• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Read the DNC’s 2024 'autopsy' obtained by CNN

essentialsaltes

Fact-Based Lifeform
Oct 17, 2011
49,316
51,615
Los Angeles Area
✟1,148,268.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
CNN is publishing a copy of a report into why Democrats lost the 2024 presidential election conducted at the request of Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin.

This version of the report – better known as the 2024 autopsy – was written by Democratic strategist Paul Rivera. The DNC withheld the report until presented with CNN’s reporting about much of its contents. The copy published by CNN includes annotations in red that the DNC added to its version of Rivera’s report. CNN has not modified the report and does not vouch for the accuracy of any statements within the report or the DNC’s annotations.
 

Always in His Presence

Jesus is the only Way
Site Supporter
Nov 15, 2006
52,701
18,103
Broken Arrow, OK
✟1,214,559.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
From the link's take away report

Indeed, the document contains factual inaccuracies and is sometimes hard to follow, and there isn’t a coherent strategy laid out for the future so much as a series of disparate points of analysis.​
Then why publish it? - it doesn't have factual proof of anything. There should be more respect for the party. It's hard to believe that the party does not have a coherent strategy laid out for the furture.
 
Upvote 0

MarcusGregor

New year, new you...
Oct 1, 2025
381
653
26
South
✟41,601.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
From the link's take away report

Indeed, the document contains factual inaccuracies and is sometimes hard to follow, and there isn’t a coherent strategy laid out for the future so much as a series of disparate points of analysis.​
Then why publish it? - it doesn't have factual proof of anything. There should be more respect for the party. It's hard to believe that the party does not have a coherent strategy laid out for the furture.
The answer to your question is in the article.
 
Upvote 0

Fantine

Dona Quixote
Site Supporter
Jun 11, 2005
42,491
17,344
Fort Smith
✟1,576,399.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
From the link's take away report

Indeed, the document contains factual inaccuracies and is sometimes hard to follow, and there isn’t a coherent strategy laid out for the future so much as a series of disparate points of analysis.​
Then why publish it? - it doesn't have factual proof of anything. There should be more respect for the party. It's hard to believe that the party does not have a coherent strategy laid out for the future.

Why should the Democratic Party publicize its "coherent strategy for the future" for the Republicans to see?

Have the Republicans ever published their strategies for the future, incoherent or coherent, for Democrats to see? If Democrats knew that part of Trump's 2020 strategy would have been to incite an insurrection on 1/6/2021, they could have more prepared with police protection, national guard, etc. to stop it...
 
Upvote 0

MarcusGregor

New year, new you...
Oct 1, 2025
381
653
26
South
✟41,601.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Why should the Democratic Party publicize its "coherent strategy for the future" for the Republicans to see?

Have the Republicans ever published their strategies for the future, incoherent or coherent, for Democrats to see? If Democrats knew that part of Trump's 2020 strategy would have been to incite an insurrection on 1/6/2021, they could have more prepared with police protection, national guard, etc. to stop it...
they actually did but then denied that it was.

Project 2025
 
Upvote 0

Say it aint so

Well-Known Member
Jun 19, 2020
5,197
4,380
28
Seattle
✟230,626.00
Country
United States
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Single
CNN is publishing a copy of a report into why Democrats lost the 2024 presidential election conducted at the request of Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin.

This version of the report – better known as the 2024 autopsy – was written by Democratic strategist Paul Rivera. The DNC withheld the report until presented with CNN’s reporting about much of its contents. The copy published by CNN includes annotations in red that the DNC added to its version of Rivera’s report. CNN has not modified the report and does not vouch for the accuracy of any statements within the report or the DNC’s annotations.
It sounds like a report, but not really a report.
Speaking personally, Biden didn't do the Democratic party any favors by ignoring polls and pleas not to run.
 
Upvote 0

Always in His Presence

Jesus is the only Way
Site Supporter
Nov 15, 2006
52,701
18,103
Broken Arrow, OK
✟1,214,559.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Why should the Democratic Party publicize its "coherent strategy for the future" for the Republicans to see?
FWIW - my post was coming to the defense of the DNC.
Have the Republicans ever published their strategies for the future, incoherent or coherent, for Democrats to see?
Yes, every election years - they publish it online and through the politicians running for office - another name for it is political platforms. Democrats do it also.

.
 
Upvote 0

iluvatar5150

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Aug 3, 2012
31,856
31,420
Baltimore
✟991,218.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Why should the Democratic Party publicize its "coherent strategy for the future" for the Republicans to see?

Have the Republicans ever published their strategies for the future, incoherent or coherent, for Democrats to see? If Democrats knew that part of Trump's 2020 strategy would have been to incite an insurrection on 1/6/2021, they could have more prepared with police protection, national guard, etc. to stop it...
They published a pretty famous “autopsy” after their loss in 2012.
 
Upvote 0

Servus

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 2, 2020
32,655
16,491
Washington
✟1,188,189.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
From the link's take away report

Indeed, the document contains factual inaccuracies and is sometimes hard to follow, and there isn’t a coherent strategy laid out for the future so much as a series of disparate points of analysis.​
Then why publish it? - it doesn't have factual proof of anything. There should be more respect for the party. It's hard to believe that the party does not have a coherent strategy laid out for the furture.
The continual strategy so to speak is that voters will finally hate Trump enough to vote democrat no matter who the candidate is.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Richard T
Upvote 0

Richard T

Well-Known Member
Mar 25, 2018
4,157
2,468
traveling Asia
✟183,335.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Hopefully both parties will learn to run their best candidates, with a runner up in case the top candidate dies or cannot continue. Probably wishful thinking, though I I do think there will be a swing to younger candidates as a result of both Biden and Trump.
 

Maria Billingsley

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 7, 2018
12,457
10,381
66
Martinez
✟1,320,768.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
CNN is publishing a copy of a report into why Democrats lost the 2024 presidential election conducted at the request of Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin.

This version of the report – better known as the 2024 autopsy – was written by Democratic strategist Paul Rivera. The DNC withheld the report until presented with CNN’s reporting about much of its contents. The copy published by CNN includes annotations in red that the DNC added to its version of Rivera’s report. CNN has not modified the report and does not vouch for the accuracy of any statements within the report or the DNC’s annotations.
I only see one reason for losing, no primary. Anyway, she barley lost so I dont see why this autopsy had to be done. It only proves how weak the Democrats are and how a massive waste of time this endeavor was.
 
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Site Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
44,006
24,729
US
✟1,939,244.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I only see one reason for losing, no primary. Anyway, she barley lost so I dont see why this autopsy had to be done. It only proves how weak the Democrats are and how a massive waste of time this endeavor was.
The selection of vice-president is most significant in that it creates the presumptive presidential candidate for the next election. Biden selected as the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate for 2024 the one person the Democratic voters had most profoundly rejected. It wasn't as though there weren't other people in the party to have selected, even other black women, who hadn't already been rejected.

The DNC couldn't afford to run a primary because A. They had no other candidates pre-selected and B. Their party policies strongly discourage anyone not pre-selected by the Party to throw their hat into the ring.

But that certainly wasn't the only reason for losing. It's still the DNC obsession with identity politics, particularly "identities" that even added together make up only a tiny, tiny part of the electorate.

They abandoned the white working-class men who had been the core of Democratic identity up to 2008. They abandoned the 70% of Americans who are not college-educated (lost a bunch of white women with that one). They abandoned men in general, which was a hot topic among black men in 2020 and 2024, and had the gall to openly scold black men for not simply obeying the command to vote for a (not really) black woman.

How did they honestly expect to win having pointedly abandoned the largest voting blocks that the Democratic Party had traditionally relied upon?

That was not a mistake, that was delusion.
 

Say it aint so

Well-Known Member
Jun 19, 2020
5,197
4,380
28
Seattle
✟230,626.00
Country
United States
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Single
The selection of vice-president is most significant in that it creates the presumptive presidential candidate for the next election. Biden selected as the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate for 2024 the one person the Democratic voters had most profoundly rejected. It wasn't as though there weren't other people in the party to have selected, even other black women, who hadn't already been rejected.

The DNC couldn't afford to run a primary because A. They had no other candidates pre-selected and B. Their party policies strongly discourage anyone not pre-selected by the Party to throw their hat into the ring.

But that certainly wasn't the only reason for losing. It's still the DNC obsession with identity politics, particularly "identities" that even added together make up only a tiny, tiny part of the electorate.

They abandoned the white working-class men who had been the core of Democratic identity up to 2008. They abandoned the 70% of Americans who are not college-educated (lost a bunch of white women with that one). They abandoned men in general, which was a hot topic among black men in 2020 and 2024, and had the gall to openly scold black men for not simply obeying the command to vote for a (not really) black woman.

How did they honestly expect to win having pointedly abandoned the largest voting blocks that the Democratic Party had traditionally relied upon?

That was not a mistake, that was delusion.
I think the way it worked was since Biden dropped off the ticket, Kamala was next up being on that ticket. Biden endorsed her, but she was selected via a roll call of electoral delegates. The DNC could not afford a primary because there was only three months before election day itself. Not enough time to go through a primary election. And I would disagree that Dems forgot the working class. Look at their platform. Look at the major legislation passed such as healthcare, infrastructure, renewable energy, American investment of chips and science, etc. Who supports the unions? What party is it in office where the working class always does better? What they are horrible at to me is really messaging.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Site Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
44,006
24,729
US
✟1,939,244.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I think the way it worked was since Biden dropped off the ticket, Kamala was next up being on that ticket. Biden endorsed her, but she was selected via a roll call of electoral delegates. The DNC could not afford a primary because there was only three months before election day itself. Not enough time to go through a primary election. And I would disagree that Dems forgot the working class. Look at their platform. Look at the major legislation passed such as healthcare, infrastructure, renewable energy, American investment of chips and science, etc. Who supports the unions? What party is it in office where the working class always does better? What they are horrible at to me is really messaging.
Yes, Kamala was "next up being on the ticket" exactly as I stated: The vice-president is the presumptive candidate for the next election. Biden set up that situation. Nobody expected him to be a two-term president.

They did not campaign on support for the working class. And it's a silly campaign to expect people you excoriated in the campaign to think about what other people who happened to be in your part legislated and vote for you on election day.

It's not accurate to say that the Democratic party supported unions. The Democrats got union leadership support because who else were the union leadership going to support? But the Democratic Party had nothing good to say for union members.
 

iluvatar5150

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Aug 3, 2012
31,856
31,420
Baltimore
✟991,218.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Yes, Kamala was "next up being on the ticket" exactly as I stated: The vice-president is the presumptive candidate for the next election. Biden set up that situation. Nobody expected him to be a two-term president.

They did not campaign on support for the working class. And it's a silly campaign to expect people you excoriated in the campaign to think about what other people who happened to be in your part legislated and vote for you on election day.

It's not accurate to say that the Democratic party supported unions. The Democrats got union leadership support because who else were the union leadership going to support? But the Democratic Party had nothing good to say for union members.
When did they excoriate working class people in the campaign?
 
Upvote 0

iluvatar5150

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Aug 3, 2012
31,856
31,420
Baltimore
✟991,218.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
It's very interesting in these forums that on each end of the spectrum everyone comes back with, "Who--us?"
You said the campaign. I don’t remember anybody in the campaign doing anything of the sort.

If you’re talking about various left-wing personalities, sure. But the campaign? If anything, I find both sides’ politicians pander to blue-collar workers to an embarrassing degree.
 
Upvote 0

JSRG

Well-Known Member
Apr 14, 2019
2,701
1,724
Midwest
✟272,653.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Hopefully both parties will learn to run their best candidates, with a runner up in case the top candidate dies or cannot continue. Probably wishful thinking, though I I do think there will be a swing to younger candidates as a result of both Biden and Trump.
The problem is, it isn't the "parties" who run their best candidates, but the people voting in the primaries. The "parties" could have the smartest people in mind... but the choice ends up going to people outside of them.

The primary system, I think, is very problematic. The way it used to work--and did work for a long time until it started to shift midway through the 20th century--was that the state parties would send delegates to the national convention who would go and debate with each other and then vote for the presidential candidate, who needed to score an absolute majority. People would periodically vote, shift as they think it would be necessary, until they arrived at a consensus candidate. To win this sort of thing, a candidate had to convince people who were very invested in the future of the party that they were in fact the person who would (1) win and (2) well represent the party.

Primaries instead rely strongly on name recognition and having a lot of money to spend on all the advertising you need to do, and you have to do it over a long period of time because you nowadays have to announce your candidacy so far ahead of the election for it to work which means you need more money to continue to sustain your campaign. And instead of having to work to convince informed people with the party's best interests in mind, you're off to try to convince low information voters that it's critical that they go and spend a few minutes voting for you.

Unfortunately, it's hard to put the genie back in the bottle after making primaries so important. But it really has taken the nomination process, especially for presidential candidates, out of the hands of the parties, so it doesn't matter who the party leadership actually thinks is a good candidate, it's up to all the random voters instead.

Someone could of course counter with "Harris didn't win a primary and she wasn't a good candidate" and sure, but they didn't go through the old convention nomination process either (which would have been very difficult to do because they didn't plan for a contested convention, they assumed they had the winner already figured out). Forced into a corner thanks to Biden's bad decisions, they just had to find someone quickly to take up the role that the delegates could rally behind without too much fuss so they grabbed the person who was Vice President.

Given that the choice of candidate seems to essentially be out of the hands of the party itself at this point, the most they can really do is to try to figure out what the good strategies are after they have one.
 
Upvote 0

Richard T

Well-Known Member
Mar 25, 2018
4,157
2,468
traveling Asia
✟183,335.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
The problem is, it isn't the "parties" who run their best candidates, but the people voting in the primaries. The "parties" could have the smartest people in mind... but the choice ends up going to people outside of them.

The primary system, I think, is very problematic. The way it used to work--and did work for a long time until it started to shift midway through the 20th century--was that the state parties would send delegates to the national convention who would go and debate with each other and then vote for the presidential candidate, who needed to score an absolute majority. People would periodically vote, shift as they think it would be necessary, until they arrived at a consensus candidate. To win this sort of thing, a candidate had to convince people who were very invested in the future of the party that they were in fact the person who would (1) win and (2) well represent the party.

Primaries instead rely strongly on name recognition and having a lot of money to spend on all the advertising you need to do, and you have to do it over a long period of time because you nowadays have to announce your candidacy so far ahead of the election for it to work which means you need more money to continue to sustain your campaign. And instead of having to work to convince informed people with the party's best interests in mind, you're off to try to convince low information voters that it's critical that they go and spend a few minutes voting for you.

Unfortunately, it's hard to put the genie back in the bottle after making primaries so important. But it really has taken the nomination process, especially for presidential candidates, out of the hands of the parties, so it doesn't matter who the party leadership actually thinks is a good candidate, it's up to all the random voters instead.

Someone could of course counter with "Harris didn't win a primary and she wasn't a good candidate" and sure, but they didn't go through the old convention nomination process either (which would have been very difficult to do because they didn't plan for a contested convention, they assumed they had the winner already figured out). Forced into a corner thanks to Biden's bad decisions, they just had to find someone quickly to take up the role that the delegates could rally behind without too much fuss so they grabbed the person who was Vice President.

Given that the choice of candidate seems to essentially be out of the hands of the party itself at this point, the most they can really do is to try to figure out what the good strategies are after they have one.
i agree with parts of what you said but to me the system to nominate someone is basically rigged. This is due not only by money but also based on the party and the party's connection to media. The party dislikes someone like Howard Dean or Ron Paul. So they make it a very tough hill to climb for those types. With Dean it was making fun of his scream, For Ron Paul it was making it tough for him to collect delegates. The delegates at the convention too consist often of large donors and party insiders. It is very hard to get a seat there for the normal guy. Political parties are never impartial and rarely does someone get through that the party leadership has not endorsed. Trump had a terrible time, and Obama did unseat Hillary. Where the voters and media fail is that they focus too much on personality and not enough on policy and character. I just long for a moderate that can work both sides of the aisle. Extremes on both sides are dead to me.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Say it aint so

Well-Known Member
Jun 19, 2020
5,197
4,380
28
Seattle
✟230,626.00
Country
United States
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Single
Yes, Kamala was "next up being on the ticket" exactly as I stated: The vice-president is the presumptive candidate for the next election. Biden set up that situation. Nobody expected him to be a two-term president.

They did not campaign on support for the working class. And it's a silly campaign to expect people you excoriated in the campaign to think about what other people who happened to be in your part legislated and vote for you on election day.

It's not accurate to say that the Democratic party supported unions. The Democrats got union leadership support because who else were the union leadership going to support? But the Democratic Party had nothing good to say for union members.
Yes, campaign messaging is not very good. But come the working class their policies and legislation help those working class much better than their opponents. Specially more so than ever. Again I noted passed legislation that helped the working class. Do you want to talk about the legislation their opponents passed that is hurting them right now? Union support? Democrats were literally on the picket lines with union members; the GOP on the state level do everything they can to stop unions. Republicans have long fought and continue to fight collective bargaining. And no one "excoriated" the working class nor they disparage union members. You have it backwards.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: iluvatar5150
Upvote 0