The decision by the DNC to block the public viewing regarding its own autopsy report on the last presidential race is remarkable yet entirely predictable. Averse to unpleasant candor, the Democrats' governing body behaves closer to a publicity machine rather than a political organization committed to cultivating local power for winning elections.
An Environment of Conformity
Unwilling to challenge the prevailing attitude of conformity, the DNC has continued under that legacy throughout this past year. Making public an official autopsy would have indicated that the leadership actually want to foster open debate about the missteps that enabled Donald Trump to return to the White House. Instead, the DNC is proceeding under the pretense that there's nothing to be learned following the electoral catastrophe of 2024.
"Here’s our North Star: does this help us win? If not, it becomes a sideline issue from the core mission," an explanation reportedly given for withholding the report.
Key Issues a Report Could Have Addressed
An autopsy report of substance would tackle head-on certain uncomfortable matters. These include:
- Electoral Disengagement: Losing of millions of voters who voted for the Democratic ticket during the previous election was decisive in the narrowly decided recent race.
- A Insistence to Run: The determined choice of the incumbent to stay in the race, coupled with a very late step-aside, is viewed as denying the party's base of a competitive nomination process.
- Failing Core Democratic Voters: While facing inflation, the campaign allegedly ceding to corporate donors' interests and not managing to address the role of corporate greed.
- A Gaza Factor: The failure to reconsider an approach concerning a ongoing war is cited as losing significant blocs, notably with youth voters, Arab-Americans, Muslim voters.
- Losing Young Voter Support: Polling data shows a huge decline in support for the party from young voters.
A Pattern of Evasion
The decision to withhold aligns with a pattern of sidestepping uncomfortable facts. It recalls a dynamic where the vast majority of Democratic officeholder in Washington went along with a sitting president's insistence on seeking another term right up until a catastrophic televised debate forced a change.
At the same time, large majorities within the party's base had been continually telling researchers that they did not want that candidate to seek re-election.
Campaign Spending Questions
A substantive analysis would also probe issues regarding where money went, such as how much money flowed to high-priced advisors and advertising contractors during a campaign that managed to spend a staggering war chest during the general election.
A Broader Issue
Fundamentally, the suppression surrounding this report is symptomatic of an allegiance to the established hierarchy who engineered a losing national race. The signal to ordinary supporters – which includes millions of dedicated activists – is that they cannot have a right to know the lessons the leadership say they discovered based on hundreds of interviews drawing from feedback from all states.
A party unable to critically review its mistakes will struggle to escape the pattern which was so advantageous to their opponents.
