The report partly blamed aides to Joseph R. Biden Jr. and Kamala Harris for her defeat. But it was widely seen as a poorly executed examination, bringing fresh scrutiny to Democrats.
The Democratic National Committee on Thursday released a nearly 200-page draft of an internal autopsy of what went wrong in the 2024 campaign, ending months of speculation that had created an embarrassing public spectacle for the party as it seeks to regain control of Congress.
The draft report places blame for former Vice President Kamala Harris’s defeat partly on former President Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s political operation, arguing that it did not position her for success in the race after Mr. Biden dropped out. It also critiques the Harris campaign for failing to distance itself from Mr. Biden, and for not producing an effective strategy to make a dent in Donald J. Trump’s rising approval ratings.
The release was an extraordinary turn of events for the party, which all but trashed its own report as incomplete and inaccurate, releasing the document only after months of mounting headaches from keeping it secret. The episode drew unwanted attention to the committee’s internal struggles at a time when it should be focused squarely on the midterms and preparing for the looming 2028 cycle.
Democrats spent the day contending with what most agreed was a shoddy assessment of the 2024 cycle, stepping on a news cycle when Republicans in Congress were breaking with President Trump over a proposed $1.8 billion fund to benefit those who claim they were targeted by the federal government.
The document itself was widely mocked. Atop each page was a bright red disclaimer that the D.N.C. “was not provided with the underlying sourcing, interviews, or supporting data for many of the assertions contained herein.” A page with the title “Executive Summary” was blank except for a note in red reading: “This section was not provided by author.”
Particular facts included in the version that the committee released were highlighted in yellow and annotated as either unverified and inaccurate. There was no list of who was interviewed, no transcriptions and no notes, which made determining the veracity of the draft all but impossible, said a person familiar with the process.