This decision from the Democratic National Committee to suppress the public viewing of its internal post-election analysis on the last presidential race appears remarkable but not surprising. Opposed to unpleasant candor, the party's leadership apparatus often functions more like a PR firm rather than a political organization committed to cultivating grassroots capacities capable of prevailing at the polls.
A Culture That Avoids Dissent
Unwilling to break with the party establishment's culture demanding unity, the committee has remained within the Biden-Harris shadow throughout this past year. Making public an official autopsy could have demonstrated that party leaders actually want to promote public discourse about the missteps that paved the way for the former president to return to the White House. Instead, the committee is acting as if there are no lessons to be learned from the stunning loss from the last cycle.
"Here’s our North Star: does this help us win? If not, it’s a distraction from the core mission," a justification reportedly given for withholding the report.
Major Failures a Report Would Have Addressed
A genuine analysis worth its salt would not dodge a series of difficult topics. These include:
- Electoral Disenchantment: The loss of millions of voters who supported the Democratic ticket in 2020 was decisive during the tight recent race.
- A Choice to Seek Re-election: The determined choice by the incumbent to run again, and an extremely delayed exit, has been criticized as robbing the party's base the chance for a competitive nomination process.
- Abandoning Everyday Americans: While facing economic anxiety, the electoral effort allegedly ceding to elite contributors and not managing to confront the effects of corporate greed.
- The Foreign Policy Effect: The refusal to shift an approach concerning a ongoing war reportedly led to driving away significant blocs, especially with youth voters, Arab-Americans, Muslim voters.
- Eroding Young Voter Allegiance: Extensive evidence indicates a major decrease of votes for the candidate from the youth electorate.
A History Avoiding Accountability
Choosing secrecy is consistent with a recurring tendency of evading uncomfortable facts. It echoes a dynamic in which virtually every elected Democrat in Congress acquiesced to a sitting president's determination to running for re-election until a disastrous campaign event compelled a reversal.
Concurrently, large majorities of the electorate had been consistently telling pollsters that they did not want the incumbent to be the nominee.
Campaign Spending Questions
An honest analysis could investigate matters about where money went, including the amounts were directed to party strategists as well as media firms during an electoral effort that burned through an enormous war chest in a short period.
A Underlying Problem
Ultimately, the secrecy surrounding this report highlights an allegiance toward party leaders responsible for a losing presidential campaign. The signal to ordinary supporters – including countless dedicated activists – appears to be that they do not have a right to understand what the insiders say they discovered based on a report compiled from feedback from all states.
An organization unable to critically review where it went wrong is unlikely to escape the rut which was so helpful to the rival party.
