By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Senior Democrats’ internal review of the 2024 election revealed that the Biden administration’s response to the Israel-Hamas war was a significant detriment to the party, particularly impacting Vice President Kamala Harris’s support among younger and progressive voters. Party officials acknowledged this wariness in discussions, noting it contributed to Harris’s electoral defeat. This internal assessment suggests a need for a stronger stance on Israel to appeal to disaffected progressives and crucial swing state voters, especially within the Arab American community.
Read the original article here
It appears a leaked internal autopsy conducted by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) has pointed a finger at President Biden’s unwavering support for Israel as a significant factor that cost Kamala Harris votes in her presidential bid. This revelation suggests a critical disconnect between the party’s leadership and the sentiments of a substantial portion of its voter base, particularly concerning the conflict in Gaza.
The core of the argument is that the DNC committed a form of malpractice by not truly listening to its voters. Instead of adapting its platform to reflect the widespread concerns about the situation in Gaza, the party seemed to operate under the assumption that voters would simply choose the Democratic candidate by default, solely to avoid Donald Trump. This approach is being characterized as one of entitlement and incompetence, demonstrating a failure to hold themselves to higher standards than those they expect from the electorate.
This perceived divergence from voter will is not isolated to the Israel-Palestine issue. The DNC has been increasingly spooked by the prospect of being labeled “radicals,” leading them to shy away from taking strong moral stances on issues that resonate deeply with their base. This includes matters like immigration, LGBTQ+ rights, and, of course, Gaza. The internal assessment suggests that the party’s platform has been “scurrying to the right” on these crucial issues, a strategy that may have alienated voters who were seeking a more robust and principled approach from their representatives.
The autopsy’s findings seem to highlight a broader trend where the DNC consistently blames voters for electoral losses, rather than acknowledging their own strategic missteps. The argument is made that Democratic voters are not just the stereotypical “blue-haired college students” but include a diverse range of everyday citizens – middle-aged individuals, working-class people, and those who might not have previously engaged in activism. These individuals are increasingly demanding that Democrats take a firm stand and actively push back against what they perceive as the MAGA movement’s agenda.
While it’s acknowledged that Donald Trump’s rhetoric on Gaza might be seen as more overtly hostile, the leaked report implies that Kamala Harris’s policy positions, in practice, would have been largely similar. The critique suggests that, materially, she would have continued to supply arms to Israel and that any expressions of concern would have been akin to the diplomatic platitudes often employed by figures like Susan Collins – more about sounding sympathetic than enacting substantive change. The voters were presented with a choice that, from this perspective, was not between genocide and non-genocide, but rather between a more overtly aggressive form of harm and a “slower genocide.”
The sentiment expressed is that the Democratic Party’s messaging and actions made voters feel resigned and powerless, as if their votes didn’t truly matter and that the party lacked conviction. The autopsy seems to underscore a frustration with the DNC’s perceived inaction, particularly in light of Biden’s initial promise to serve as a transitional president and the subsequent decision not to hold a primary election. The lack of a competitive primary meant that dissenting voices and movements, such as the “Uncommitted” movement that gained traction due to concerns about Gaza, had no outlet to express their dissatisfaction or rally behind an alternative candidate.
The report also seems to touch upon the complexities of voter motivations, noting that while some voters might have felt compelled to vote for Harris despite reservations about Biden’s Israel policy due to the perceived greater threat posed by Trump, others found it impossible to overlook the issue. The idea that supporting Israel, with significant financial and military backing, while a state commits what many perceive as genocide, is a difficult stance for many to reconcile with a party that often champions moral leadership.
Furthermore, the autopsy may suggest that the Democratic campaign failed to effectively communicate its positions or to distance itself from policies that were unpopular with key segments of the electorate. The argument is that doubling down on Biden’s existing policies, rather than forging a distinct path for Harris, was a strategic error. Her inability or unwillingness to publicly criticize Biden on certain issues, including his stance on Israel, is cited as a potential reason for alienating voters who were looking for a change in direction or a more critical perspective.
The leaked findings also hint at a perception that the DNC is eager to shift blame onto its voters, rather than taking responsibility for its electoral losses. The critique suggests that the party is looking for a “cherry-picked wedge” issue to explain away its failures, rather than confronting the possibility that its broader platform or campaign strategy was fundamentally flawed. The notion that the Gaza issue alone was responsible for the loss is questioned by some, who point to other factors such as courting centrist or even conservative figures and a general lack of a compelling alternative to the status quo.
Ultimately, the leaked DNC autopsy appears to paint a picture of a party struggling to connect with its base, caught between its desire to appeal to a broader electorate and the passionate, often morally driven, concerns of its core supporters. The findings suggest that a failure to acknowledge and address these deeply felt issues, particularly the ongoing conflict in Gaza, had tangible and detrimental consequences for Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign.