Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin has released a critical study of the party’s performance in the 2024 campaign.

NEW YORK (AP) — Kamala Harris “wrote off rural America” during the 2024 presidential campaign and failed to attack Donald Trump with sufficient “negative firepower,” according to a long-awaited post-election autopsy released on Thursday by the Democratic National Committee.

The committee’s chair, Ken Martin, shared the 192-page report only after facing intense internal pressure from frustrated Democratic operatives concerned with his leadership. Martin had originally promised to release the autopsy, only to keep it under wraps for months because he was concerned it would be a distraction ahead of the midterms as Democrats mobilize to take back control of Congress.

    • baronvonj ( baronvonj@piefed.social ) English
      6·
      5 个月前

      The blame doesn’t fall wholly on the one side or the other, here. Between the voters, nominees, campaign runners, and the party itself every had something they needed to do to win. Failures were made among all groups and it’s valid to point all of them out.

        • baronvonj ( baronvonj@piefed.social ) English
          3·
          5 个月前

          One of the candidates on the ballot will be sworn into office whether you vote or not. So regardless if you’re voting for someone or against someone, it’s foolish to silence your only voice in the selection process.

            • baronvonj ( baronvonj@piefed.social ) English
              1·
              5 个月前

              Voting 3rd party at the state and federal level in a district without some form of RCV or an encumbent 3rd party representative is pretty much a counter-productive to giving greater political power to your preferred end of the political spectrum. It’s just lowering the number of votes the opposing end of the spectrum needs to win because of our first-past-the-post plurality winner-takes-all system. Yes, I know it’s a corrupt system working as designed by those in power. Quoting myself from another thread where included sources for all this:

              We won’t get rid of the two-party system by voting for losing 3rd party candidates. At present there are a grand total of 3 (out of 535) federal legislators who are not either Democratic or Republican. Bernie Sanders ran in the Democratic primary for Senate in 2008, winning the nomination but then declining it to run as an Independent. Kevin Kiley was first elected as a Republican and then declared as Independent after several years in office. In all state legislatures combined, there are a total of 6 state senators and 22 state representatives out of 7,578 total state legislative seats. There hasn’t been a single electoral college vote for a presidential 3rd party candidate sine 1968, and Perot won 19% of the national popular vote in 1992! Unless you already live in a district with ranked choice voting or with an independent elected official, the odds of displacing either of the major parties is effectively zero. So your best opportunity for reform is still to vote for such candidates at the state level in the major party primary.

              For county and below, have at it. If your state/federal rep is already 3rd party or independent and not getting trounced in public approval, keep them. If your district has RCV, definitely support 3rd party. but in the other 99.5% of districts, voting Green at state and federal level is just making easier for a Republican to win.

      • MagicShel ( MagicShel@lemmy.zip ) English
        1·
        5 个月前

        The voters are basically the same every election. Yeah they evolve over time but not quickly. You can’t blame populace for being exactly who they are.

        They weren’t enthusiastic about Kamala, and if you ask me it has everything to do with the economy and approximately fuck all to do with anything else. But you can’t fault the people any more than you can fault the tide when there is a flood.

        • baronvonj ( baronvonj@piefed.social ) English
          2·
          5 个月前

          I can absolutely fault every single person who didn’t vote in either the primary or the general for giving up their voice. Voting is the only speech that matters in respect to who is sworn into office. If you don’t speak up when it counts then I will absolutely call you out for complaining about the result.

          • MagicShel ( MagicShel@lemmy.zip ) English
            1·
            5 个月前

            You either meet people where they are, you find a strategy to move the people, or you lose. None of that is on the people. Your blame changes nothing. It’s wishful thinking — you go into the election with the voters you have, not the voters you wish you had.

            • baronvonj ( baronvonj@piefed.social ) English
              2·
              5 个月前

              And voters go into the election with the nominees they have, not the nominees they wish they had. And to be clear, people who skip an election because the equate that to voting for “none of the above” are non-voters in that election. The reality we have is that [for over 99% of the state and federal legislative offices and for the presidency] either the Democratic or the Republican nominee will win that election regardless of how many people don’t vote or why they chose not to. Not voting lowers the number of votes needed for the other side of the political spectrum to win. It’s the last chance for the voting-eligible public to effect the outcome of that election, and to skip it and silence themselves and then complain about the outcome deserves being confronted over. And again, pointing this out does not excuse the failure of Kamala/Walz and their campaign runners and the DNC of their faults. All of them have blame here.