The morning after Election Day on November 8, 2016 was supposed to be one of reckoning for Republicans in their support of an unpopular and divisive Presidential nominee. Instead, Democrats awoke to face the weight of their misplaced trust in the epitomized “establishment” candidate. While countless op-ed pieces have outlined various theories for what exactly went wrong, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) has abstained from internally investigating the causes of their 2016 Presidential election failure.

With the 2018 Midterm Election quickly approaching, viable politicians are already preparing to throw their hats in the 2020 presidential ring. Rank-and-file Democrats such as Kirsten Gillibrand and Kamala Harris appear to be leaning towards a potential bid, while presidential rumors circulate around party progressive Elizabeth Warren. Preempting what may be a similar ideological primary divide to 2016, the refusal of the DNC and Democratic Party leaders to critically examine the mistakes it made in the previous election − in light of what is at stake − is deeply disturbing.

After the defeat of Hillary Clinton in 2016, Democratic Party leaders in “self-pity and righteous indignation” attributed their loss to factors largely outside their control— FBI Director Comey’s untimely letter, general voter misogyny, voter apathy, and Russian interference, among others. While some of these factors may have been impactful, members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus called for an internal examination of how party mechanisms played a role in their defeat, similar to the Republicans’ “post-mortem” 97-page diagnosis published after the party’s loss in the 2012 presidential election.

The Obama Administration’s favored candidate Tom Perez’s election over his progressive-endorsed opponent to chair the DNC added insult to injury to an increasingly alienated progressive base, revealing that Party leadership had learned little from Clinton’s loss.

In response to Perez’s election, a group of left-leaning activists within the Party took matters into their own hands and published a scathing 34-page report in October 2017, titled “Autopsy: The Democratic Party in Crisis.” Their report squarely placed the blame of the 2016 defeat on the Democratic Party leadership. Embedded in their critique was a call to action, urging Democrats to make profound changes to both their party operations and overarching policy agenda.

The “Autopsy” charged that in 2016, the DNC’s major funding priority and campaign focus was “persuadables,” or “moderate Republicans” who could potentially swing Democratic. This quixotic strategy took historic voting blocs for granted, as is evidenced by the 11% drop in support from Democrats’ most loyal base: African-American women. The report argued that it is far more cost-effective to focus on mobilizing an already loyal voter base − people of color, young people, and the poor − and working to remove the many obstacles frequently placed in their path to the polls.

Second, the Autopsy argues that the Democrats’ halfhearted, moderate reforms failed to energize their party base and swing-voters alike. The Democratic Party’s dedication to a “tepid” policy platform is, as the report states, a result of “corporate domination over the party’s agenda.” The Democrats’ rhetoric, which disparages corporate influences, is rendered inauthentic and meaningless in light of their subservience to them. An indebtedness to corporate money has prevented the Democrats from coming out strongly in favor of measures which unapologetically prioritize the needs of the working class − policies such as a $15 minimum wage, single-payer “Medicare for All” health care, free public college and a jobs-producing plan to fight climate change.

A new report, “Democratic Autopsy: One Year Later,” published in October 2018, evaluated how well the Democratic Party has implemented these changes. On measures of voter participation and party democracy, the architects of the original study issued a grade of “somewhat improved.” On issues of war and corporate power, the Party has become “somewhat worse” in light of the overwhelming majority of House and Senate Democrats who supported Trump’s 2019 military budget expansion and the repeal of a proposal which banned Democrats from accepting contributions from fossil-fuel manufacturers, among other issues.

The Democrats proposed no coordinated platform or clear, unified message for the 2018 Midterm Election. This demonstrates their continued dedication to their failed 2016 strategy, which was truly no strategy at all. As such, analysts can attribute the “Blue Wave” to the erratic Trump presidency more than anything else. A failure to heed the advice of the “Autopsy” reports and profoundly change their ways in the coming months before the 2020 presidential election will result in Donald Trump’s reelection falling − once again − into the Democrats’ hands.