DNC Report Details Missed Opportunities, Harris Campaign Struggles And Democratic Party Weaknesses
The Democratic National Committee released a sweeping internal review Thursday examining the party’s 2024 election losses, but DNC Chair Ken Martin made clear he was not standing behind the final product.
The release came after months of pressure on Martin, who previously told DNC members in December that the full report would not be made public while the party focused instead “on implementing our findings.”
Martin reversed course Thursday, releasing the report in full while also saying the document was incomplete, flawed and not up to the party’s standards.
“I am not proud of this product; it does not meet my standards, and it won’t meet your standards. I don’t endorse what’s in this report, or what’s left out of it. I could not in good faith put the DNC’s stamp of approval on it,” Martin said in an explainer posted online Thursday morning. “But transparency is paramount. So, today I am releasing the report as I received it, in its entirety, unedited and unabridged, with annotations for claims that couldn’t be verified.”
DNC Chair Releases Report While Disputing Its Findings
The report is challenged throughout by DNC annotations, with the party flagging claims it said were unsupported or could not be independently verified. Still, the document offers a blunt look at what went wrong for Democrats in 2024, including missed messaging opportunities, weaknesses in the presidential campaign and structural problems across the party.
The report says the national campaign failed to effectively define Donald Trump and that the Biden White House did not do enough over three and a half years to strengthen then Vice President Kamala Harris before she became the nominee.
“The national campaign did not effectively drive Trump’s negatives, and the White House did not effectively support Vice President Harris over three and half years to improve her standing before the candidate switch,” the report says.
The DNC added an annotation to that section, saying the report provided no evidence for that claim.
In another section, the report says Harris struggled to define herself beyond being “not Trump” and the contrast of “prosecutor vs. felon.”
“The truncated campaign timeline didn’t help, but the campaign did not quickly resolve on how to tag Trump and define Harris,” the report says.
Report Says Democrats Failed To Define Trump And Harris
The report argues Democrats failed to effectively remind voters of Trump’s weaknesses, a political challenge that has followed his opponents since his first presidential run in 2016.
“The campaign and allies failed to remind voters of his incompetence,” the report says in one section challenged by a DNC annotation.
The report also criticizes the idea that Trump’s negatives were already built into voters’ opinions of him.
“The idea Trump’s negatives were ‘baked in’ is a major failure of analysis and reality, given how his favorability has cratered less than a year into this term,” the report says.
The report says Democrats did not match the Republican campaign’s messaging power and failed to make a consistent case for why Trump should not return to office.
“The grounds were there, but the messaging did not make the case,” the report says.
Biden’s Exit Left Harris With A 107 Day Campaign
Democrats entered the 2024 election already facing major political pressure. The party lost the White House, lost control of the Senate and failed to win back the House.
For months, the presidential race was dominated by questions about President Joe Biden’s age and ability to serve another term. Those concerns intensified after Biden’s June 2024 debate performance against Trump.
Weeks later, Biden ended his campaign and Democrats rallied behind Harris. Her campaign became a 107 day sprint to try to limit the damage and hold the White House.
The initial energy around the ticket change did not last. Harris lost every presidential battleground state to Trump, who became the first Republican in 20 years to win the popular vote. Conservatives viewed the outcome as a clear mandate from voters.
The report does say Harris may have helped other Democrats more than Biden would have if he had remained on the ticket.
“Having Kamala Harris on the ballot actually helped down ballot Democrats maintain part of their base support,” the report says. “Had Biden remained on the ballot, down ballot Democrats might have faced even steeper challenges.”
Autopsy Criticizes Biden White House’s Support For Harris
The report casts the Biden operation as failing to adequately prepare Harris for a potential presidential run or protect her public image while she served as vice president.
According to the report, before the 2022 midterms, the White House asked the DNC to research how first lady Jill Biden could help President Biden politically. The report says no similar research was conducted for Harris, even as she handled difficult issues such as immigration.
The report calls that a “massive missed opportunity.”
“As a result, at the moment of the candidate switch the polling team discovered there was no self research on the Vice President to guide the development of the research instruments,” the report says.
The report also says the Biden White House did not aggressively push back against right wing efforts to label Harris as the administration’s “border czar.” Harris had been assigned to focus on root causes of migration from Central American countries, not to serve as the administration’s border enforcement chief.
Report Says Harris Took Too Much For Granted
The report includes several direct criticisms of the Harris campaign, including the argument that it relied too heavily on Trump being unacceptable to voters instead of building a stronger affirmative case for Harris.
The report says Harris focused too heavily on college educated suburbs, lagged in rural areas and assumed urban and suburban margins would be enough to offset losses elsewhere.
“Harris lagged in rural areas nationally, which proved to be insurmountable in swing states,” the report says. “Harris wrote off rural America, assuming urban/suburban margins would compensate.”
The report also says Harris “struggled with definition” and did not quickly settle on how to define either herself or Trump during the shortened campaign.
Trump’s Anti Transgender Ad Was Seen As Damaging
The report also addresses one of the most widely discussed ads from the 2024 campaign, Trump’s anti transgender spot using the line, “Kamala is for they/them, President Trump is for you.”
The report says campaign pollsters recognized the attack as highly effective and difficult to answer because it was tied to Harris’ past comments and policy positions.
“If the Vice President would not change her position, and she did not, then there was nothing which would have worked as a response,” the report says.
The report adds that pollsters generally agreed with campaign leadership that, given the stakes and timing, the campaign needed to focus on attacking Trump.
Report Urges Democrats To Move Beyond Identity Politics
The report repeatedly criticizes what it describes as Democrats’ reliance on “identity politics,” arguing that the party needs to focus more clearly on affordability, the economy, housing and middle class concerns.
It points to Democratic candidates such as Josh Stein in North Carolina, Jacky Rosen in Nevada, Ruben Gallego in Arizona and Elissa Slotkin in Michigan as examples of candidates who connected with voters through economic messaging, year round presence and local appeal.
The report says Stein’s campaign showed how Democrats could focus less on abstract issues and connect with voters on issues including the economy, disaster relief and housing affordability.
It also says Democrats trying to win over male voters should use male messengers and avoid assuming identity politics will hold male voters of color.
The broader message of that section is that Democrats need candidates who match their states or districts and can speak directly to middle class voters in their communities.
Republicans Framed As More Effective Political Operators
The report also presents Republicans as more disciplined and aggressive in their political messaging, while portraying Democrats as too limited and too focused on winning arguments instead of elections.
“At times, it seems Democrats are trying to win arguments while Republicans are focused on winning elections,” the report says. “Democrats operate in an ecosystem defined by reason even in cycles when the electorate is defined by rage.”
The report says Democrats need to become “always on,” meaning they must consistently message, organize and invest between elections instead of waiting until campaign season.
It argues that right wing political interests take a longer term approach by amplifying polarizing messages and candidates in order to “other” all Democrats.
“Without aggressive pushback and tactics, it works,” the report says.
The report concludes that Republicans learned more from Barack Obama’s 2008 victory than Democrats did.
“The GOP’s victory in 2024 largely came down to its ability to learn more from President Obama’s victory than Democrats did,” the report says. “The GOP’s campaign was powered by data, amplified by social media, and enabled by ardent supporters at every level.”
Few Clear Solutions In A Report Filled With Criticism
While the report offers strong judgments about what went wrong, it provides fewer specific solutions for what Democrats should do next.
The document mostly summarizes the 2024 cycle and identifies weaknesses, but its recommendations are broad. It says the party must rethink how it organizes, communicates and prepares beyond the next election.
“Building to win requires new thinking, and building to last requires thinking about more than the next election,” the report says. “It requires finding the best way to connect with the right voters in the right places, and if 2024 has proven anything, there is enough money to do it all the right way.”
One of the clearest recommendations is that Democrats should spend earlier in campaign cycles and invest between elections, rather than saving resources for the final stretch.
“We have enough money to think and act differently,” the report says. “Democrats must break with stale and counterproductive practices to Build to Win and Build to Last.”
Report Contains Errors And Omits Major 2024 Questions
Martin’s criticism of the report is partly tied to what he described as problems with sourcing, accuracy and readiness for public release.
The document contains factual errors, including incorrect vote percentages for North Carolina Republican gubernatorial candidate Mark Robinson. It also misspells the names of some politicians, including former Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin and former New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine.
The report also gives mixed treatment to some examples. At one point, it highlights Washington Gov. Bob Ferguson as a candidate who did the right things, but later notes that he underperformed Harris.
The report also leaves out several major 2024 issues, including a detailed judgment on Biden’s decision to run again, the impact of the war in Gaza, Harris taking over the ticket without a broader electoral process and Harris’ decision not to do an interview with podcast host Joe Rogan.
The report also says Democrats had already conducted a postmortem after the 2022 midterms, but did not fully act on its recommendations.
“Unfortunately, none of these recommendations were implemented on the proposed timeline, if at all,” the report says.
Democrats Face Midterms After A Difficult Reset
Since the 2024 election, Democrats have struggled to find a clear national direction without a singular party leader. Martin, who became DNC chair in early 2025 after leading Minnesota’s Democratic Farmer Labor Party, inherited a difficult political moment that included fundraising concerns and criticism over his handling of the autopsy report.
At the same time, Democrats are trying to build momentum heading into this fall’s midterm elections, where the party is in position to compete for control of the House and potentially the Senate during the final two years of Trump’s presidency.
The release of the DNC report marks a reversal from the party’s earlier decision to keep the full review under wraps. It also gives Democrats a public look at the internal criticism now shaping the party’s attempt to recover from one of its most difficult election cycles in recent history.
