The Least Curious People in America

DNC Autopsy and NYT Poll: Two documents that could have asked useful questions but refused.

Yesterday the DNC released its autopsy of the 2024 election. DNC chair Ken Martin sat on it for months, assured us there was no smoking gun, promised he’d already been sharing the lessons, and then finally dropped the 48,000 words on a Thursday with a note on the front saying the findings don’t reflect the views of the DNC. He released the autopsy and disowned it simultaneously.

I get why he’d disown it. It’s a big turd. But the whole time he buried it, Martin kept saying the lessons from this report were already being put to work. Lessons. We’re keeping the focus on the lessons, he’d say. We’ve been releasing the lessons. I read it, most of it. It’s not that there are no recommendations. There are plenty. Go heavier on digital and connected TV, lighter on broadcast. Organize earlier. Rebuild the state parties. Those are the lessons. If they’ve taken any of them, they’ve taken the wrong ones, and there’s a reason for that.

Every question in that report is a variation on the same question. How do we campaign better with what we’ve got. How do we market this thing more effectively to the people we’re trying to sell it to. Never once do they stop and ask whether the thing they’re selling is bullshit. Whether the product is any good. Whether a single promise in it would fix a single person’s life.

It was never about governing. It was about winning for the sake of winning, with no theory of what to do with the power once they have it. The DNC still isn’t looking for a mission of its own. It tells the campaigns to build their own contrast and definition and leaves the meaning to everyone else. The party is a machine with no idea what it’s for.

To the contrary, it’s pretty pleased with itself. The report never once treats the Biden record as a failure. Its gripe about Bidenomics isn’t that it failed people, it’s that the message leaned on big macro statistics instead of the daily reality people were actually living. When the party lost down the ballot, the report decided strong local candidates just needed to define themselves better. They’re certain Democrats are doing a great job, and that it’s just their inability to explain how awesome they are that keeps them out of power.

What I see in this report is the Biden administration in miniature. Biden was sold to us, by the press and by his own people, as proof of what Democrats could do if they got back to their FDR roots. We got the CHIPS Act. We got the IRA. We got the bipartisan infrastructure law. We were told it was the most historic spending in generations. But the rubber never hits the road. Lives weren’t transformed. Why? Because these people refuse to admit that the systems they are funding are no longer productive.

They refuse to look at the difference between an input and an output. Effort and results. You can pour trillions into a financialized housing market and a six-trillion-dollar healthcare industry, but if you never touch the monopolies and the middlemen and the rot underneath, nothing useful comes out the other side. It’s worse than that. Pour more money into an out-of-control healthcare industry and all you’ve built is a stronger monopoly, a more powerful opponent.

The net result of all that historic spending is a Democratic Party that seventy percent of voters can’t stand and that can’t get above water with its own base. A lot of money. A lot of effort. Nothing delivered. Same as the report.

If you doubt where the party’s head is, count the words. The report runs 48,000 of them. “Spend” shows up 350 times. “Data,” 226. “Organizing,” 211. “Fundraising,” 150. “Monopoly,” zero. “Cost of living,” zero. “Affordability,” four. “Healthcare,” twice. That’s not an analysis of a country in pain. That’s a sales team studying its own pipeline.

Then there’s the New York Times, coming to the rescue with much-needed polling and data. The paper of record put out a poll a few days ago, I assume in an effort to find out how Americans actually feel and what they want from their politics and government. Among people who plan to vote for Democrats, socialism runs favorable by twenty-seven points, 49 to 22. Those same people turn around and say, 52 to 25, that the party should move to the center to win. The Times wants you to read that as confused voters. They aren’t confused. The question is garbage. This is the paper that fancies itself the one asking the hard questions and uncovering the real America, and the hard question it managed to come up with was whether the party should move left, right, or not at all on healthcare.

What does that mean? What’s the policy? What changes in your life? They don’t say. You decide. They never asked whether you want a zero-copay, zero-cost national health plan. They never asked whether we should go back to a country where the states and the cities and the government own some of the hospitals and the clinics and the research labs. They asked left or right, defined nothing, and then acted stunned when people handed them a tangle.

They asked exactly one real policy question in the whole poll. Whether you’d rather have a candidate who lowers prices by going after corporate monopolies and price gougers, or one who lowers prices by deregulating and building more. Better than two to one, people said go after the ones with the power. The reason was sitting right there. The good sense was sitting right there. They just wouldn’t go looking for it anywhere else.

They keep us trapped in left and right because it’s the frame they know how to sell. But the world isn’t left and right, and I’m not sure it ever was. It’s something they lay over the top of us, the same way they sort us into black, white, Latino, Jew, Gentile, Muslim, Quaker, the way a zoologist sorts fish into types. It might be a fine theory for eking out a marginal election here and there. It’s a useless theory for fixing a broken system. And there’s overwhelming agreement out there that the system is broken.

Every problem this autopsy was built to diagnose is still here in 2026, we’ve yet to solve a damn one of them. The NYT poll proves it. Same disgust, same broken trust, same party underwater with its own people. Nothing got fixed because nothing got understood. And they’re going to win anyway. Not because they earned it. Because the other side is handing it to them.

We’re in a deeply unpopular war in the Middle East. Gas is climbing. The president is corrupt as hell and everyone can see it. The headwind is so strong that, as Pelosi once put it, you could run a glass of water with a D next to its name and win in half these districts. So they’ll win in November, call it proof the model works, and walk right back into the same wall in 2028 having learned nothing. Winning is the very thing that lets them skip getting better.

So no, I don’t think we live in a left-right world anymore. We live in a world of capacity, of competency, of outcomes. That’s the whole game now, and it’s exactly where the government and the corporations have failed us, over and over, while the political class argues about a spectrum that means nothing to a family trying to buy groceries. It is not baked in. I’ve spent ten years trying to build something that takes that seriously, and I’m going again, harder, with A Fight Worth Having.

How we do it, and why I think the people telling us to keep our hands clean have it exactly backwards, is next.

Corbin Trent
afightworthhaving.com