The action by the Democratic National Committee to suppress the public viewing of its internal post-election analysis on the last presidential race appears shocking yet entirely predictable. Averse to frank assessments, the Democrats' governing body operates closer to a PR firm than an electoral entity focused on building a volunteer base capable of prevailing at the polls.
An Environment That Avoids Dissent
Hesitant to depart from the prevailing attitude of conformity, the DNC has remained under that legacy throughout this past year. Releasing an official autopsy might have shown that party leaders actually want to encourage public discourse regarding the strategic failures which allowed Donald Trump to become president again. Instead, the committee is acting as if there are no lessons to be learned following the stunning loss from the last cycle.
Our guiding principle: does this help us win? Should the answer be negative, it becomes a sideline issue from what truly matters," an explanation that has been offered to justify concealing the document.
Critical Problems an Autopsy Could Have Explored
Any valuable post-mortem of substance would confront certain uncomfortable matters. This encompasses:
- Electoral Disengagement: Failing to retain among millions of voters who voted for the Democratic ticket during the previous election proved pivotal during the tight recent race.
- A Insistence to Run: The stubborn choice by the incumbent to run again, and an extremely delayed exit, is seen by some as denying Democratic voters of a genuine choice.
- Failing Core Democratic Voters: During a time of inflation, the campaign allegedly ceding to corporate donors' interests and not managing to confront the effects of corporate greed.
- The Foreign Policy Impact: An unwillingness to shift an approach concerning a ongoing war allegedly caused driving away key demographic groups, especially among young people, Arab American communities, and Muslim Americans.
- A Decline in Youth Allegiance: Research shows a significant decrease of votes for the candidate among the youth electorate.
A History Shunning Scrutiny
This refusal is consistent with a pattern of sidestepping difficult realities. This mirrors a situation in which virtually every Democratic officeholder in Washington acquiesced to an incumbent's determination to seeking another term right up until a catastrophic public debate performance compelled an exit.
Concurrently, overwhelming numbers of the electorate had been consistently telling researchers that they did not want that candidate to seek re-election.
Campaign Spending Questions
A substantive report would also examine questions about financial allocations, such as how much money were directed to insider consultants and media firms over the course of a campaign which expended an enormous amount in a short period.
The Underlying Problem
Ultimately, the secrecy regarding the analysis is symptomatic of an allegiance to the existing power structure who engineered an unsuccessful national race. The message for rank-and-file members – including countless loyal volunteers – appears to be that they do not have a right to understand the lessons party chiefs say they discovered based on an analysis compiled from feedback from all states.
A political entity incapable to critically review its own failings is unlikely to climb out of the rut that proved so advantageous to the winning candidate.
