meta_pixel
Tapesearch Logo
Log in
WSJ Opinion: Potomac Watch

Did Democrats Learn Anything from Losing in 2024?

WSJ Opinion: Potomac Watch

The Wall Street Journal

News, Society & Culture

4.22.8K Ratings

🗓️ 22 May 2026

⏱️ 25 minutes

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

A leaked campaign "autopsy" from the Democratic National Committee says Kamala Harris lost in 2024 because the Biden White House didn't help her enough and she didn't run hard enough against Trump. But the report makes no mention of Biden's age or the Democratic divide on Israel. Plus, Tulsi Gabbard resigns from her post as President Trump's director of national intelligence. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0

Some follow the noise.

0:03.0

Bloomberg follows the money, whether it's the funds fueling AI or crypto's trillion dollar swings.

0:08.9

There's a money side to every story.

0:11.4

Get the money side of the story.

0:13.5

Subscribe now at Bloomberg.com.

0:25.7

From the opinion pages of the Wall Street Journal, this is Potomac Watch.

0:33.2

Democrats have had more than 18 months to ponder why Kamala Harris lost the presidency in 2024.

0:36.5

And so what have they learned in those nearly two years?

0:39.7

Well, apparently not very much. At least that's what it appears from looking at a leaked Democratic National Committee campaign autopsy

0:44.6

released this week. Welcome to Potomac Watch. I'm Kate O'Dell. I'm here with my esteemed colleagues

0:51.2

and gentlemen Barton Swain columnist and Bill McGurn, another columnist

0:55.8

and a member of the editorial board. We're going to chat today about the DNC autopsy,

1:00.4

and we'll also give you a quick update on Friday's news that Director of National Intelligence

1:05.5

Tulsi Gabbard has resigned from the administration. But Bill, digging into this autopsy report that the DNC

1:12.8

has put out, it's more than 150 pages, it is not scintillating reading, it is peppered

1:19.8

with odd annotations questioning the underlying reasoning. I think some of our listeners

1:25.7

will be wondering, what is this? Why did this come

1:28.4

out two years later? What's the story behind this late Democratic recrimination of 2024?

1:34.6

Well, I think whenever you lose, there are recriminations for the next couple of years.

1:40.6

Part of it, there's a good faith effort to find out what they did wrong so they don't do it

1:45.9

again. In practice, I think these autopsies are not useful at all because they're kind of by

1:54.1

definition, not honest. They're asking people to go on the record. So even though the whole

...

Transcript will be available on the free plan in 15 days. Upgrade to see the full transcript now.

Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from The Wall Street Journal, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.

Generated transcripts are the property of The Wall Street Journal and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.

Copyright © Tapesearch 2026.