Takeaways from the DNC’s autopsy report on 2024 election

policy

There was no shortage of criticism of Harris’ campaign following her defeat. Some Democrats believed she spent too much time campaigning with Republicans like Liz Cheney, and others believed she lacked a strong economic message.

By Steve Peoples, The Associated Press

May 21, 2026 | 4:43 pm

4 minutes to read

WASHINGTON (AP) — It’s never a good idea for a report to come with a big red disclaimer at the top of every page, but that’s what happened Thursday when the Democratic National Committee late released its controversial autopsy report on the 2024 election.

“This document reflects the views of the author, not the views of the Democratic National Committee,” the disclaimer said. “The DNC was not provided with primary sources, interviews, or supporting data for many of the assertions made here, and therefore cannot independently verify the claims made.”

It is an ominous sign for a document that has caused a lot of heartburn. Ken Martin, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, had originally promised to release the autopsy, then decided to keep it secret because he said he didn’t want to cause distraction before the midterms.

After months of angst, Martin released the report on Thursday, saying it was withheld only because it was so poorly prepared.

After all that, what is in the report? Here are some takeaways from the 192 pages.

The report contains some major holes

The report is far from comprehensive, and it avoids some of the more important factors in the 2024 race.

For example, the resolution does not address President Joe Biden’s decision to run for a second term when he turns 81, despite widespread concerns about his age. Biden withdrew after a faltering performance in the debate, and Vice President Kamala Harris was quickly chosen to replace him at the top of the list.

After serving as Biden’s vice president, Harris was seen in some corners as the natural choice for a new nominee. But the report does not address remaining concerns that the process was rushed or should have been handled in a more deliberate manner.

Perhaps most notably, the words “Gaza” and “Israel” do not appear anywhere in the text. Democrats have been plagued by internal disagreements over the conflict, sapping enthusiasm for Harris among voters upset by the Biden administration’s support for Israel.

Harris was surrounded

The report found that the Biden White House did not “appoint or prepare the vice president” in a way that would allow her to lead a successful campaign.

It wasn’t until after Biden announced his withdrawal from the race in July that the campaign’s polling team scrambled to get new public opinion in three key areas — “one on the vice president’s resume and record, one on her vision and plan, and another on attacks and responses.”

The team also determined that Harris did not have an answer on a sensitive issue: the Trump campaign’s attacks against transgender people. Specifically, the report highlighted pollsters’ belief that the Democratic nominee was “boxed in” by Republicans’ “highly effective” ad highlighting Harris’ past support for taxpayer-funded gender-affirming surgeries for prison inmates.

“Kamala is for them, and President Trump is for you,” the ad read.

“If the Vice President did not change her position — and she did not — there would be nothing that could amount to a response,” the report said.

Trump hasn’t been attacked enough

There was no shortage of criticism of Harris’ campaign following her defeat. Some Democrats believed she spent too much time campaigning with Republicans like Liz Cheney, and others believed she lacked a strong economic message.

The autopsy report reaches a different conclusion, saying not enough was done to convince voters that Trump was an unacceptable candidate.

“There was a decision in the 2024 Democratic leadership not to engage in negative advertising on the scale required,” the report said. “The Trump campaign and supporting political action committees did their best against Vice President Harris, but there was not enough or similar negative firepower directed at Trump by Democrats.”

On another point, the report says: “Democrats made a mistake in assuming that voters were already aware of Trump’s various weaknesses.”

“The idea that was ‘hidden’ in Trump’s negatives is a major failure of analysis and reality,” the report says.

The Democratic National Committee leadership apparently didn’t like these conclusions, adding clarifying comments like “No evidence provided; contradicts claims elsewhere in report” and “No sources or evidence provided.”

To court rural voters: “Show up, listen, then do it again.”

The report criticized Harris’ outreach to key sectors of America while including a few sarcastic references to “identity politics.” The document raises serious concerns about Latinos in particular.

“Democrats can no longer assume that Latino voters, especially younger Latino men, constitute a reliable part of their base,” the report says. “The party needs to completely rethink its Latino outreach strategy, moving beyond traditional tactics like Spanish-language ads and late-cycle alternatives.”

The report points to successful statewide Democratic candidates in Arizona, Nevada, and North Carolina, who showed that “economic messaging and addressing concerns about the cost of living resonate more than just identity politics.”

The autopsy also highlighted Democrats’ poor performance with men.

“Male voters need direct participation,” the report says. “The gender gap can be narrowed.” “Deploy male messengers, address economic concerns, and don’t assume identity politics will appeal to male voters of color.”

Harris also had no answers for the party’s struggle with rural voters.

“Harris has written off rural America, assuming that urban/suburban margins will make up. The math doesn’t work,” the report says. “You can’t lose rural areas by a large margin and then make up for it elsewhere when rural voters make up a large share of the electorate. If Democrats are to regain leadership in the Heartland or the South, candidates must do well in rural areas. Show up, listen, and do it again.”