🔗 Share this article

This action by the DNC to withhold the release regarding its internal post-election analysis concerning the last presidential race appears remarkable but not surprising. Opposed to hard truths, the Democrats' governing body behaves more like a publicity machine rather than an electoral entity focused on building a volunteer base to secure victories.

A Culture of Conformity

Hesitant to depart from the prevailing attitude demanding unity, the committee has remained within the Biden-Harris shadow throughout this past year. Publishing an official autopsy would have indicated whether party leaders are interested to foster honest conversation regarding the missteps which allowed the former president to win re-election. Yet, the committee is acting under the pretense that there is little to be learned from the tragic debacle from the last cycle.

Our guiding principle: is this good for winning elections? If not, it’s a distraction from what truly matters," an explanation which was presented to justify concealing the analysis.

Key Issues an Analysis Would Have Explored

An autopsy report of substance would not dodge a series of difficult topics. This encompasses:

• Electoral Alienation: Failing to retain among a significant portion of the electorate who supported the party's candidate in 2020 became a critical factor in the narrowly decided recent race.
• The Decision to Run: The stubborn choice of a party leader to seek re-election, and a very late withdrawal, is seen by some as denying Democratic voters the chance for a genuine choice.
• Abandoning the Working-Class Base: While facing economic anxiety, the electoral effort is criticized for accommodating elite contributors while failing to address the impact of profit-seeking.
• A Gaza Effect: The refusal to shift a stance regarding a ongoing war is cited as alienating many voters, notably among youth voters, Arab American communities, Muslim voters.
• Eroding Young Voter Support: Polling data indicates a huge decline in support for the party from voters aged 18-29.

A History Avoiding Accountability

The decision to withhold fits a pattern of evading difficult realities. This mirrors an episode where the vast majority of Democratic officeholder in Washington went along with an incumbent's insistence on seeking another term right up until a catastrophic campaign event forced a reversal.

Meanwhile, large majorities of Democratic voters were consistently telling surveyors of their opposition to the incumbent to run again.

Financial Issues

A substantive analysis might also investigate issues regarding campaign spending, such as the amounts went to high-priced advisors and ad buyers over the course of an electoral effort which expended a colossal war chest during the general election.

The Broader Problem

Ultimately, the suppression regarding the analysis points to an allegiance to party leaders responsible for an unsuccessful national race. The signal to ordinary supporters – which includes countless loyal volunteers – appears to be that they do not be trusted to understand what the insiders claim to have learned from a report based on extensive interviews.

An organization unwilling to honestly assess its own failings will struggle to climb out of the cycle which was so advantageous to their opponents.