I've been told on multiple occasions
by numerous progressive groups in the aftermath of the 2012 election that the
GOP did an autopsy of why Mitt Romney had lost against Obama, what those
weaknesses were and that they chose to ignore them. Progressive Democrats chose
to argue years later this was a moral flaw and proof of the GOP's failings –
while ignoring, as they have done, the results of the 2016 election that
followed.
For that reason when Ken Martin, the
head of the DNC, finally released the official (albeit still incomplete) autopsy
of the reasons Democrats lost in 2024, I was neither shocked nor angered that
the loudest voices of the left did more than ignore what it said, they
basically said that the people who'd painstakingly performed it had no idea
what they were talking about.
I've known for a long time that when
it comes to election denialism the progressive left makes anything that Trump
or his colleagues say or do look like sane, rational people. They have spent an incredible amount of time
and energy arguing, with a straight face, that the conservative revolution is
either a complete illusion and that America not only still wants liberal
policies they've actually become more liberal in their thinking to the
present day, results of elections be damned.
The incredible electoral demolitions of McGovern, Mondale and Dukakis
didn't take place because Americans rejected liberalism but because the
electorate was either misled or is too dumb to realize how much the
conservatives and GOP are lying to them.
Furthermore if Democrats try to reach the rest of the country, either by
the Third Way or Obama's attempts, they have betrayed the cause and their
victories are irrevocably tainted. The fact that the voters have made their
choices clear on multiple occasions is just another in the endless list of
proving you can't trust voters with making decisions that affect their lives.
If they're dumb enough to believe that the left all but says out loud, why
should anyone trust them with the direction of the country?
The left has, if anything, less use
for democracy or politics then the right does and in the last decade they've
doubled down on that believe. Increasingly the academic wing of the party has
pushed as hard as they can that Bernie Sanders, who is a socialist who only
caucuses with the Democrats, should be the baseline for any Democratic
candidate in any office around the country. That Sanders never won the
Democratic nomination and has no real legislation to his credit, is irrelevant
to the discussion as is the fact that the more the Democrats made Sanders the
face of their party, their electoral footprint in much of the country,
including rural America and white working class voters, has eroded to its
lowest points in years. The party has allowed Sanders a ridiculous amount of
influence in its thinking since the 2016 election and the Biden administration,
none of which, I should make clear has done anything to convince the majority
of left-wing thinkers to embrace the party even after Trump's first term. They
remain convinced AOC and the Squad are the future of the party even though they
are still a fragment of the party overall.
The arithmetic of the 2024 election
made it very clear why Harris lost in 2024: she carried just eight percent of
rural America and barely a third of the white working class voter, the lowest
numbers for any Democrat in history. For all the abuse Martin has taken in some
circles every indication is he is doing the hard work of what is necessary to
rebuild the party. That included eventually firing David Hogg as Vice Chair
when he made it clear he was planning to primary active Democrats, something
that has been forbidden by DNC rules, the slow long process of rebuilding the
party at a national level in every state of the union and recruiting candidates
to run in every state and local office, including some deep red states and
districts. There have been many signs in 2025 this strategy has been paying
dividends: Democrats have been overperforming across the board, winning state
seats in deep red districts, including in Iowa and Louisiana and overperforming
– though not winning – in deep red districts Republicans carried by larger
margins just last year. Martin should be applauded for making hard decisions
that may very well may enormous dividends in a few months' time for his party.
The postelection report also tells
uncomfortable truths. It says millions of Americans are suffering from poor
access to health care and a failing infrastructure yet continue to be persuaded
to vote against their own best interests with the Democratic party. It calls
for a renewed focus on the voters of Middle America and the South who 'have
come to believe that they are not included in the Democratic vision of a
stronger and more dynamic America for everyone." It speaks to a reduction
in support and training for Democratic state parties, voter registration shifts
and 'a persistent inability or unwillingness to listen to all voters."
All of these are conclusions that are
hard to escape for anyone who has been a Democrat for an extended period. More
importantly it's clear that Martin is doing the work that the autopsy is
calling for. And yet many Democrats are still calling for Martin to resign,
particularly from progressives because it is not what they want to hear. They
want to be told that the failings of the Democrats have nothing to do
with them and everything to do with the Democrats complete and utter
unwillingness to embrace their agenda.
In their mind multiple publications,
including the left wing leaning The Guardian, say that the fact that the
Democrats did not, in their opinion, put Gaza front and center during the
election was a key factor in their defeat. It was a key factor in why
progressives chose not to vote for Democrats – I've seen multiple
left-wing articles arguing this point even prior to the election – but that's
part of the left's reductive thinking: that what their top priority is at any
given moment, must therefore be not just the Democratic Party, but America, if
not the world. That none of the candidates of either party were running to be
elected President of Gaza but rather to be President of the United States is
not a consideration for the left.
The argument that publications like The
Guardian make is that a significant portion of Biden voters who didn't vote
for Harris said that her position on Gaza was key to their not voting. The
problem is exit polling for every swing state on election night made it very
clear that for the majority of voters, their top issue was the economy. The
left wants to ignore that, mostly because for the majority of them, economic improvement
is not their top concern but as the autopsy points out that's the problem the
party cares about more then the left, for whom its clearly more abstract.
Furthermore The Guardian wants
to make the argument, more or less indirectly that Harris was not a flawed
candidate but that Harris was given unfair treatment because of her race and
gender. Or in the progressive translation, they want the report to indict the
media in all forms as racist and sexist, even though that's not a problem the
Democratic Party should have to solve. By that definition they can continue to
label the parts of the country they don't like as racist and sexist and
therefore the party should not bother to win them over. To be clear the
Guardian says it acknowledges gaps among male voters, suburban voters, rural
voters and the Latino voter shift which is what a political party has to do
because that's something they can solve. But as always they want them to call
institutions racist and sexist at the same time even though it won't solve
anything and will almost certainly isolate the very voters they're trying to
win back.
The Guardian's contradictions can be the definition
of hairsplitting. They argue that the autopsy doesn't mention Trump's
appearance on Joe Rogan or Harris's decision to decline. The report spends a
lot of time dealing with the Democrats failure to reach young men on digital
platforms and the need to meet voters 'where they are' – which would seem to be
by extension on podcasts like Rogan. But because they don't spell it out
directly in the minds of the left, they're not saying it at all. To be clear by
saying anything that is obvious to the left one gets no credit for it, so if
they mentioned: "Harris should have gone on Joe Rogan" in big bold
font, The Guardian no doubt would have said: "Why should we give them
credit for saying what we already knew to be true?"
Its worth noting the remarks about the
autopsy basically break down along ideological lines. Liam Kerr, head of a centrist Democrat
coalition, made it clear that their losses were because of 'a decade accepting
all edits from every progressive group." Johnathan Cowan, the head of
Third Way said this report was shelved because it would anger
progressives – which as we can see is exactly what happened.
The clearest line that makes me think
that the report is correct is this: At times, it seems Democrats are trying
to win arguments while Republicans are focused on winning elections." Martin by any measure is doing everything to
help the Democrats do so in the last year and has been remarkably successful.
For people like Hogg, who are very clear that winning elections is less important
then ideological candidates who win the arguments.
The autopsy did what it was supposed
to and provided lessons in order to move forward in the midterms. But most of
the people involved want the lessons to be the ones that place blame on someone
else whether it is those associated with the Harris campaign or the progressive
wing.
Martin has spent the last year
attempting to steer the party forward, which is honestly the right move. But
numerous progressive groups made it clear that they wanted it released. Now
groups like Roots Action, keeping with progressives, are angry with what was
released, mainly because it didn't tell them exactly what they wanted to hear.
And of course the only thing they want
to here is that the only reason the Democrats lost in 2024 is that they didn't
agree to endorse the Justice Democrats platform fully and completely as part of
the Democratic platform along with anything that the Squad chose to say in a
tweet. That the reason any voter dares to vote Republican is because they are a
racist even if their African-American, part of the patriarchy even if their
female, xenophobic even if their LatinX etc. That the Democratic party should
start giving voters IQ tests if they come to the polls and pull our voter
outreach from any part of America that isn't on the coast. That they should
stop trying to win voters in red states and focus on making the Virgin Islands
and America Samoa full states. And that
when it wins its next election President AOC must dissolve the Republican Party
and the Democratic Party and install herself as Queen for life to enact the
warmth of collectivism throughout America.
It's a complete and utter fantasy, as
ridiculous and absurd as any of the rants that you find at a MAGA rally. But if
you, like me, have spent enough time among the progressives and liberals you
know that in their hearts its what they believe America is and always wants
regardless of the results of any election. They don't want an autopsy that
reveals the truth; they want fanfiction.
Even in its admittedly incomplete form
the autopsy of the 2024 has many strengths, not the least of which that it once
again provides a key hypocrisy of a progressive talking point. It has become
the gospel of the progressive that one of their critical objectives, one that
justifies so much of their behavior, is that they are 'speaking truth to
power'. This autopsy literally did just that and as always the progressives in
power made it very clear that when they were told a truth that didn't agree
with their preconceptions they could be as thin-skinned and mean-spirited as
any reaction the once and current President ever reveals when he feels as
wronged. That this autopsy basically gave an argument why he has this power is
another irony that I can appreciate even as I know that the progressive voices
will never see it for themselves, much less accept it.
No comments:
Post a Comment