Much of what @harrispolitico says about centrist bias in DC media is true, but it's also true that Warren's coverage up until now has been extremely favorable and even protective, relative to both centrist candidates and to Bernie Sanders:
politico.com/magazine/story…
politico.com/magazine/story…
@harrispolitico Several reasons for this, I think, but one is that there is also an "expert/technocrat" bias in DC media that Warren has skillfully played to, framing her plans in the language of technocracy rather than Sanders-style revolution.
@harrispolitico She's run into trouble with Medicare for All because 1) it was Bernie's bill first, 2) it's big enough that its revolutionary character is obvious no matter what wonk language you use and 3) she conspicuously didn't *want* to cost it out, and her critics forced her to do it.
@harrispolitico A further thought on this passage; centrists shouldn't be "sure" they're right, indeed they're often wrong, but the Tea Party era GOP proved that just having your base pull you rightward doesn't mean you've moved the whole country with you. 
@harrispolitico Paul Ryan and the Tea Party between made centrist-GOP doubts about, say, Medicare reform seem "irrelevant" for a while -- but then Romney-Ryan lost, his budget roadmap withered, and Trump's ascent made it irrelevant.
@harrispolitico Not saying the same will happen with the Warren-Sanders agenda; parts of it are more popular than Ryan's roadmap. Other parts, however, are conspicuously not.
@harrispolitico And the story of the era @harrispolitico is describing in that passage has been one in which the USA moved left ... and Democrats lost a lot of elections because they moved left faster. It's not just DC-centrist bias to wonder if going yet *further* left will break this trend.
