The document also said Harris did not do enough to court rural voters.
https://abcnews.com/Politics/democrats-release-2024-election-autopsy-report/story?id=133187401
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Huge denial of the authentic, objective facts.
1. No mention of Joe Biden's major cognitive decline
2. No mention of his total disaster open border policies
3. No honest assessment about Kamala Harris's lack of qualifications and lack of likeability, lack of charisma.
4. No mention that she was in charge of the border
They handed the presidency to Donald Trump.
Obama would have crushed Trump.
Bill Clinton in his prime would have crushed Trump.
Even Al Gore would have beaten Trump.
Even Jimmy Carter probably could have beat Trump as could have most previous D presidents in the past. Many might disagree with this one because of the misleading interpretations of his presidency. Jimmy Carter was a likeable, extremely credible and honest person with character and a track record with integrity. If you want to contrast Donald Trump's Mt. Everest pile of negative attributes and corruption with somebody, Carter shines brighter than anybody else.
They claim that Kamala failed because she didn't have the best support system. She was the border czar and vice president for Pete's sake. The one issue that hurt that administration the most was the one she was supposed to be in charge of!!!
The fact is that the Biden/Harris team were bad leaders and not likeable. Joe Biden refusing to retire and turning the nomination process into the biggest nightmare in history. Americans didn't nominate Kamala Harris, the D party forced her on to the democrats after Biden's cognitive collapse became obvious in his June 2024 debate with Donald Trump.
Until then, the D party spent the previous 3.5 years covering for, lying and hiding Biden's huge cognitive decline. They thought they could get away with it just a bit longer.......thru November 2024(drag him over the finish line) but their scheme collapsed when THE REAL Joe Biden collapsed in confusion during that debate in front of the nation.
+++++++++++++++
She was officially tasked by President Biden on March 24, 2021, “to lead our efforts with Mexico and the Northern Triangle…in stemming the movement of…migration to our southern border.”
The state of the report itself has gotten some backlash from Democrats.
"I think the report is a disaster. The only thing worse than the report explaining that the party is wrong on policy is the appearance of incompetence at evaluating what went wrong in 2024," a source working in Democratic politics told ABC News.
"This autopsy, and the months-long debate about even releasing the report, is a demoralizing joke," former DNC vice chair David Hogg, who left the committee last year after publicly clashing with Martin, wrote in a statement where he called for Martin to resign.
++++++++++=
For the democrats to run the person in charge of the worst failure of that administration (a key issue for voters) would be like the Super bowl between 2 teams, featuring 1 of them with the worst record in the NFL that lost all their playoff games......
edit: Make that NOT HAVING ANY PLAYOFFS and just inserting the worst team in the Super Bowl!
Trump didn't win because he was so strong. He won because the Ds gifted him with weak leadership for 4 years under Biden/Harris, that THEY DOUBLED DOWN ON, with a failed, weak and not likeable leader that THE PARTY appointed to run in 2024.
I have nothing against Kamala Harris but c'mon on! This analysis is just not honest or accurate.
++++++++++++++++++++
I agree with the comments in the article. The 2024 presidential election was a big debacle for the Ds. However, this makes it even WORSE!
It's just a display of ignorance, denial and DIShonesty with regards to what went wrong. They appear to be protecting some people and blaming others/ factors for things that are not the main ones.
Maybe they have hopes that Kamala Harris still has a future with the party and don't want to damage that?
If this is really how they think, then that's' bad news for the future of the D party if these same people or reports like this are being used in future presidential elections.
I'm thinking that there are many, MANY much smarter people in the D party than the ones that gave us these assessments.
I know some Ds that think Kamala was a great candidate and that she lost because she was a women or because of reasons similar to this delusional autopsy.
She probably did lose votes from being a woman but Hillary Clinton should have crushed Trump in 2016.........if only she was honest and likeable with the woman factor not being the top one
So for me at least, blaming it on her being a woman is being in denial of other factors. Maybe its because I actually understand the authentic facts most of the time to know that she was extremely deceptive(lied) so many times that it took away from her credibility.
Some politicians, like Obama, Bill Clinton and Reagan can get away with lying because they are extremely likeable with world class charisma that causes millions of people to not even care if they are lying.
They are just saying all the right things and saying things that people WANT TO BE TRUE so convincingly that they get support for it.
Donald Trump and MAGA is the quintessential example of that principle.
Hillary Clinton, though not extremely likeable was off the charts credible, knowledgeable and believable, regardless of her gender. Hillary had everything that a country needed to be a great president.........except she lacked in the likeability factor. Even when Hillary was lying, she was pretty dang convincing but she still was missing the charm of the others mentioned above.
Bush 1 and Bush 2 also lacked that world class charisma but got elected. Was it because they were men? Because they were Rs? Because they were Bushes?
I would say if either of the Bushes were Biden's VP, they too would have lost.
I'll repeat this again because it was added.
The presidential election is like the Super Bowl of politics with supposedly the best candidates from both parties facing each other based on the American people choosing them, just like the play off system in the NFL elimination system determines the 2 playing for the championship.
The Ds not only botched the elimination process catastrophically by NOT HAVING ANY PLAYOFFS for their Super Bowl team, the one THEY picked was a team that had a LOSING RECORD during the regular season!
She was the Southern Border czar for Joe Biden. That by itself should have disqualified her...........PERIOD. Her denial of the problem during that administration and comments previously disqualified her. It was because the border "problem" was an INTENTIONAL policy of the Ds and when it came time to own it, just before the election she tried to pretend to be somebody else to bail from accountability and that destroyed her credibility.
Just to be clear, personally I was and still am STRONGLY FOR increasing immigration WITH A PATH TO LEGAL CITIZENSHIP.
Biden/Harris wrecked the system set up for that by intentionally gushing in many millions with no process for legal citizenship, just to get them in. A recipe for disaster. A recipe for wrecking Harris's credibility. A recipe for a psychopath to win the election by convincing voters that he would FIX what they all knew was INTENTIONALLY BROKEN by Biden and his border czar, Kamala Harris.
Maybe Biden and the Ds are to blame for this and Harris just happened to be the face representing their biggest failure in November 2024? So be it and exactly my point. The Ds needed a different face that could credibly sell people on a better border policy.
Promises for what you WILL do mean 0 when you just got done doing the diametrically opposed polar opposite for 3.5 years and stood behind for years BEFORE that.
The huge disaster of ICE and it's reeking havoc on humanity to cause much more damage than it was fixing was caused by the initial really bad conditions that Biden/Harris put in place.
Biden/Harris deserve blame for this!
Harris did NOT deserve to be promoted to the top job when she botched being #2 so badly.
That's the biggest difference with the Bushes getting elected and not her. Bush #1 was under Reagan. He was nothing special but earned a promotion by doing his job as #2.
Bush #2 was nothing special. He was governor of TX, had experience in the military and had the last name Bush but most importantly, didn't botch the last 4 years of his job before running for president. He won by the slimmest of margins against Gore who was #2 for Clinton and could make a strong case for being promoted to #1 because he did a good job(but many standards) as VP for 8 years. Gore also seemed more credible and likeable than Harris and yet, GORE LOST to a weak Bush #2!
With regards to Gore. He has plenty of the type of charisma to win peoples votes (that Harris lacked) as noted by his ability to effectively sell a fake climate crisis to the entire world by making things up about polar bears(there are more now than 2 decades ago) and all sorts of catastrophes that never happened. His anti science movie "An inconvenient truth" won an Oscar and he won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007(along with the IPCC) by lying about climate, weather, biology and the biosphere(science). So Gore has that magic needed to generate likeability and credibility votes and even HE lost.
20 years later, Gore is seen as a huge joke but 2 decades ago his scam had the world wrapped around his finger because of his believably using JUNK science.
Kamala didn't have that and never will. Nothing against her personally. She did her best but the Ds had to pick the BEST person to run. Picking a person lacking that magic, with a bad record and claiming they just didn't give her the best support is denial.
http://personality-politics.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Kamala-Harris-poster-2020-scaled.jpg
Regardless of personality profiles done by organization X, Y or Z the facts on the previous page are what people connect to and of course this is only my opinion.
10s of millions of Ds disagree with me on Kamala and voted for her. Likability is very subjective.
On Gore, his likability is also subjective. I rated him subjectively high in that category in 2000.
However, opinions about whether he is right or wrong about the fake climate crisis, while important in judging how people view him don’t get the same weighting in science and math, where physical laws rule.
Fossil fuels are massively greening up the planet because of the key role that beneficial CO2 plays in photosynthesis. Our planet is still just less than 50% of the optimal level of CO2 for life on our planet.
Fossil fuels are the REAL green energy by all scientific standards. Wind energy is the most anti environmental by an extremely wide margin.
Al Gore calls it pollution and says that we are using the atmosphere as an open sewer by dumping toxic CO2 into it.
His words not mine. His side calls wind energy, "green" energy.
The laws of science, physics and math tell us that both of us are not just sharing opinions of equal value.
1 of us is right about the science and the other one is wrong.
