CNN
—

A short campaign that emerged in a political storm, weeks before the party’s national convention. A news media that held Kamala Harris to a higher standard than Donald Trump. A hurricane that ‘ruined’ two weeks of campaigning.

Leaders of Harris’ presidential campaign defended their decisions in an interview released Tuesday, blaming several external factors for the Democrat’s defeat three weeks ago.

“There was a price to pay for the short campaign,” said David Plouffe, a senior adviser to Harris, who became the Democratic presidential nominee this summer after President Joe Biden withdrew from the race.

Three weeks after the election, Plouffe and three other Harris advisers spoke out for the first time on the liberal podcast “Pod Save America.” They said a 107-day campaign did not give Harris time to differentiate himself from Biden and craft a message that could warm up a cold political climate for Democrats. Harris’ top aides expressed no significant regret and suggested the vice president might have done better with more time.

“In a 107-day race, it was hard to do what we had to do,” said Jennifer O’Malley Dillon, the campaign chair, who pushed back against critics’ claims that they spent too much time attacking Trump and warning voters of what his second term could bring, and not enough to make a positive case for Harris.

“This idea that people have a well-constructed, already ingrained idea about Trump and don’t need to learn more,” Dillon said, “is a complete fallacy.”

None of the campaign brass mentioned Biden by name, but they repeatedly referenced political “headwinds” and touted how much Harris needed to bounce back to make the race competitive.

“Every time she spoke to a constituent, every time she showed up on her doorstep, she really leaned into her own vision. But the headwinds were tough,” Dillon said. “Where she campaigned, we did much better than the rest of the country.”

Harris himself also spoke about the race on Tuesday during a conversation with supporters. While she seemed less inclined to shift blame, the vice president also suggested the short campaign crippled her chances.

“The outcome of these elections is obviously not what we wanted. It’s not what we worked so hard for, but I’m proud of the race we ran, and your role in it was critical,” Harris said. “What we did in 107 days was unprecedented.”

On “Pod Save America,” campaign leaders also rejected suggestions that they should have responded directly to Trump’s scathing attack ad on transgender rights, which ended with the memorable line: “Kamala is for them/them. President Trump is for you.” The spot used Harris’ own words and highlighted support for taxpayer-funded gender reassignment surgery for transgender prisoners.

“If there is any belief that if only we had responded to this trans ad with national and major state ads, we would have won,” Plouffe said. “I don’t think that’s true.”

Quentin Fulks, deputy campaign manager, acknowledged the ad’s usefulness for Trump.

“Obviously it ended up being a very effective ad,” Fulks said. “I think that seemed to keep her out of touch.”

Still, the architects of the Harris campaign rejected suggestions some Democrats have made since the election that the failure to respond to the ad played a major role in Harris’ defeat. The consultants said they tested several response ads, but none were considered particularly effective in focus groups.

“We took it very seriously,” Plouffe said, adding that it did not determine the election. “This was not the driving force behind voter behavior like the economy.”

In a wide-ranging conversation with podcast host Dan Pfeiffer, a former adviser to Barack Obama, Harris aides defended the strategic decisions they made during the campaign, including extensive aid to moderate Republicans in the final weeks of the race.

“Of course you want to maximize your base. And that was a place where we spent a tremendous amount of time and a lot of resources. That is crucial,” said Plouffe. “You have to combine that with dominance in the middle. Not just winning a little. We must dominate the moderate voices.”

Stephanie Cutter, another senior adviser to Harris, said the vice president was “ready and willing to discuss Joe Rogan,” the popular podcast that Trump eventually appeared on and earned the host’s support. She said they couldn’t reach an agreement on scheduling.

“Would it have changed anything?” Cutter said. “It would have broken through, not because of the conversation with Joe Rogan, but because of the fact that she did it.”

Cutter and Dillon have also criticized the “traditional media” for not putting more pressure on Trump to sit down for a serious policy interview.

“Trump did none of that,” Cutter said. “Literally none,” Pfeiffer added.

Dillon finished the thought, “And I don’t feel like doing that.”

“We heard a lot about how she wasn’t doing enough media,” Cutter said.

They also criticized reporters for asking Harris what they described as lazy or incoherent questions during her handful of major interviews.

“We did an interview and Stephanie said the questions were small and process-oriented,” Dillon said.

“Stupid,” Cutter said. “Just stupid.”

“They did not inform a voter who tried to listen to learn or understand more,” Dillon said.

CNN’s Ebony Davis contributed to this report.