The move from the Democratic National Committee to suppress the release of its internal post-election analysis on the last presidential race seems remarkable however not surprising. Opposed to unpleasant candor, the party's leadership apparatus often functions more like a PR firm than an electoral entity focused on cultivating local power for winning elections.
An Environment Resistant to Internal Critique
Hesitant to depart from the prevailing attitude demanding unity, the DNC has stayed within the influence of the previous administration all through this past year. Making public the findings would have indicated whether party leaders are interested to foster honest conversation regarding the errors which allowed the former president to become president again. However, the leadership is moving forward as if there are no lessons to understand following the tragic debacle from the last cycle.
Our guiding principle: does this help us win? Should the answer be negative, it is an unnecessary diversion from what truly matters," a justification reportedly given to justify concealing the report.
Key Issues a Report Might Have Addressed
Any valuable post-mortem with any value would not dodge certain uncomfortable matters. Among them are:
- Electoral Alienation: Losing among millions of voters who voted for the Democratic ticket in 2020 proved pivotal in the close recent race.
- The Insistence to Seek Re-election: The unwavering decision by the incumbent to run again, coupled with an extremely delayed step-aside, is seen by some as robbing Democratic voters of open primaries.
- Failing Everyday Americans: Amid economic anxiety, the electoral effort reportedly accommodating corporate donors' interests and not managing to confront the role of big business.
- The Foreign Policy Effect: The refusal to adjust a stance regarding a major international conflict allegedly caused alienating key demographic groups, particularly among youth voters, Arab-Americans, and Muslim Americans.
- Eroding Young Voter Allegiance: Extensive evidence shows a huge drop-off of support for the party among young voters.
A Pattern of Evasion
Choosing secrecy aligns with a longstanding habit of evading uncomfortable facts. It recalls a dynamic where nearly all Democratic officeholder in Washington acquiesced to a sitting president's insistence on running for re-election right up until a catastrophic public debate performance compelled an exit.
At the same time, overwhelming numbers of the electorate were consistently telling researchers that they did not want that candidate to seek re-election.
Campaign Spending Issues
A substantive autopsy might also probe matters regarding where money went, such as how much money flowed to insider consultants and advertising contractors over the course of an electoral effort that managed to spend a colossal amount over a few months.
A Broader Implication
Fundamentally, the suppression of the official autopsy points to a submission toward the established hierarchy responsible for an unsuccessful presidential campaign. The implication to ordinary supporters – including millions of loyal volunteers – appears to be that they do not have a right to know what party chiefs have learned based on a report compiled from conversations with insiders.
An organization incapable to honestly assess where it went wrong finds it difficult to climb out of the pattern which was so helpful to the rival party.
