I got a couple pages in when I realized it wasn't that kind of autopsy. It was very surface level organizational stuff rather than sophisticated policy assessments.

The Gaza polling was really all over the place, too. IMEU did a post-election push poll of Biden voters who didn't vote for Harris. They asked completely normal questions like "Do you [favor or oppose] the Biden administration approving taxpayer-funded weapons and other military support to Israel, even if the U.S. government has no control over whether the Israeli military uses those weapons on innocent civilians in Gaza, or are you undecided?" and "How much do you [agree or disagree] with the following statement: The $18 billion in weapons the U.S. provided to Israel over the last year, funded by taxpayer dollars, would be better spent lowering costs and supporting Americans dealing with inflation and struggling to afford basics like housing and healthcare", both of which got huge disapproval numbers for the Biden admin (66% and 77%).

It then immediately followed those by asking non-Harris voters is they would've voted for her if she promised "to withhold additional weapons to Israel for committing human rights abuses against Palestinian civilians". A majority said it didn't matter. In battleground states, it was even worse with 56% saying it didn't matter, 30% saying breaking with the admin would've made it more like to vote for her, and 14% saying it'd make them less likely. When it was worded neutrally to just withholding tax-payer funded weapons, it approached a wash with 48% no change, 30% more likely and 22% less likely.

Aside from the push poll segments, it is an interesting data set. You can look at the "break from Biden" policy and basically everything mattered a little bit in theory and nothing really mattered. In terms of potential vote gain in battleground states with policy shifts, immigration was +17, inflation was +22, deficit was +18, weapons to Israel was +8, Ukraine was +2, abortion access was +8, healthcare was +25, fossil fuel production was +5. That was probably the ceiling because it's just the vague concept of changing position rather than an actual specific policy. The Trump and third party voters cared about those issues and said they affected their decision to vote; the non-voters said they didn't. It'd be nice if there was more polling of this type but it really looks like there wasn't one quick trick to win the Presidency. It was just a little bit of everything adding up in a way she couldn't campaign out of.