The decision by the Democratic National Committee to suppress the release of its internal autopsy report on the last presidential race seems shocking yet entirely predictable. Resistant to frank assessments, the Democrats' governing body often functions more like a communications shop than a political organization devoted to building local power for winning elections.
An Environment of Conformity
Unwilling to break with the prevailing attitude of conformity, the committee has stayed within the Biden-Harris shadow throughout this past year. Publishing the findings would have indicated whether the leadership actually want to foster public discourse regarding the errors that paved the way for Donald Trump to become president again. Instead, the DNC is proceeding as if there are no lessons to glean from the electoral catastrophe from the last cycle.
Our guiding principle: is this good for winning elections? If not, it is an unnecessary diversion from our fundamental goal," a justification which was presented for withholding the document.
Critical Problems an Autopsy Could Have Addressed
An autopsy report with any value would tackle head-on key points of failure. This encompasses:
- Electoral Alienation: Losing among millions of voters who supported the party's candidate during the previous election proved pivotal in the narrowly decided recent race.
- A Decision to Seek Re-election: The stubborn choice by the incumbent to stay in the race, and a last-minute exit, is viewed as denying Democratic voters the chance for open primaries.
- Abandoning Everyday Americans: During a time of economic anxiety, the electoral effort allegedly bowing to powerful financial backers while failing to address the effects of big business.
- The Foreign Policy Effect: The refusal to shift a stance on a major international conflict allegedly caused alienating significant blocs, especially with youth voters, Arab-Americans, and Muslim Americans.
- Losing Young Voter Allegiance: Extensive evidence demonstrates a major decrease of support for the party among young voters.
A Pattern Avoiding Accountability
The decision to withhold is consistent with a pattern of sidestepping difficult realities. It echoes a situation where nearly all elected Democrat in Congress supported an incumbent's insistence on running for re-election right up until a disastrous campaign event compelled a change.
Concurrently, overwhelming numbers of the electorate were continually telling surveyors that they opposed that candidate to run again.
Campaign Spending Questions
A substantive report might also investigate matters about financial allocations, including how much money went to insider consultants as well as media firms over the course of a campaign which expended an enormous war chest in a short period.
The Underlying Problem
Fundamentally, the suppression regarding the analysis highlights an allegiance toward party leaders responsible for a losing national race. The implication to rank-and-file members – which includes countless loyal volunteers – appears to be that they cannot have a right to understand the lessons party chiefs have learned based on a report compiled from conversations with insiders.
A party incapable to critically review its own failings will struggle to climb out of the pattern that ended up being so beneficial to the rival party.
