🔗 Share this article

This move by the DNC to block the public viewing of its own autopsy report on the last presidential race appears shocking but not surprising. Averse to unpleasant candor, the Democrats' governing body often functions more like a PR firm than an electoral entity committed to cultivating a volunteer base for winning elections.

A Culture That Avoids Dissent

Reluctant to depart from the party establishment's culture of conformity, the DNC has remained under the influence of the previous administration throughout this past year. Publishing an official autopsy would have indicated that party leaders are interested to foster open debate about the missteps that paved the way for Donald Trump to return to the White House. Yet, the DNC is proceeding as if there's nothing to glean following the tragic debacle from the last cycle.

"Here’s our North Star: is this good for winning elections? If not, it becomes a sideline issue from what truly matters," a justification that has been offered to justify concealing the report.

Critical Problems an Analysis Would Have Explored

An autopsy report with any value would tackle head-on key points of failure. This encompasses:

• Electoral Disengagement: Failing to retain among millions of voters who supported the party's candidate in 2020 was decisive in the narrowly decided recent race.
• A Choice to Run: The stubborn choice of the incumbent to run again, coupled with an extremely delayed step-aside, is viewed as denying the party's base of a genuine choice.
• Losing Touch With Everyday Americans: Amid economic anxiety, the electoral effort allegedly ceding to powerful financial backers without successfully attempting to address the impact of profit-seeking.
• The Foreign Policy Factor: The refusal to reconsider an approach on a ongoing war reportedly led to losing significant blocs, particularly among youth voters, Arab American communities, Muslim voters.
• Losing Young Voter Allegiance: Extensive evidence shows a significant decline in support for the party among the youth electorate.

A History Shunning Scrutiny

The decision to withhold aligns with a recurring tendency to avoid difficult realities. It echoes a dynamic where the vast majority of elected Democrat in Congress went along with an incumbent's decision for running for re-election until a disastrous televised debate forced a reversal.

Meanwhile, a significant majority of Democratic voters had been consistently telling researchers that they did not want that candidate to seek re-election.

Financial Issues

A thorough report could investigate questions about financial allocations, including what sums flowed to high-priced advisors and advertising contractors during a campaign which expended an enormous sum in a short period.

A Broader Problem

At its core, the suppression surrounding this report points to a submission toward party leaders who engineered a losing national race. The implication for rank-and-file members – including countless small donors – appears to be that they cannot have a right to know what party chiefs say they discovered from an analysis compiled from conversations with insiders.

A party unwilling to critically review its mistakes finds it difficult to climb out of the cycle that ended up being so beneficial to the rival party.