Thread by @jacobflowers

THREAD: Hi @yeselson, I wanted to respond to some of the points you made in the politico article about Warren written by @ruairiak. "If plutocrats themselves think she's just as dangerous as Bernie, why does @Jacobinmag doubt that?"

--> POINT #1 There is reason to believe the plutocracy is feigning worry about Warren.
A) She's had over 20 billionaires donate to her over the past two years. Its silly to think they did so "by accident". @yeselson

The plutocracy are only creating an "image" of Warren.

B) People who know her personally, also do not believe that she is sincere in her advocation for her policies. Reference: Harry Reid on @davidaxelrod

https://twitter.com/wideofthepost/status/1183168042920005632?s=20

@yeselson

--> POiNT #2) THE neoliberal corporatist establishment is warm to her.
A) Centrist organizations have praised her, from CAP and Thirdway.
B) It's public knowledge that she has been liaising with Hillary Clinton this election cycle. nbcnews.com/politics/2020-…
@yeselson

--> POINT #3) She has in fact, as Harry Reid predicted, pivoted to center.

I don't need to provide references for this. On the campaign trail, she is now using the exact same language as Pete Buttigieg. @yeselson

"Neither of them is going to appoint officials from Goldman Sachs" @yeselson

--> POINT #1) We can't reasonably assume this about Warren.
A) Given that she was originally intending on taking from the donor class in the general.

B) She has displayed the same kind of "favor buying" as Clinton in 2016. This goes to show she lacks the same principles as Bernie (systemically seen in the dishonesty about her ethnicity). @yeselson

Some additional comments about Warren @yeselson.
1) She is not reliable. Her betrayal of progressives in 2016 is at best, cowardice, and at worst (and more likely), unprincipled opportunism. For what reason, should we want this in the WhiteHouse? @yeselson

2) She performs terribly under pressure. Her interviews with Amy Goodman, Stephen Colbert, on the Breakfast Club, all show her freezing up, and fumbling for words. We should be worried about putting her up against Donald Trump. @yeselson

3) If she really cared about progressive causes, she should drop out and endorse Sanders.
A) She is in a negative polling trend
B) Her base is not diverse
C) Sanders has the best favorables, trust ratings, and matchup performances against Trump. @yeselson

All of the above reaches the conclusion, that Elizabeth Warren is an existential threat to the progressive cause. Even if by some slim chance she won the election, we'd see her continue to pivot to center, and she wouldn't change the congressional landscape the way Sanders would

But the cold reality, is that she likely would lose to Trump. Which is all the more reason, why we should be helping to position her to rally around the progressive champion, whom former Sander's critic @peterdaou says is untouchable. @yeselson

This is why I agree with @jacobinmag @curaffairs @NathanJRobinson @sunraysunray @BMStudebaker if Warren presents a threat to a progressive reality, then we cant help corporate media any further by elevating her alongside Sanders. Harry Reid has it right

https://twitter.com/wideofthepost/status/1183168042920005632?s=20