The action by the DNC to suppress the public viewing regarding its own autopsy report on the last presidential race seems stunning yet to be expected. Resistant to unpleasant candor, the party's leadership apparatus operates more like a communications shop rather than an electoral entity focused on cultivating a volunteer base for winning elections.
An Environment of Conformity
Reluctant to challenge the prevailing attitude demanding unity, the DNC has stayed within the Biden-Harris shadow all through this past year. Making public such a report might have shown whether the leadership are interested to foster public discourse about the strategic failures that enabled the former president to become president again. Yet, the leadership is moving forward as if there's nothing to be learned from the stunning loss from the last cycle.
The top priority: will this lead to victory? If not, it becomes a sideline issue from our fundamental goal," a rationale that has been offered for withholding the analysis.
Key Issues an Analysis Could Have Addressed
Any valuable post-mortem with any value would not dodge a series of difficult topics. These include:
- Electoral Alienation: The loss of millions of voters who supported the Democratic ticket in 2020 was decisive in the narrowly decided recent race.
- The Decision to Run: The unwavering decision by the incumbent to seek re-election, coupled with a very late step-aside, is viewed as denying the party's base of a competitive nomination process.
- Failing the Working-Class Base: Amid rising costs, the campaign is criticized for accommodating corporate donors' interests without successfully attempting to challenge the effects of corporate greed.
- The Gaza Factor: The failure to shift an approach concerning the situation in Gaza is cited as driving away significant blocs, particularly with youth voters, Arab American communities, Muslim voters.
- A Decline in Youth Allegiance: Polling data shows a major decline in votes for the candidate among voters aged 18-29.
A Record Shunning Scrutiny
The decision to withhold aligns with a longstanding habit of sidestepping hard truths. It recalls an episode where the vast majority of elected Democrat in Congress went along with a sitting president's insistence on running for re-election until a disastrous televised debate compelled a reversal.
Meanwhile, a significant majority of Democratic voters were repeatedly informing researchers of their opposition to the incumbent to be the nominee.
Campaign Spending Questions
A thorough autopsy would also probe matters regarding campaign spending, such as what sums went to high-priced advisors and ad buyers during a campaign which expended a colossal war chest during the general election.
A Larger Problem
Fundamentally, the suppression surrounding this report points to a submission to party leaders responsible for a losing presidential campaign. The message for ordinary supporters – which includes millions of small donors – appears to be that they cannot have a right to understand what party chiefs claim to have learned based on hundreds of interviews compiled from conversations with insiders.
A party incapable to publicly examine where it went wrong is unlikely to escape the pattern that proved so helpful to the rival party.
