My guess is they were afraid the autopsy would create discord in the party. Acknowledge how moderately Harris ran and that centrists in Congress have lost ground in all but two or three cycles of the twenty-first century and a lot of pundits, including some who root for Democrats will mock that they don't get it. Pretend it's still 1992 when there were four or five times the current number of centrists in Congress and the left will be upset.
You may feel that's a biased way to put it, but I speak in terms of hard facts. Don't live in a world in which the likes of Scott Brown, Dean Heller, Brad Ellsworth, and Joe Manchin must still be in the Senate.
I agree that this report shouldn't be made public. It is for internal consumption and edification only. When exactly have the Republicans ever aired their own mistakes? The Dems need to stop being so honest about their shortcomings. It just ends up as a continuous reel on FOX.
The DNC hasn't learned any lessons. if you look at the platform at least last time I looked at it it was the throwback to before the last presidential election and we know how that ended. In reality it wasn't a new platform. It was just the old one left up for everyone to look at which to me is pretty bad practice. The recent wins by democrats was inspite of, not because of the DNC…
There was recently a great interview with Rahm Emanuel on Pod Save America, and his explanation sounded more plausible which is that yes they still are going to release it, they should, but it wouldn't make sense to distract away from the current news cycle that has Republicans on the defensive on various areas. It makes no sense to not take advantage of the current news cycle of the Epstein files the infighting, the action against the citizenry with ice, and the military actions taken by Trump without Congressional approval in the southern hemisphere. That sounds like a reasonable explanation as to why they haven't released it.
I think our current leadership sucks and they need to pass the baton and I don't believe that any kind of report even if it was useful, would be acted upon by the current leadership. Sorry, but that's my negative/ realistic take.
On a positive note Democratic wins are because we have good candidates that are running good local and regional campaigns and it helps that the current administration is out to lunch.
If the DNC ever gets its act together, it would be helpful.
What is the use of an autopsy report if you’re not going to release it? Well, unless the report provided a clear answer to winning the propaganda war while the MAGA party controls all three chambers of our government and the Supreme Court, as well as a superior information ecosystem, it might not matter much. And if the autopsy does identify how the D’s can win the propaganda war with the odds stacked against them, they shouldn’t tell anyone and just launch their plan around Halloween 2025 - since the median voter cannot pay attention for more than a couple of weeks anyway.
Last - here’s my autopsy report - the D’s covered for a good man with a serious case of old age and cancer - the money people were willing to go along with it till it was too late - and we got a tin pot dictator backed by a determined administration seeking permanent minority rule. The end? I hope not. But I’m not really a hopeful kind of guy.
"Martin had decided over the summer to avoid addressing Joe Biden’s decision to run for re-election ..."
This isn't even the right question. How could an entire political party go down in flames because of a personal decision by an vain octogenarian who was clearly losing it? Why was an entire political party so afraid of internal disagreement that everyone just assumed it was Joe's decision to make, and they should not question it? No Democrat of any stature was inclined or prepared to challenge Biden in a vigorous primary campaign. This is the party's disgrace, and getting to the bottom of why this happened is key to going forward.
We see the same thing playing out again as the party establishment tries to discourage potential candidates from challenging incumbents. The gerontocracy is still in control, they still have no idea how to meet the moment, and they have to go. The ones who don't retire voluntarily have to be booted out in primaries.
Constantly rehashing the last election is silly and boring. Just a way to blame democrats for Trump. The voters are to blame for Trump. Not messaging. They own it and if they have to be convinced not to vote for a liar, traitor, and lunatic then fuck them. Grow up. Everyone knew who and what he was.
Important assessment. We can infer why the report wasn't released. It may be full of damaging criticism of individuals, policies, and material that would benefit Republicans. However, as pointed out, reversing the commitment has downsides. If it was as curt as Egan indicates, the way the decision was communicated does not reflect well on Martin's strategic skills . He could have been candid and acknowledged the kinds of things referred to above, except in more decorous language. Keeping things within party hierarchy is more of same.
In addition, re Harris' book: Why should she publish her evaluation of how the party went about the campaign IN A BOOK? Why doesn't she just give her evaluation to the DNC? What purpose is served by making it public? It shows she's just another politician, as many who voted against her thought.
Too bad she didn't acknowledge Biden's decision to run again was a mistake, which all of us registered Democrats knew, when she had the national platform. Those 10% of Dems who stayed home and gave Trump his win might have turned out had she been honest with the voters. Who was she protecting then?
Does she think that her thoughts about the current media climate and its misinformation and the sway of Trump-allied barons and personalities is a new insight?? Writing a book to get this message, long recognized by media analysts, across seems gratuitous. Again, calculated, for a political effect.
I'm a lifelong Dem. I like Harris and I voted for her. I DO NOT WANT TO SEE HER RUN AGAIN. I think she is a very flawed candidate, and her book proves it. I would love to see her as a Supreme Court Justice. There, she doesn't have to calculate her responses and her stands but can contribute her commitment to justice
I don't think that a lot more "evaluation" was required than that she wanted (maybe needed) a payday, and a book was the fastest way to get it. Mission accomplished.
Aside from that, 1000% agreement with everything you said.
Always glad to hear agreement. She needed a payday? Of course that's always operating with politicians, especially those that lose. Which contributes to the perception that she's a politician, only.
However, I also recognize that being a female and running for office is a very complex task, in the USA; but not the UK, Germany, New Zealand, Scotland, etc.
It sounds to me like either the report had some very hard truths to say about The Groups, The Donor Organizations, and the Consultants, or that those parts were edited out of the final version to placate them, and the resulting gaping holes would have caused more trouble and comment than not releasing the report at all. Shades of the Epstein Files, but in blue.
Those are the very entities that have made the party so unpopular with voters in general, so it seems the height of political malpractice to act like that can be camouflaged now. I imagine that, this being the Democrats we're talking about, someone eventually will leak it. I just hope that it's soon enough to do some good.
My guess is they were afraid the autopsy would create discord in the party. Acknowledge how moderately Harris ran and that centrists in Congress have lost ground in all but two or three cycles of the twenty-first century and a lot of pundits, including some who root for Democrats will mock that they don't get it. Pretend it's still 1992 when there were four or five times the current number of centrists in Congress and the left will be upset.
You may feel that's a biased way to put it, but I speak in terms of hard facts. Don't live in a world in which the likes of Scott Brown, Dean Heller, Brad Ellsworth, and Joe Manchin must still be in the Senate.
I agree that this report shouldn't be made public. It is for internal consumption and edification only. When exactly have the Republicans ever aired their own mistakes? The Dems need to stop being so honest about their shortcomings. It just ends up as a continuous reel on FOX.
Because it's clear we want the Democratic Party to be Left and not Right-Lite.
The DNC hasn't learned any lessons. if you look at the platform at least last time I looked at it it was the throwback to before the last presidential election and we know how that ended. In reality it wasn't a new platform. It was just the old one left up for everyone to look at which to me is pretty bad practice. The recent wins by democrats was inspite of, not because of the DNC…
There was recently a great interview with Rahm Emanuel on Pod Save America, and his explanation sounded more plausible which is that yes they still are going to release it, they should, but it wouldn't make sense to distract away from the current news cycle that has Republicans on the defensive on various areas. It makes no sense to not take advantage of the current news cycle of the Epstein files the infighting, the action against the citizenry with ice, and the military actions taken by Trump without Congressional approval in the southern hemisphere. That sounds like a reasonable explanation as to why they haven't released it.
I think our current leadership sucks and they need to pass the baton and I don't believe that any kind of report even if it was useful, would be acted upon by the current leadership. Sorry, but that's my negative/ realistic take.
On a positive note Democratic wins are because we have good candidates that are running good local and regional campaigns and it helps that the current administration is out to lunch.
If the DNC ever gets its act together, it would be helpful.
What is the use of an autopsy report if you’re not going to release it? Well, unless the report provided a clear answer to winning the propaganda war while the MAGA party controls all three chambers of our government and the Supreme Court, as well as a superior information ecosystem, it might not matter much. And if the autopsy does identify how the D’s can win the propaganda war with the odds stacked against them, they shouldn’t tell anyone and just launch their plan around Halloween 2025 - since the median voter cannot pay attention for more than a couple of weeks anyway.
Last - here’s my autopsy report - the D’s covered for a good man with a serious case of old age and cancer - the money people were willing to go along with it till it was too late - and we got a tin pot dictator backed by a determined administration seeking permanent minority rule. The end? I hope not. But I’m not really a hopeful kind of guy.
Another excellent article. I wondered what the story was behind canceling the release of the report. Thanks
"Martin had decided over the summer to avoid addressing Joe Biden’s decision to run for re-election ..."
This isn't even the right question. How could an entire political party go down in flames because of a personal decision by an vain octogenarian who was clearly losing it? Why was an entire political party so afraid of internal disagreement that everyone just assumed it was Joe's decision to make, and they should not question it? No Democrat of any stature was inclined or prepared to challenge Biden in a vigorous primary campaign. This is the party's disgrace, and getting to the bottom of why this happened is key to going forward.
We see the same thing playing out again as the party establishment tries to discourage potential candidates from challenging incumbents. The gerontocracy is still in control, they still have no idea how to meet the moment, and they have to go. The ones who don't retire voluntarily have to be booted out in primaries.
Constantly rehashing the last election is silly and boring. Just a way to blame democrats for Trump. The voters are to blame for Trump. Not messaging. They own it and if they have to be convinced not to vote for a liar, traitor, and lunatic then fuck them. Grow up. Everyone knew who and what he was.
The DNC is a sham.
Having been a democrat since 1960, I see no point in supporting the party any longer.
A rebranding is the least of their problems.
The party needs to earn my trust.
Important assessment. We can infer why the report wasn't released. It may be full of damaging criticism of individuals, policies, and material that would benefit Republicans. However, as pointed out, reversing the commitment has downsides. If it was as curt as Egan indicates, the way the decision was communicated does not reflect well on Martin's strategic skills . He could have been candid and acknowledged the kinds of things referred to above, except in more decorous language. Keeping things within party hierarchy is more of same.
Ken Martin has all the leadership qualities of a frozen waffle.
If the DNC is hoping to bring young people back into the Democratic party, this kind of lack of transparency is exactly the wrong approach.
Sorry to be so OT, but that picture of Ken Martin gave me a powerful flashback to early childhood:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1USHuud5i8
They chose the wrong guy.
In addition, re Harris' book: Why should she publish her evaluation of how the party went about the campaign IN A BOOK? Why doesn't she just give her evaluation to the DNC? What purpose is served by making it public? It shows she's just another politician, as many who voted against her thought.
Too bad she didn't acknowledge Biden's decision to run again was a mistake, which all of us registered Democrats knew, when she had the national platform. Those 10% of Dems who stayed home and gave Trump his win might have turned out had she been honest with the voters. Who was she protecting then?
Does she think that her thoughts about the current media climate and its misinformation and the sway of Trump-allied barons and personalities is a new insight?? Writing a book to get this message, long recognized by media analysts, across seems gratuitous. Again, calculated, for a political effect.
I'm a lifelong Dem. I like Harris and I voted for her. I DO NOT WANT TO SEE HER RUN AGAIN. I think she is a very flawed candidate, and her book proves it. I would love to see her as a Supreme Court Justice. There, she doesn't have to calculate her responses and her stands but can contribute her commitment to justice
I don't think that a lot more "evaluation" was required than that she wanted (maybe needed) a payday, and a book was the fastest way to get it. Mission accomplished.
Aside from that, 1000% agreement with everything you said.
Always glad to hear agreement. She needed a payday? Of course that's always operating with politicians, especially those that lose. Which contributes to the perception that she's a politician, only.
However, I also recognize that being a female and running for office is a very complex task, in the USA; but not the UK, Germany, New Zealand, Scotland, etc.
It sounds to me like either the report had some very hard truths to say about The Groups, The Donor Organizations, and the Consultants, or that those parts were edited out of the final version to placate them, and the resulting gaping holes would have caused more trouble and comment than not releasing the report at all. Shades of the Epstein Files, but in blue.
Those are the very entities that have made the party so unpopular with voters in general, so it seems the height of political malpractice to act like that can be camouflaged now. I imagine that, this being the Democrats we're talking about, someone eventually will leak it. I just hope that it's soon enough to do some good.