This action from the DNC to withhold the public viewing of its own post-election analysis concerning the last presidential race appears remarkable yet to be expected. Averse to frank assessments, the party's leadership apparatus behaves closer to a PR firm than a political organization focused on cultivating a volunteer base capable of prevailing at the polls.
A Culture That Avoids Dissent
Unwilling to break with the party establishment's culture demanding unity, the DNC has remained under the Biden-Harris shadow throughout this past year. Releasing such a report could have demonstrated whether party leaders actually want to promote public discourse about the strategic failures that enabled the former president to return to the White House. However, the DNC is proceeding under the pretense that there are no lessons to be learned following the stunning loss from the last cycle.
Our guiding principle: is this good for winning elections? If not, it is an unnecessary diversion from the core mission," an explanation reportedly given for withholding the document.
Critical Problems an Analysis Might Have Addressed
Any valuable post-mortem with any value would tackle head-on key points of failure. These include:
- Voter Alienation: Failing to retain among a significant portion of the electorate who supported the Democratic ticket during the previous election became a critical factor during the tight recent race.
- A Decision to Seek Re-election: The determined insistence of the incumbent to seek re-election, and an extremely delayed exit, has been criticized as robbing the party's base the chance for a genuine choice.
- Failing the Working-Class Base: While facing rising costs, the campaign allegedly ceding to elite contributors while failing to challenge the role of corporate greed.
- The Gaza Effect: The refusal to shift a stance concerning a ongoing war allegedly caused alienating significant blocs, notably among youth voters, Arab American communities, Muslim voters.
- Losing Young Voter Backing: Research shows a huge drop-off in votes for the candidate among the youth electorate.
A History Shunning Scrutiny
This refusal fits a pattern of evading uncomfortable facts. It echoes an episode where virtually every elected Democrat in Washington acquiesced to a sitting president's decision for running for re-election until a poor campaign event compelled a change.
Meanwhile, large majorities of Democratic voters were repeatedly informing researchers that they opposed that candidate to be the nominee.
Campaign Spending Issues
A substantive autopsy would also examine issues regarding campaign spending, such as the amounts were directed to high-priced advisors as well as advertising contractors during an electoral effort that managed to spend a staggering sum over a few months.
The Broader Problem
Ultimately, the suppression of the official autopsy is symptomatic of a submission toward the established hierarchy that oversaw an unsuccessful presidential campaign. The message to ordinary supporters – including millions of dedicated activists – is that they do not have a right to see what the leadership say they discovered based on an analysis compiled from feedback from all states.
An organization incapable to publicly examine its own failings is unlikely to climb out of the rut that ended up being so beneficial to the rival party.
