The decision from the DNC to withhold the public viewing regarding its internal autopsy report concerning the last presidential race seems stunning yet not surprising. Resistant to unpleasant candor, the Democrats' governing body operates closer to a PR firm than a political organization devoted to building grassroots capacities for winning elections.
A Climate Resistant to Internal Critique
Unwilling to depart from the party establishment's culture demanding unity, the DNC has stayed under that legacy throughout this past year. Making public the findings could have demonstrated whether party leaders actually want to foster open debate about the missteps which allowed Donald Trump to return to the White House. Instead, the leadership is moving forward as if there's nothing to be learned from the tragic debacle from the last cycle.
Our guiding principle: will this lead to victory? If not, it is an unnecessary diversion from the core mission," a justification reportedly given to justify concealing the document.
Key Issues an Analysis Could Have Addressed
Any valuable post-mortem worth its salt would confront certain uncomfortable matters. Among them are:
- Electoral Disengagement: Failing to retain among millions of voters that backed the Democratic ticket in 2020 became a critical factor in the close recent race.
- The Decision to Run: The determined decision by a party leader to seek re-election, coupled with a very late step-aside, is seen by some as denying the party's base of open primaries.
- Abandoning the Working-Class Base: During a time of inflation, the campaign allegedly bowing to corporate donors' interests while failing to address the role of big business.
- The Foreign Policy Effect: The failure to adjust an approach regarding a ongoing war allegedly caused alienating significant blocs, notably with young people, Arab American communities, and Muslim Americans.
- Eroding Young Voter Support: Extensive evidence shows a major drop-off of support for the party among voters aged 18-29.
A Pattern Shunning Scrutiny
This refusal fits a recurring tendency of sidestepping hard truths. It recalls an episode where nearly all Democratic officeholder in Washington acquiesced to an incumbent's insistence on seeking another term until a catastrophic televised debate compelled an exit.
Concurrently, overwhelming numbers of the electorate were consistently telling researchers of their opposition to that candidate to seek re-election.
Campaign Spending Concerns
A thorough autopsy would also examine questions regarding financial allocations, including what sums went to insider consultants as well as media firms over the course of an electoral effort which expended a staggering sum during the general election.
A Larger Issue
At its core, the secrecy surrounding this report highlights a deference toward party leaders who engineered an unsuccessful national race. The signal for the party's base – which includes millions of small donors – is that they cannot have a right to know the lessons the leadership claim to have learned based on a report based on conversations with insiders.
A party unwilling to honestly assess its own failings is unlikely to climb out of the rut that ended up being so helpful to the rival party.
