The move from the Democratic National Committee to suppress the public viewing regarding its internal post-election analysis on the 2024 election seems stunning but entirely predictable. Opposed to hard truths, the Democrats' governing body behaves closer to a communications shop rather than a political organization devoted to cultivating local power for winning elections.
An Environment of Conformity
Unwilling to depart from the prevailing attitude demanding unity, the committee has continued under the Biden-Harris shadow throughout this past year. Releasing the findings could have demonstrated that the leadership actually want to foster open debate regarding the errors which allowed the former president to become president again. Instead, the DNC is proceeding under the pretense that there is little to be learned from the tragic debacle from the last cycle.
The top priority: is this good for winning elections? Should the answer be negative, it’s a distraction from what truly matters," an explanation reportedly given for withholding the analysis.
Critical Problems a Report Might Have Explored
An autopsy report with any value would confront certain uncomfortable matters. Among them are:
- Electoral Alienation: Losing of a significant portion of the electorate that backed the Democratic ticket in 2020 was decisive in the close recent race.
- The Choice to Seek Re-election: The determined decision of a party leader to run again, alongside a very late step-aside, has been criticized as denying the party's base the chance for a genuine choice.
- Failing the Working-Class Base: While facing rising costs, the electoral effort reportedly accommodating elite contributors and not managing to confront the effects of big business.
- The Foreign Policy Effect: An unwillingness to reconsider a policy position regarding a ongoing war allegedly caused losing many voters, especially among young people, Arab-Americans, Muslim voters.
- Eroding Young Voter Support: Research indicates a significant drop-off in support for the party from voters aged 18-29.
A Record Shunning Scrutiny
The decision to withhold aligns with a longstanding habit of evading uncomfortable facts. It echoes a dynamic where nearly all Democratic officeholder in Congress supported an incumbent's decision for seeking another term until a catastrophic campaign event led to a change.
Meanwhile, a significant majority of Democratic voters were repeatedly informing pollsters that they did not want the incumbent to run again.
Financial Questions
A substantive report might also examine matters about financial allocations, including the amounts flowed to insider consultants and advertising contractors over the course of an electoral effort which expended an enormous amount in a short period.
The Broader Issue
At its core, the blockage regarding the analysis highlights a deference to party leaders responsible for a disastrous electoral effort. The message to ordinary supporters – including millions of small donors – is that they do not have a right to understand what the insiders claim to have learned based on a report compiled from feedback from all states.
A political entity unwilling to publicly examine its own failings is unlikely to escape the pattern which was so beneficial to the winning candidate.
