This decision by the DNC to suppress the release regarding its internal autopsy report on the last presidential race seems shocking yet entirely predictable. Averse to frank assessments, the party's leadership apparatus behaves more like a communications shop than a political organization focused on building grassroots capacities capable of prevailing at the polls.
A Climate Resistant to Internal Critique
Reluctant to challenge the party establishment's culture of conformity, the DNC has stayed within that legacy throughout this past year. Publishing such a report could have demonstrated whether the leadership actually want to promote public discourse regarding the errors that enabled Donald Trump to become president again. Yet, the leadership is moving forward under the pretense that there's nothing to glean following the tragic debacle from the last cycle.
"Here’s our North Star: will this lead to victory? If the answer is no, it becomes a sideline issue from the core mission," an explanation reportedly given for withholding the report.
Critical Problems an Autopsy Could Have Examined
Any valuable post-mortem worth its salt would confront certain uncomfortable matters. Among them are:
- Electoral Alienation: Losing of a significant portion of the electorate who supported the Democratic ticket in 2020 became a critical factor during the tight recent race.
- A Choice to Run: The unwavering choice by the incumbent to run again, coupled with an extremely delayed exit, is viewed as denying Democratic voters of a genuine choice.
- Abandoning Everyday Americans: During a time of inflation, the electoral effort reportedly accommodating elite contributors without successfully attempting to challenge the role of corporate greed.
- A Gaza Factor: The refusal to adjust an approach on a major international conflict is cited as alienating key demographic groups, especially among youth voters, Arab-Americans, and Muslim Americans.
- Losing Young Voter Support: Research demonstrates a huge decrease in Democratic support among voters aged 18-29.
A History Shunning Scrutiny
The decision to withhold aligns with a longstanding habit to avoid uncomfortable facts. It recalls an episode in which the vast majority of Democratic officeholder in Congress supported a sitting president's insistence on seeking another term until a catastrophic public debate performance compelled a reversal.
At the same time, overwhelming numbers of Democratic voters had been repeatedly informing surveyors that they opposed that candidate to be the nominee.
Campaign Spending Concerns
An honest analysis would also probe matters regarding campaign spending, such as the amounts flowed to insider consultants and advertising contractors during a campaign that managed to spend an enormous sum in a short period.
The Broader Issue
At its core, the blockage regarding the analysis points to a deference toward the existing power structure responsible for a disastrous electoral effort. The signal for ordinary supporters – including millions of small donors – is that they cannot have a right to know what party chiefs have learned from an analysis compiled from extensive interviews.
An organization unable to honestly assess its own failings is unlikely to break free from the pattern that proved so advantageous to the rival party.
