This move by the Democratic National Committee to block the publication regarding its own post-election analysis on the last presidential race seems remarkable however to be expected. Averse to frank assessments, the party's leadership apparatus often functions closer to a communications shop than an electoral entity devoted to cultivating a volunteer base capable of prevailing at the polls.
A Culture Resistant to Internal Critique
Hesitant to break with the prevailing attitude of conformity, the committee has continued under the influence of the previous administration throughout this past year. Releasing such a report would have indicated whether party leaders are interested to foster public discourse about the missteps which allowed the former president to win re-election. However, the DNC is proceeding under the pretense that there is little to be learned from the electoral catastrophe from the last cycle.
The top priority: will this lead to victory? Should the answer be negative, it becomes a sideline issue from our fundamental goal," a justification which was presented to justify concealing the analysis.
Critical Problems a Report Would Have Addressed
A genuine analysis with any value would tackle head-on certain uncomfortable matters. These include:
- Voter Alienation: Failing to retain of a significant portion of the electorate who supported the party's candidate during the previous election proved pivotal in the narrowly decided recent race.
- A Insistence to Seek Re-election: The unwavering choice of a party leader to seek re-election, and a very late step-aside, is seen by some as robbing the party's base of a genuine choice.
- Losing Touch With Core Democratic Voters: While facing rising costs, the electoral effort reportedly bowing to elite contributors and not managing to confront the impact of big business.
- A Gaza Effect: The failure to adjust a stance on a ongoing war reportedly led to driving away many voters, notably among young people, Arab-Americans, Muslim voters.
- Losing Youth Allegiance: Research indicates a major drop-off of Democratic support among young voters.
A Record Shunning Scrutiny
Choosing secrecy aligns with a longstanding habit to avoid hard truths. It recalls a situation in which nearly all Democratic officeholder in Congress went along with a sitting president's insistence on seeking another term until a catastrophic televised debate forced an exit.
Concurrently, overwhelming numbers of the electorate had been consistently telling researchers that they opposed that candidate to run again.
Campaign Spending Concerns
An honest report might also probe matters about financial allocations, such as how much money flowed to high-priced advisors as well as media firms during an electoral effort that burned through an enormous sum during the general election.
The Larger Implication
Fundamentally, the secrecy of the official autopsy highlights an allegiance to the existing power structure who engineered a losing electoral effort. The implication to ordinary supporters – including countless small donors – appears to be that they cannot have a right to understand what party chiefs say they discovered from an analysis compiled from feedback from all states.
A political entity unable to honestly assess its mistakes is unlikely to escape the pattern which was so helpful to the winning candidate.
