The DNC autopsy: Did Democrats really want to know?
The Democratic National Committee's recent autopsy of the 2024 Kamala Harris campaign has faced significant criticism for its lack of professionalism and transparency. Key sections of the report are filled with disclaimers indicating that the DNC could not verify many of the claims made, raising questions about the party's commitment to understanding its failures. The handling of the autopsy suggests that the DNC may not genuinely want to confront the issues that led to their electoral defeat.
- ▪The autopsy was authored by Paul Rivera, a former Clinton aide, and has been criticized for its lack of sourcing and verification.
- ▪Numerous disclaimers throughout the document indicate that the DNC could not independently verify many claims made in the report.
- ▪The DNC chairman, Ken Martin, assigned the autopsy to Rivera, who treated it as a low-priority task, leading to incomplete interviews with key campaign officials.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
THE DNC AUTOPSY: DID DEMOCRATS REALLY WANT TO KNOW? Do you know who Paul Rivera is? Don’t feel bad if you don’t; he’s not a household name, even among political junkies. A little-known former Clinton White House aide and senior adviser to the losing 2004 John Kerry presidential campaign, Rivera became famous this week as the author of the Democratic National Committee’s disastrous analysis — the “autopsy” — of the party’s even more disastrous 2024 Kamala Harris campaign. Widespread, instant criticism of the autopsy has focused on three areas: what is in it, what is not in it, and how it was prepared. Other than that, as they say — no problem.
…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at Washington Examiner.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from Washington Examiner
