🔗 Share this article

The action by the Democratic National Committee to withhold the release of its internal autopsy report concerning the last presidential race appears shocking yet not surprising. Averse to unpleasant candor, the Democrats' governing body operates closer to a publicity machine rather than an electoral entity focused on building grassroots capacities to secure victories.

A Culture That Avoids Dissent

Hesitant to challenge the party establishment's culture of conformity, the DNC has stayed within that legacy all through this past year. Releasing such a report might have shown that party leaders are interested to encourage open debate about the missteps that paved the way for the former president to win re-election. Instead, the leadership is moving forward as if there is little to glean from the tragic debacle from the last cycle.

The top priority: is this good for winning elections? If not, it becomes a sideline issue from the core mission," a rationale that has been offered for withholding the document.

Major Failures an Analysis Might Have Addressed

An autopsy report with any value would confront key points of failure. These include:

• Electoral Alienation: Losing among a significant portion of the electorate who supported the party's candidate during the previous election became a critical factor in the narrowly decided recent race.
• The Choice to Seek Re-election: The determined choice by the incumbent to stay in the race, coupled with an extremely delayed withdrawal, is viewed as denying Democratic voters the chance for a competitive nomination process.
• Failing Everyday Americans: Amid economic anxiety, the campaign allegedly ceding to corporate donors' interests without successfully attempting to challenge the role of big business.
• A Gaza Impact: An unwillingness to shift a policy position regarding a major international conflict allegedly caused losing many voters, particularly among youth voters, Arab American communities, and Muslim Americans.
• Eroding Young Voter Support: Polling data indicates a significant drop-off in votes for the candidate from voters aged 18-29.

A History Avoiding Accountability

This refusal aligns with a longstanding habit to avoid hard truths. It echoes an episode in which the vast majority of elected Democrat in Washington acquiesced to an incumbent's insistence on seeking another term until a poor public debate performance forced an exit.

Meanwhile, overwhelming numbers within the party's base had been consistently telling researchers that they opposed that candidate to run again.

Campaign Spending Concerns

A substantive report would also investigate issues regarding financial allocations, such as what sums were directed to high-priced advisors and advertising contractors during a campaign that burned through a colossal sum during the general election.

The Larger Problem

Ultimately, the suppression regarding the analysis points to a submission to party leaders responsible for an unsuccessful electoral effort. The signal for the party's base – which includes millions of dedicated activists – appears to be that they cannot be trusted to know what the leadership have learned from a report based on conversations with insiders.

A party incapable to honestly assess its own failings will struggle to climb out of the pattern that proved so helpful to their opponents.