The move by the Democratic National Committee to block the public viewing regarding its internal autopsy report on the last presidential race seems stunning yet to be expected. Averse to hard truths, the Democrats' governing body behaves more like a publicity machine than an electoral entity focused on building local power for winning elections.
An Environment That Avoids Dissent
Hesitant to challenge the party establishment's culture of conformity, the committee has stayed within that legacy throughout this past year. Publishing an official autopsy might have shown that party leaders truly desire to foster open debate about the errors that paved the way for Donald Trump to become president again. Yet, the leadership is moving forward under the pretense that there are no lessons to be learned following the tragic debacle from the last cycle.
The top priority: does this help us win? If the answer is no, it becomes a sideline issue from our fundamental goal," an explanation that has been offered to justify concealing the report.
Major Failures a Report Could Have Explored
Any valuable post-mortem of substance would not dodge a series of difficult topics. Among them are:
- Electoral Disenchantment: Failing to retain of a significant portion of the electorate who supported the party's candidate in 2020 became a critical factor in the close recent race.
- The Decision to Run: The unwavering choice by a party leader to stay in the race, and a last-minute withdrawal, has been criticized as denying Democratic voters of a genuine choice.
- Failing the Working-Class Base: During a time of economic anxiety, the electoral effort reportedly ceding to powerful financial backers and not managing to confront the role of big business.
- A Foreign Policy Effect: The failure to shift a policy position regarding a major international conflict allegedly caused losing significant blocs, especially among youth voters, Arab-Americans, Muslim voters.
- Eroding Young Voter Support: Extensive evidence demonstrates a major decrease in votes for the candidate from young voters.
A Record of Evasion
The decision to withhold is consistent with a pattern of evading difficult realities. It recalls a dynamic where the vast majority of elected Democrat in Congress went along with an incumbent's decision for seeking another term until a disastrous campaign event forced a change.
At the same time, overwhelming numbers of the electorate had been consistently telling researchers of their opposition to that candidate to run again.
Campaign Spending Questions
An honest autopsy could examine questions regarding where money went, including how much money flowed to insider consultants as well as media firms during an electoral effort which expended an enormous sum over a few months.
A Broader Implication
Fundamentally, the suppression surrounding this report is symptomatic of a deference to the established hierarchy that oversaw a disastrous electoral effort. The signal to the party's base – including countless small donors – is that they do not have a right to see the lessons party chiefs claim to have learned from hundreds of interviews drawing from extensive interviews.
A party incapable to critically review where it went wrong finds it difficult to break free from the rut which was so advantageous to the rival party.
