WASHINGTON (AP) 鈥� It’s never a good sign when a report comes with a big red disclaimer at the top of each page, but that’s what happened on Thursday when the Democratic National Committee its controversial autopsy report on the 2024 election.
鈥淭his document reflects the views of the author, not the DNC,” the disclaimer said. “The DNC was not provided with the underlying sourcing, interviews, or supporting data for many of the assertions contained herein and therefore cannot independently verify the claims presented.鈥�
It’s an inauspicious label on a document that has caused so much heartburn. Ken Martin, the DNC chair, originally promised to release the autopsy, then decided to keep it under wraps because he said he didn’t want to cause a distraction ahead of the midterms.
, Martin released the report on Thursday, saying it was only withheld because it was so shoddily done.
After all that, what’s in the report? Here are some takeaways from the 192 pages.
The report has some big gaps
The report is far from comprehensive, and it avoids some of the most critical factors in the 2024 race.
For example, it doesn’t address President Joe Biden’s decision to run for a second term at 81, despite Biden after a , and Harris was to replace him at the top of the ticket.
After serving as Biden’s vice president, Harris was viewed in some corners as the natural choice for But the report does not address lingering concerns that the process was rushed or should have been handled in a more deliberative manner.
Perhaps most notably, the words 鈥淕aza鈥� and 鈥淚srael鈥� do not appear anywhere in the text. Democrats suffered from over the conflict, which sapped enthusiasm for Harris among voters who were upset by the Biden administration’s support for Israel.
Harris was boxed in
The report found that the Biden White House did not 鈥減osition or prepare the vice president鈥� in a way that would allow her to lead a successful campaign.
It wasn鈥檛 until Biden announced his departure from the race in July that the campaign鈥檚 polling team scrambled to get fresh public opinion on three key areas 鈥� 鈥渙ne on the Vice President鈥檚 biography and record, one on her vision and plan, and another on attacks and responses.鈥�
The team also determined Harris had no answer : The Trump campaign’s anti-transgender attacks. Specifically, the report highlighted the pollsters鈥� belief that the Democratic nominee was 鈥渂oxed鈥� in by Republicans’ 鈥渧ery effective鈥� advertisement highlighting Harris鈥� previous support for taxpayer-funded gender-affirming surgeries for prison inmates.
鈥淜amala is for they/them, President Trump is for you,” the ad said.
The report said: 鈥淚f the Vice President would not change her position 鈥� and she did not 鈥� then there was nothing which would have worked as a response.鈥�
Trump wasn’t attacked enough
There’s been no shortage of criticism toward Harris’ campaign after her defeat. Some Democrats think she spent too much time campaigning with , others think she lacked .
The autopsy report reaches a different conclusion, saying not enough was done to convince voters that Trump was an unacceptable candidate.
鈥淭here was a decision in the 2024 Democratic leadership not to engage in negative advertising at the scale required,鈥� the report states. 鈥淭he Trump campaign and supportive Super PACs went full throttle against Vice President Harris, but there was not sufficient or similar negative firepower directed at Trump by Democrats.鈥�
At another point, the report says, “Democrats made a mistake by assuming voters were already aware of Trump’s various weaknesses.
鈥淭he idea Trump鈥檚 negatives were 鈥榖aked in鈥� is a major failure of analysis and reality,鈥� the report says.
DNC leadership did not appear to like these conclusions, adding annotations like 鈥渘o evidence provided; contradicts claims elsewhere in report鈥� and 鈥渘o sourcing or evidence provided.鈥�
Identity politics and demographic shifts
The report criticized Harris鈥� outreach to while including a handful of derisive references to 鈥渋dentity politics.鈥� The document raises serious concerns about Latinos in particular.
鈥淒emocrats can no longer assume Latino voters, especially younger Latino men, are a reliable part of their base,” the report says. 鈥淭he party needs a complete rethink of its Latino outreach strategy, moving beyond traditional approaches like Spanish-language ads and late-cycle surrogates.鈥�
The report points to successful Democratic statewide candidates in Arizona, Nevada and North Carolina, who showed that 鈥渆conomic messaging, and addressing cost-of-living concerns resonate more than identity politics.鈥�
The autopsy also highlighted the Democrats’ underperformance with men.
鈥淢ale voters require direct engagement. The gender gap can be narrowed,” the report says. 鈥淒eploy male messengers, address economic concerns, and don鈥檛 assume identity politics will hold male voters of color.鈥�
Harris also didn’t have any answers for the party’s struggle with rural voters.
鈥淗arris wrote off rural America, assuming urban/suburban margins would compensate. The math doesn鈥檛 work,鈥� the report says. 鈥淵ou can鈥檛 lose rural areas by overwhelming margins and make it up elsewhere when rural voters are a significant share of the electorate. If Democrats are to reclaim leadership in the Heartland or the South, candidates must perform well in rural turf. Show up, listen, and then do it again.鈥�
Copyright © 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, written or redistributed.
