The action by the Democratic National Committee to suppress the public viewing of its internal autopsy report concerning the last presidential race seems remarkable yet entirely predictable. Opposed to unpleasant candor, the DNC operates more like a communications shop than a political organization committed to cultivating grassroots capacities to secure victories.
A Culture Resistant to Internal Critique
Reluctant to depart from the prevailing attitude demanding unity, the committee has stayed within the Biden-Harris shadow throughout this past year. Publishing an official autopsy would have indicated whether party leaders truly desire to foster honest conversation about the missteps that enabled the former president to win re-election. However, the leadership is moving forward under the pretense that there's nothing to glean following the stunning loss from the last cycle.
Our guiding principle: does this help us win? Should the answer be negative, it’s a distraction from the core mission," an explanation reportedly given for withholding the report.
Critical Problems an Analysis Could Have Explored
A genuine analysis with any value would confront key points of failure. These include:
- Electoral Disenchantment: Failing to retain of a significant portion of the electorate who supported the party's candidate during the previous election proved pivotal in the narrowly decided recent race.
- A Decision to Run: The stubborn decision of a party leader to seek re-election, coupled with an extremely delayed step-aside, is seen by some as robbing Democratic voters the chance for a competitive nomination process.
- Failing Core Democratic Voters: During a time of inflation, the electoral effort reportedly ceding to corporate donors' interests and not managing to address the effects of big business.
- A Foreign Policy Factor: The refusal to adjust an approach on a ongoing war allegedly caused alienating key demographic groups, particularly among young people, Arab American communities, Muslim voters.
- Losing Youth Backing: Extensive evidence demonstrates a major decrease in votes for the candidate among young voters.
A Pattern of Evasion
This refusal is consistent with a pattern of sidestepping hard truths. It echoes a situation in which nearly all elected Democrat in Congress supported a sitting president's decision for running for re-election right up until a disastrous public debate performance compelled a change.
At the same time, a significant majority of the electorate had been continually telling pollsters that they opposed the incumbent to be the nominee.
Financial Issues
A substantive report would also examine questions about where money went, such as what sums were directed to insider consultants as well as advertising contractors over the course of a campaign which expended a staggering amount during the general election.
A Underlying Implication
Ultimately, the secrecy surrounding this report highlights an allegiance toward the existing power structure responsible for a losing electoral effort. The implication for the party's base – which includes millions of small donors – appears to be that they cannot have a right to know what party chiefs claim to have learned based on hundreds of interviews based on feedback from all states.
A political entity unable to critically review where it went wrong finds it difficult to climb out of the pattern that proved so helpful to the winning candidate.
