So the DNC commissioned a "post-mortem" on its failures in the 2024 election… that even aside from its other flaws (like actually providing/citing evidence) failed to consider whether the deceased had multiple terminal conditions, and most especially whether any of the contributing factors had public-health implications. In no particular order, this purported death certificate didn't just fail, but actively refused, to engage with the deceased's pre-election debilitating conditions:
- Ask yourself a question, but without using any lookup or reference materials: Who established party strategy, and how were they selected? In particular, who "elected" Mr Martin as the Chair of the DNC? Probably people like this asshole, but the processes are so hidden even from party members and activists that they might as well be the Party Congress of 1927.
- The primary characteristic required of candidates who are actually endorsed by the Party is loyalty to the existing party leadership — and, in particular, to the part of the leadership selected by the process questioned above. The young, the insurgent, the doctrinally-aligned-but-independently-thinking, the questioners of that "established" doctrine, the different-priorities-within-established-doctrine, are absent from the ballot and from this report. These are precisely who were exploited by the Trumpistas.
- The purportedly left-leaning core of academia is completely absent from consideration, either as intellectual/research resources or for fine-tuning policy and candidate selection. Failure to listen to the most-discernable segment who are already thoroughly aligned with one's loyalty/doctrine (at least according to the opposition) seems rather like failure to wash one's hands in the kitchen, let alone before performing surgery.
- There has not been a major change in party leadership, roughly equivalent to allowing Typhoid Mary to continue preparing her peach desserts after diagnosis. In this instance, the typhoid is inherited wealth — and these idiots put Mary in the White House with their neglect.
- There's been no attempt to deal with the obvious demographic of superannuated leadership and candidates. Even if not a formal ballot qualification, no party that expects to not stumble after Biden, Feinstein, Pelosi, Madigan (see above) and … I'd break the internet listing all of the "old, wise party elders" — who were also electoral candidates — who had instead demonstrated they were decrepit, hidebound, and incapable of adaptation to change. No coalition actually seeking either power or policy consideration should be endorsing candidates for office who are eligible for Social Security/Medicare. At least not until we've got, at minimum, "Medicare for all" that puts healthcare back in the hands of providers (for all the inefficiencies) instead of insurers (for all the individual neglect); yet that's precisely how both parties are structured. My g-g-generation's time has gone; we didn't die before we got old, we monopolized the ballot instead.
And that's just a starting point. (The RNC is no better after its utter failures along the same lines that — in the 2024 election, but not on all indications in the forthcoming election — just haven't proven fatal. Yet.)
This patient was a chronic alcoholic, long-term smoker (or at least resident of smoke-filled rooms), at least fifteen years over demographic life expectancy, and hadn't exercised effectively in nearly half a century. A death certificate citing only a single fall in a nursing home as the cause of death is… not professionally (or legally) sufficient. Especially so because it leaves the zombies in charge. Democracy doesn't work by "predisposition" and "loyalty to incumbents" — it works by persuasion. That both parties appear to have completely ignored that demonstrates that neither is fit for leadership roles in a democratic republic; perhaps not even a dictatorship of the proletariat (and/or bourgeosie, and/or feudal overlords)…