This action by the DNC to withhold the release of its own autopsy report concerning the last presidential race seems stunning but not surprising. Averse to frank assessments, the party's leadership apparatus often functions more like a communications shop than an electoral entity committed to building grassroots capacities capable of prevailing at the polls.
A Climate That Avoids Dissent
Unwilling to challenge the prevailing attitude demanding unity, the committee has stayed within that legacy all through this past year. Releasing an official autopsy might have shown that party leaders actually want to encourage honest conversation about the errors which allowed the former president to win re-election. Instead, the committee is acting as if there are no lessons to glean following the stunning loss from the last cycle.
"Here’s our North Star: is this good for winning elections? If not, it’s a distraction from the core mission," a justification which was presented to justify concealing the report.
Critical Problems a Report Could Have Examined
Any valuable post-mortem of substance would not dodge key points of failure. Among them are:
- Electoral Disengagement: Losing among a significant portion of the electorate who supported the Democratic ticket during the previous election became a critical factor in the narrowly decided recent race.
- The Choice to Run: The determined choice of a party leader to seek re-election, coupled with an extremely delayed withdrawal, has been criticized as denying Democratic voters of open primaries.
- Failing Everyday Americans: Amid rising costs, the campaign allegedly bowing to elite contributors and not managing to address the role of big business.
- A Gaza Factor: An unwillingness to shift a policy position on a major international conflict is cited as losing key demographic groups, especially among youth voters, Arab American communities, and Muslim Americans.
- Eroding Youth Backing: Polling data demonstrates a major drop-off of support for the party among the youth electorate.
A Record Shunning Scrutiny
The decision to withhold is consistent with a pattern of sidestepping difficult realities. This mirrors a situation in which nearly all Democratic officeholder in Congress supported an incumbent's insistence on seeking another term right up until a disastrous public debate performance forced a reversal.
At the same time, overwhelming numbers within the party's base were consistently telling surveyors that they opposed the incumbent to seek re-election.
Campaign Spending Concerns
A thorough autopsy would also investigate issues regarding financial allocations, including how much money went to party strategists as well as ad buyers over the course of an electoral effort that managed to spend a colossal war chest during the general election.
The Broader Problem
At its core, the secrecy regarding the analysis points to a deference toward party leaders responsible for an unsuccessful presidential campaign. The implication to rank-and-file members – including millions of dedicated activists – is that they do not be trusted to know what party chiefs claim to have learned from an analysis based on conversations with insiders.
A political entity unwilling to publicly examine its mistakes is unlikely to break free from the rut which was so helpful to the winning candidate.
