The action by the DNC to suppress the public viewing regarding its internal autopsy report on the last presidential race appears shocking however not surprising. Averse to unpleasant candor, the DNC behaves closer to a PR firm rather than a political organization focused on building a volunteer base for winning elections.
A Climate Resistant to Internal Critique
Hesitant to challenge the prevailing attitude demanding unity, the committee has remained within the influence of the previous administration all through this past year. Publishing the findings would have indicated whether party leaders truly desire to promote open debate about the missteps which allowed the former president to return to the White House. However, the DNC is proceeding as if there are no lessons to be learned following the stunning loss from the last cycle.
The top priority: will this lead to victory? If the answer is no, it becomes a sideline issue from our fundamental goal," an explanation which was presented for withholding the document.
Key Issues a Report Might Have Examined
A genuine analysis with any value would confront certain uncomfortable matters. Among them are:
- Voter Disenchantment: The loss among millions of voters who supported the party's candidate during the previous election proved pivotal during the tight recent race.
- A Choice to Seek Re-election: The unwavering choice of a party leader to seek re-election, coupled with a very late exit, is seen by some as denying Democratic voters of a genuine choice.
- Losing Touch With Everyday Americans: Amid economic anxiety, the campaign allegedly bowing to elite contributors without successfully attempting to challenge the role of big business.
- The Gaza Effect: The refusal to shift a stance concerning a major international conflict allegedly caused driving away significant blocs, notably among young people, Arab American communities, Muslim voters.
- Losing Youth Backing: Research shows a significant decrease in Democratic support from the youth electorate.
A History Avoiding Accountability
Choosing secrecy fits a longstanding habit of evading uncomfortable facts. It echoes an episode where virtually every elected Democrat in Congress supported an incumbent's insistence on seeking another term until a poor campaign event led to an exit.
Meanwhile, a significant majority within the party's base had been continually telling researchers that they did not want the incumbent to be the nominee.
Campaign Spending Questions
An honest autopsy might also probe matters regarding financial allocations, such as the amounts went to insider consultants as well as ad buyers over the course of a campaign that managed to spend an enormous sum during the general election.
The Larger Implication
At its core, the secrecy regarding the analysis is symptomatic of an allegiance toward party leaders responsible for a disastrous electoral effort. The implication to rank-and-file members – which includes millions of dedicated activists – appears to be that they cannot have a right to understand what the leadership say they discovered based on hundreds of interviews based on extensive interviews.
A party incapable to critically review where it went wrong is unlikely to escape the pattern which was so helpful to the winning candidate.
