The move by the DNC to withhold the public viewing of its internal post-election analysis on the last presidential race is shocking yet to be expected. Averse to frank assessments, the Democrats' governing body operates closer to a communications shop than a political organization focused on cultivating grassroots capacities for winning elections.
A Culture of Conformity
Hesitant to depart from the prevailing attitude of conformity, the committee has continued within the Biden-Harris shadow all through this past year. Publishing such a report could have demonstrated whether party leaders actually want to promote open debate regarding the missteps that enabled the former president to become president again. Instead, the leadership is moving forward under the pretense that there are no lessons to glean following the stunning loss from the last cycle.
"Here’s our North Star: is this good for winning elections? Should the answer be negative, it is an unnecessary diversion from the core mission," a justification that has been offered for withholding the document.
Critical Problems an Autopsy Would Have Examined
Any valuable post-mortem of substance would tackle head-on certain uncomfortable matters. Among them are:
- Electoral Alienation: The loss among a significant portion of the electorate who supported the party's candidate during the previous election became a critical factor during the tight recent race.
- The Insistence to Run: The stubborn decision by the incumbent to seek re-election, coupled with a very late exit, is viewed as robbing the party's base of a genuine choice.
- Failing the Working-Class Base: While facing rising costs, the electoral effort allegedly ceding to powerful financial backers and not managing to challenge the effects of profit-seeking.
- A Gaza Impact: The failure to reconsider an approach regarding the situation in Gaza is cited as driving away many voters, particularly among young people, Arab-Americans, and Muslim Americans.
- Eroding Youth Backing: Research indicates a significant decrease in support for the party from the youth electorate.
A History Shunning Scrutiny
Choosing secrecy aligns with a pattern to avoid hard truths. It echoes a situation in which the vast majority of Democratic officeholder in Washington went along with a sitting president's insistence on running for re-election until a catastrophic televised debate compelled a change.
Meanwhile, overwhelming numbers of the electorate had been repeatedly informing researchers that they opposed the incumbent to run again.
Financial Questions
A substantive analysis would also investigate matters about where money went, including the amounts went to insider consultants and advertising contractors during a campaign which expended an enormous war chest during the general election.
A Larger Implication
At its core, the blockage of the official autopsy highlights a submission toward the existing power structure that oversaw a losing electoral effort. The message for the party's base – including millions of loyal volunteers – is that they do not have a right to know what the insiders have learned from an analysis drawing from feedback from all states.
An organization unwilling to critically review its mistakes is unlikely to climb out of the pattern that ended up being so helpful to the winning candidate.
