The action from the Democratic National Committee to suppress the release of its internal post-election analysis on the last presidential race seems shocking but entirely predictable. Averse to frank assessments, the party's leadership apparatus often functions more like a PR firm than a political organization devoted to building grassroots capacities for winning elections.
A Climate That Avoids Dissent
Unwilling to challenge the prevailing attitude demanding unity, the committee has remained within that legacy all through this past year. Releasing an official autopsy could have demonstrated that party leaders actually want to promote honest conversation about the errors which allowed Donald Trump to become president again. However, the DNC is proceeding as if there's nothing to be learned from the electoral catastrophe from the last cycle.
Our guiding principle: does this help us win? Should the answer be negative, it is an unnecessary diversion from the core mission," a rationale which was presented for withholding the analysis.
Critical Problems an Analysis Would Have Explored
An autopsy report worth its salt would tackle head-on key points of failure. This encompasses:
- Voter Disengagement: Failing to retain of millions of voters that backed the Democratic ticket during the previous election was decisive in the close recent race.
- The Insistence to Run: The unwavering insistence of a party leader to run again, and an extremely delayed exit, is viewed as robbing Democratic voters of open primaries.
- Losing Touch With Everyday Americans: While facing economic anxiety, the campaign reportedly ceding to elite contributors and not managing to challenge the role of profit-seeking.
- The Foreign Policy Factor: The failure to reconsider an approach concerning a ongoing war reportedly led to driving away key demographic groups, particularly among youth voters, Arab American communities, Muslim voters.
- A Decline in Young Voter Backing: Research shows a major decrease of support for the party from voters aged 18-29.
A History of Evasion
The decision to withhold is consistent with a longstanding habit of evading hard truths. It recalls an episode where virtually every Democratic officeholder in Congress supported a sitting president's determination to seeking another term until a disastrous public debate performance compelled a change.
Meanwhile, large majorities of the electorate had been continually telling surveyors of their opposition to the incumbent to run again.
Campaign Spending Questions
A thorough autopsy would also investigate issues regarding campaign spending, including the amounts flowed to insider consultants as well as ad buyers over the course of a campaign that managed to spend an enormous war chest during the general election.
A Underlying Problem
Ultimately, the secrecy surrounding this report highlights a submission to party leaders responsible for an unsuccessful electoral effort. The signal for the party's base – including millions of loyal volunteers – is that they cannot have a right to understand what party chiefs say they discovered based on an analysis based on conversations with insiders.
A party unable to honestly assess where it went wrong will struggle to climb out of the cycle that proved so advantageous to the rival party.
