🔗 Share this article

The decision by the Democratic National Committee to block the public viewing regarding its internal post-election analysis on the 2024 election is remarkable but entirely predictable. Averse to unpleasant candor, the party's leadership apparatus behaves closer to a PR firm than a political organization devoted to building grassroots capacities for winning elections.

A Culture of Conformity

Reluctant to challenge the prevailing attitude of conformity, the DNC has stayed within the Biden-Harris shadow all through this past year. Publishing such a report could have demonstrated whether the leadership truly desire to foster honest conversation about the missteps that paved the way for Donald Trump to return to the White House. Yet, the leadership is moving forward under the pretense that there's nothing to be learned from the stunning loss of 2024.

"Here’s our North Star: will this lead to victory? If not, it is an unnecessary diversion from our fundamental goal," a justification which was presented for withholding the analysis.

Major Failures a Report Would Have Addressed

Any valuable post-mortem of substance would confront certain uncomfortable matters. These include:

• Voter Alienation: Losing among a significant portion of the electorate who voted for the Democratic ticket in 2020 became a critical factor in the close recent race.
• A Insistence to Seek Re-election: The stubborn decision by the incumbent to run again, and an extremely delayed exit, is seen by some as denying the party's base the chance for a genuine choice.
• Failing Core Democratic Voters: Amid economic anxiety, the electoral effort is criticized for bowing to corporate donors' interests and not managing to challenge the effects of profit-seeking.
• A Foreign Policy Effect: The failure to shift an approach concerning a major international conflict allegedly caused losing many voters, notably with youth voters, Arab American communities, and Muslim Americans.
• A Decline in Young Voter Support: Polling data shows a significant decline of support for the party from the youth electorate.

A Record of Evasion

The decision to withhold aligns with a longstanding habit of evading difficult realities. This mirrors an episode where the vast majority of elected Democrat in Congress supported an incumbent's decision for seeking another term until a disastrous public debate performance led to a reversal.

At the same time, a significant majority within the party's base had been repeatedly informing surveyors that they did not want the incumbent to seek re-election.

Campaign Spending Issues

An honest autopsy could examine issues about financial allocations, including the amounts were directed to insider consultants as well as advertising contractors over the course of a campaign that managed to spend a staggering amount during the general election.

A Underlying Implication

At its core, the suppression of the official autopsy highlights a submission toward the established hierarchy responsible for an unsuccessful electoral effort. The implication for ordinary supporters – including millions of dedicated activists – is that they cannot have a right to know what the leadership say they discovered from an analysis compiled from feedback from all states.

An organization unwilling to critically review where it went wrong finds it difficult to climb out of the cycle that proved so helpful to the winning candidate.