trump for what he is. She's telling us what he isn't. She's saying he is incapable of putting the country above himself because voters at this point know what Trump is. They know all the attacks. They know what a threat to our democracy he could be. But Kamala Harris is articulating, I think, a much more powerful statement about what four years of Trump would be. And it would just be selfishness. It would be chaos. And she's doing that by pointing out what he's incapable of. I think it's also critical to point out to Sam's point about the identity politics aspect of this all and how the Democratic Party really seems to have turned the page on this. I don't think that's so much

about de-emphasizing the historic nature of her candidacy. I think it's about not making the campaign about herself. You're not hearing the slogans, I'm with her, right? She wants to make this about the American people and how she will take us forward into a different kind of era, a kind of politics where we are not at each other's throats at the Thanksgiving dinner table, where we can once again, as you say, feel like the better angels of our nature are still there and need to be nurtured. So, you know, I think she's very wisely making this about the country and bringing the country back together rather than saying, this is about me. This is who

I am. And you already have one candidate who is doing that quite well. And by the way, the Harris campaign is happy to have Donald Trump step into the void every time like that, make it about himself, give the insults and give them the chance to say this is what we're talking about. Turn the page. We don't want to go back. NBC's Ali Vitale. Great job on way too early this week. Great to have you with us. Thanks so much, Ali. Appreciate it as always. Still ahead on Morning Joe, Vice President Joe Biden and President Kamala Harris are set to hold a joint campaign event this Labor Day in Battleground, Pennsylvania. Harris campaign senior advisor Adrian Elrod joins us for a preview. Plus, Federal Reserve officials

this morning will get the latest look at key inflation data, which could influence next month's decision on interest rates. We'll bring you those new numbers. Also ahead, we'll talk to NBC's Dasha Burns about her exclusive interview with Donald Trump, including his response to the criticism surrounding his visit to Arlington National Cemetery and a new position on abortion that has pro-lifers up in arms this morning. You're watching Morning Joe. We're back in 90 seconds. Former President Trump is responding to reports of an incident that took place Monday when he visited Arlington National Cemetery. In a statement, an Army spokesperson confirmed

a cemetery employee was, quote, abruptly pushed aside by one of Trump's aides at the ceremony. According to the Army, the employee acted with professionalism when she sought to enforce restrictions on taking photos and video within a sacred part of that cemetery.

When asked about the Army's statement, a spokesperson for Trump said it wasn't true, claiming the cemetery employee was the one who initiated physical contact and verbal harassment. In an interview with NBC's Dasha Burns yesterday, former President Trump responded to the criticism of his visit. I was asked to be there by the parents and by the relatives, and I went there for the parents and the relatives. And while I was there, I didn't ask for a picture. While I was there, they said, sir, could we have a picture at the grave? You have the tombstone. You have the name of the tombstone. They're crying.

They died because of incompetent leadership of Harris and Biden. They said, sir, could we have a picture? I said, yes. All of a sudden I hear that it's some kind of a PR thing. It's a disgrace. So Sam Stein, obviously, President Trump was there at the request of the families. He was doing that and they came out in support of him after all this happened this week of the 13 Marines who died at Abbey Gate in Afghanistan that terrible day as the United States left Afghanistan after 20 years. But where where is this story right now? Because we did hear very specifically from the army itself. And then we heard the Trump campaign kind of trolling the United States Army on Twitter and social media. Bizarre twist here. What exactly went down as we sift through all this? And what is the what's the state of things

right now? Right. So things are getting a little bit conflated. No one is, I think, objecting to the idea that Trump could go there at the request of the families who wanted him there. It's not a problem. I don't think anyone is saying he can't show up at Arlington Cemetery. Some people were kind of turned off by the fact that he was doing, you know, these thumbs up photo shoots. But where it really gets hairy is that he was told or his people were told specifically that there was a policy that restricted their access to a section of Arlington National Cemetery. Not that they couldn't access it, but they couldn't shoot video and take photos in there. And then, as far as we know, I mean, everyone agrees that there was some altercation, right?

An official with the cemetery tried to insist that they couldn't bring videos or videographers there. The campaign insisted that they could and would bring videographers there. Some type of altercation occurred. Everyone agrees on that. The question is, what kind of nature of confrontation are we talking about? The other thing that happened that is, I think, worth noting is that at this point of conflict, there were two routes that could have been taken. One is de-escalation and one is escalation. And it seems very evident that the Trump campaign chose the latter one, which is escalation. Not only did they go into Section 60 and shoot video, but they also then belittled the official, without naming this person, calling this person and saying they had mental health issues, insisting that they had every right to be there, threatening to release video if needed. And look, as a grand matter, this is the problem, I think, which is that there are very few places that we try to keep immune from partisan politics.

And this place is now being sullied by the Trump campaign because of their insistence that this person, this official, was in the wrong. You could have de-escalated. It could have been a relatively non-story. But in typical Trump fashion, they chose to just, you know, fight it through. And here we are. Yeah, Eddie, that's what it is. At the end of the day, the behavior is just grotesque. I mean, ask yourself, knowing what we know about Donald Trump for these last 10 years, at least, or go back further if you want, if you believe an employee at Arlington National Cemetery, sacred ground in the United States, trying to enforce rules that restrict video and political ads inside a cemetery, or Donald Trump and his campaign and

the people who are saying, as Sam pointed out, that this person was mentally ill, throwing that out there, that they were having some kind of a mental health episode and not just doing his or her job. And it tells you something that this employee did not want to press charges because the employee didn't want his or her name attached to something because he or she knew the threats that would come with that from Trump's side. Right, Willie. And, you know, I think our default position when it comes to Donald Trump and his statements should be, let's prove to me that you're telling me the truth. Right. We can't presume that he's being honest. We need to presume that he's being dishonest. It seems to me the evidence seems to suggest that. Right. And so and then it's just the level of what is revealed at the level of character that he would continue in this ongoing desecration of these very, very sacred spaces in our national history. So I think we need to, shall we say, cast doubt on the truthfulness of his claim and the campaign's claim and let the facts play themselves out, Willie. I mean, this is another example of his character, my man. And as Sam says, it just didn't have to be this way. We could have resolved

this and move forward. But no. Coming up, Vice President Kamala Harris was asked yesterday about Donald Trump's race based attacks on her in that new interview with CNN. We'll hear her response and we'll get a live report from Ukraine on the counteroffensive now inside Russian territory. The very latest in Morning Joe comes right back. I want to ask you about is what he said last month. He suggested that you happened to turn black recently for political purposes, questioning a core part of your identity. Yeah. Any same old tired playbook.

Next question, please. That's it. That's it. Vice President Kamala Harris in her first TV interview since becoming the Democratic nominee, quickly brushing off Donald Trump's comments on her racial identity as the vice president hits the campaign trail. There is a growing focus on a group of voters that doesn't usually get recognized as a political demographic that is mixed race voters, people of two or more races. Join us now, NBC News

correspondent and co-anchor of NBC News Daily, Morgan Radford. She sat down with a group of mixed race and multi-ethnic voters to get their take on this election. Morgan, it is great to see you. What did they tell you? Hey, they're really good morning. Look, this was a fascinating conversation, just to say the least. We talked to six people across a range of different racial, ethnic and political backgrounds in my home state, the swing state of North Carolina. And many of them said that, look, the census forms and the boxes on polls, they give them pause, sometimes even panic because of the choices that those boxes force them to make. But even though they said those boxes are getting better and a little bit more inclusive over time, people's perceptions politically can still be pretty narrow. Take a

look. I identify as Indian American and white, Asian. They're the face of a changing nation. When anybody asks, I just say I'm black and Puerto Rican. All my grandparents are from a different ethnic background. Multiracial Americans are now the fastest growing racial or ethnic group in the country over the last decade. And their voting power will be significant. In six battleground states, the population with two or more races has surged by more than 200 percent, including here in North Carolina's Mecklenburg County. Can you raise your hand if you are a Republican, Democrat, independent? Does the way that you identify racially impact your politics or specifically how you plan to vote this election?

Absolutely. How so? I'm not going to lend my support behind someone who does not support people who look like me. I don't think he sees me as who I am. Former President Donald Trump. Yes. What about the rest of you? I just don't think that Kamala Harris has anything vested in the air finger quote

black or Hispanic experience in so much as it would be identified by anybody that lives in those communities. You're saying you don't think that she can help black or brown people? No, I mean, going to Howard don't make you black. A conversation that quickly turned to this moment in a July interview at the National Association of Black Journalists. I didn't know she was black until a number of years ago when she happened to turn black and now she wants to be known as black. So I don't know, is she Indian or is she black? What did you think when you heard those comments? Highly offensive. I mean, I think

probably every multiracial, mixed race, biracial person has had the experience of someone else telling them that they are not something enough. I think it's kind of triggering. Right. I think it is impossible to be biracial in America. And I think that it requires that you're covering all bases at all times. And it requires constant recognition of both identities. And I think when Donald Trump says stuff like that about Kamala Harris and implies that she's like picking a race for political advantage, it's tapping into an

incredibly familiar sentiment that I think everyone on this panel can understand. LaMarie and Abdul, as Trump supporters, when you heard that comment, as mixed people, how did it register with you? Well, my first thought was, no, that wasn't very well thought out. At the same time, though, when I heard it, I didn't hear it as an attack on blacks or Indians. I heard it more so of him commenting towards identity politics and the appeal that some take to play up one side of their race over the other. Adul, I see you nodding your head. I agree with him. I didn't know. I didn't know she identified as black because everything I saw was first South Asian, first Indian.

There's none of that identified as black. Regardless of her parents, I mean, she was born in this country and she identifies as a black person in this country in an American way and a uniquely American context. I've never heard her identify herself as a black woman. She said multiple times she's a black woman. I've never heard it. But I'm black. Yes. And I'm black. Yes. And I'm proud of being black.

Politics sometimes becoming personal this year, with mixed-race Americans having representation on both tickets. I don't agree with anything J.D. Vance has to say. I mean, almost nothing. But I think it's incredible that we've gotten to a point where the vice president of the United States can have a wife named Usha Chilikari and a son named Vivek. That doesn't mean I won't vote against him in November. Even though you disagree with Kamala Harris politically, do you feel some kinship towards her as a mixed person?

Not personally. I find a lot of her trajectory to not be my brand of woman leader. We've got three major international crises going on and someone applying to be commander-in-chief. As a woman, I want to see you do more than, you know, appeal to giggling and having a girl moment on the stage. Was there ever a moment that sort of forced you to confront the concept of race?

For me, it's more about ethnicity. As you guys can see, I have an accent, right? And I speak with an accent. I don't think with an accent. You just learn to be comfortable in uncomfortable situations. A conversation with implications beyond the ballot box. I think every time we see polling, it's about race. And, you know, as a candidate of color, you put a lot of stake into how this candidate represents, say, the black experience or the Indian American experience. I think we will never ask Donald Trump or Joe Biden or Bill Clinton or George Bush to do the same thing. I think white people are expected and people of

color aren't. To do what? To be in the highest office in the United States. I should note that one of the gentlemen we spoke to there, Abdul Ali, is currently a Republican candidate for North Carolina's 12th congressional district. His opponent is Representative Alma Adams, who was elected back in 2014. But what's interesting is that almost all of these interviewees talked about legacies of things like the one drop rule, which was a legal doctrine that classified you as black if you had any drop of African ancestry. So basically saying that you belong to what's called the minority parent group instead of both groups equally. So until they said that mindset changes politically, they said we really won't be able to discuss or even really accurately capture the full range of this demographic politically. So, Morgan, help help me understand, because as I was listening to the exchange, it was a collision of all sorts of things. Right. A collision of race processes of racialization, how one is reviewed and read as a black person or a person of color process. Ethnic identification, the difference between racialization and being an ethnic identity,

the difference between the way race is lived, say, in the Bay, Oakland, San Francisco, and the way it's lived in Charlotte, North Carolina. All of these things are just colliding. And people are trying to get clear. But there was one of your person, one of the people said, it's impossible to be biracial in the United States. And that kind of crystallized it. Why? Why do you think he said that? What is it? What do you think it means? Is it about how?

How shall we say how fixed our racial categories are? And when people see beyond them, we kind of get confused. That was Landon. And Landon is half Indian, half white. And Landon was fascinated because he's only 18. So from the mouths of young people, of babes, as the old folks say, right, we had this incredibly clear notion of the difficulty, as you described, the impossibility, as he said, of being mixed race, because he said being mixed in this country by virtue of those fixed boxes and dynamics, it is an impossible decision because it makes you and forces this

choice upon you. And then he said, you're constantly watching all sides, constantly having to validate your very existence in this country. But what was also interesting was every single panelist there could describe to me the moment they were forced to confront the concept of race. And they said it was when they heard a derogatory comment because every single person could remember the first time they were called the N-word. I mean, I actually don't know a black person in this country who can't remember that first time. And they said that in that moment,

it forced a reckoning that who they were was not necessarily the way that the world always viewed them. So what's so important about a topic like this is that it doesn't get enough coverage, right? There's this impulse in the media, I think, to label candidates, you are this or you are that. And what Kamala Harris has told us in her responses to these various questions is, I'm me. She has actually said that. I am an American. I am me. I'm not going to let you put me in a box. She doesn't see the need to

get drawn into these debates if you can even dignify calling a question over like, you know, whether or not she's black at debate. She's not going to take that bait. And she says like she did to Dana Bash. Next question. I don't need to talk about this. I would rather talk about how to bring the country together instead of how to separate us by putting us or forcing us to pick a side and choose a box. And to your point, Eddie, I think one thing that also goes unsaid about her, it doesn't get said often enough about her mixed background, is the way that she is so comfortable in her own skin is a byproduct of her growing up in the cultural and racial melting pot that is California.

It's not the South, right? And you can kind of see that in this growing confidence that she has versus the Kamala Harris that we saw in 2019, who often didn't seem so comfortable. She really, I think, has figured out a way to talk about these very sensitive subjects or not talk about them. Yeah. And the question becomes, how does that play politically? Right. I mean, Morgan, you talk to these folks and two of them are Trumpist. So how are they reading her? Right. The ways in which she inhabits her identity, the culturally, at least not the way in which she's kind of read her body's read by, by Americans as such. I mean, they were clear. They said this was

identity politics. They said that she was playing up different aspects of her race, different elements of her story based on the audience. But, you know, Cindy, who was in the back, made it very clear that, you know, just because as a mixed person, I may share different parts of me that may connect with the listener. Doesn't mean that I'm being inauthentic in traversing those boundaries at the same time. Yeah. And do you think just really quickly, really sorry about this, just the very category mixed, does that actually show and reveal how deeply racialized it already is? I, I don't, maybe, maybe. But I think, you know, the more that we talk about the full categories, mixed or whatever you want to do it, I think that's what really helps us

capture the spirit of America. Right. I think that's where the boxes causes problems. Right. I think, you know, about my own family and my dad coming family come from Jamaica and Cuba. And those boxes didn't even exist, right, when he was filling out the census form. So for me, those boxes are now an option. But that's, you know, a lot something that a lot of generations face, identifying differently based on the plethora of options that we had that just weren't available before. Such a fascinating conversation. NBC's Morgan Radford, you always seem to start these conversations and we're grateful for that. And by the way, this is all very interesting when you put it in the context of

new polling to show how kamala harris is doing in the state of north carolina we'll show that in just a moment morgan thank you as always coming up democratic member of the house armed services committee congresswoman mikey sherrill of new jersey weighs in on the backlash to donald trump's visit to arlington national Cemetery. Also ahead, actors and comedians Jason Schwartzman and Robert Smigel join us with a look at their new film Between the Temples. Morning Joe's coming right back. A bit of a drizzly start to the Friday morning in Washington. Live picture of the White House at 6 at 650 on this Friday going into Labor Day weekend. Vice President Kamala Harris is now leading Donald Trump in all but one battleground

state, but they're very close. According to the latest Bloomberg Morning Consult polling, Harris leads Trump by two points among registered voters in Georgia and North Carolina, by three points in Michigan, four points in Nevada and Pennsylvania, and by eight points, at least according to this poll, in the state of Wisconsin. The only state where she's not leading is Arizona, but the race is tied there. The most notable shifts come from Pennsylvania, where Trump led by four points in a poll taken last month, and North Carolina, where he led by two points last month. We should note, though, that last month's result in Michigan and this month's in Wisconsin do appear to be outliers. All of this month's results are within the polls

margin of error. So Sam Stein, we say leads. Those races are all tied. And I think most people do not believe that anyone is leading by eight points in any of those states, including in Wisconsin. But the point is the momentum shift from where this race was a month ago when Joe Biden or just over a month ago when Joe Biden was still the top of the ticket and what Vice President Harris has done to energize Democrats. Yeah, I mean, it feels like an eternity. But I think if you remember about a month and a half ago, those states were not in play. It was Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. And even in those states, not in play. It was Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. And even in those states, those select few, the Biden-Harris ticket was down by three, four points. What Harris has done in about six weeks is fairly remarkable, honestly, to move the needle like that, to

consolidate, to build up a campaign, to take these narrow leads in a number of battleground states where Democrats were not expected to compete this cycle. All that has expanded the map. And then to do it and raise half a billion dollars, which will allow her to play in those states and then force Trump to spend resources in those states. I think that's critical. But ultimately, look, this is going to be just like 2016, just like 2020. It's going to be a couple thousand votes in a couple of states that decide the election. It's remarkable. This is the system we have. It's not a national popular vote. It's not that type of democracy. It's an electoral college

system. And so what I'm looking for, what I was telling Ali about is where is she going to go? Where are they going to spend her money? That's the real metric here. It's not what Morning Consult says on any given day. It's not with the, It's not whatever poll you want to point to. It's where they're spending their time and money, because that's the real indication of what they see as what's in play. And notable today is that they are on a bus tour in Georgia, which they clearly see as a big prize. And as you say, some Democrats are sort of worried with slipping away under Joe Biden, pulling back that state. You can throw Nevada into the mix as well. The paths have opened up a little bit with Kamala Harris at the top of the ticket. Also, according to a new Wall Street

Journal poll, Vice President Harris has taken a narrow lead over Donald Trump in a national poll. The poll, Harris leading Trump by a single point. So they're tied within the margin of error, 48 to 47. That's among registered voters. In a survey conducted late last month, Trump led Harris by a couple of points. In early July, before that shakeup at the top of the Democratic ticket, Trump led Joe Biden by six points. Again, we will note the new results are within the poll's margin of error. Voters in the survey also expressed concern about Trump's policies and his personality. Fifty nine percent described him as too extreme compared to just 46 percent who say

the same about Harris. Fifty six percent also say Donald Trump does not have the right temperament to be president, while 55 percent say Harris does. And Eddie, also, if you look at the perceptions of Vice President Harris, her favorable unfavorable is split down the middle in this new poll, 49 percent, 49 percent favorable, unfavorable. That's a big jump for her personally when she was vice president, even a few weeks ago, a couple of months ago, to be sure. So, again, this is a margin of error race, as we've been saying from the very beginning. But there is without question, we have enough data, enough polling to show that she has fully changed the momentum and the dynamics of this race. Absolutely, Willie. She has become the change candidate. And that's showing up in the polls, is showing up in the excitement and hopefully is showing up on the ground as

people are trying to organize as they make their way to November, Willie. Jeremy, your take on this sort of stew of polling, there's another one from USA Today, which tells the same story, that nationally, this is a effectively a tide race. And within those swing states, it varies a bit from poll to poll. But effectively, we're talking about margin of error. The difference, I guess I would say, is under Joe Biden, we were talking specifically about three states only effectively, which is Michigan, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin is the path, the blue wall that he was going to have to win. But that Vice President Harris now has opened up some other avenues to

victory. That's right, Willie, because when Joe Biden was the candidate, this election was going to be about him, his fitness, his competence to lead the country for another four years at his advanced age. Now, Kamala Harris can make this election about Donald Trump and his flaws. And that is a much better place for the Democrats to be. It's a place that they want to be. And I also think that what you've seen critically with her improvement in these favorable ratings is more people are getting a sense of her. A lot of the reporting that we at The New York Times have done lately has been trying to probe voters on what they know about Kamala Harris. And it may surprise

a lot of people who were watching the convention and cheering her on that plenty of Americans still don't know who she is. As one top Democratic strategist told me, she's famous, but she's unknown. And I think she has certainly gotten to fill in the blanks in herabor Day stretch of this campaign when we know not only will more Americans be paying attention, but they will start to actually vote. Early voting begins soon. And this is the time. I mean, it's no accident she gave this interview yesterday, right? Like she was fine not to give an interview for the first two weeks. Right. When, you know, relatively few people were paying attention except for us. But now she's it's it's it's go time. Yeah. A couple of the crosstabs on that Wall Street Journal poll, just to be specific, her favorable unfavorable, as I mentioned, is forty nine forty nine. And this poll back in

early July, she was underwater. Twenty three points on that question. So she has changed some perceptions about it. And Trump now holds in this Wall Street Journal poll an eight point advantage over Harris on who would best handle the economy. That was a 20 point lead for Donald Trump when asked versus Joe Biden. So she has changed this race without question. Jeremy Peters, thanks so much as always. We appreciate it.