Before we get any deeper into the primary season, I think if Warren wants to win she is going to have to attack two of Sanders' attributes. The first is the most important one: he's not a socialist. It's his branding. He's not going to nationalize Wall Street. At the end of four
2/ years we will still have a market economy. The Nordic countries he touts are capitalist economies with large social welfare sections. Nobody talks about getting rid of markets. Here is the 1912 Socialist Party platform. At best, Sanders is going to expand the TVA--a program 
3/ supported by anti-union, anti-black Democrats in the Jim Crow South. Bottomline, Sanders wants more and better regulations of a market economy, with federal dollars shifting economic priorities--like building the railroads, or the interstate highway system, or the space
4/ program, or building the Internet. On social programs, expanding Medicare is extending that "socialist" LBJ's Medicare program by removing three words from the original legislation. Without the "socialist" label, the question is then who best understands how markets work? I
5/ think Warren knows better how to transform a capitalist economy. The next substantive issue is his "political revolution." Sanders wants to keep the filibuster, so his "political revolution" will be a "political fizzle." Warren wants to get rid of the filibuster. Those two
6/ branding issues would go along way to demystifying Sanders' appeal. Then, there is the issue of his medical records. Why is he not releasing them? If Warren wants to win, she needs to take the gloves off with Sanders. Sanders is an FDR-LBJ liberal claiming to be a "socialist"
7/ to distinguish himself from Democrats. It's a branding gimmick. His "political revolution" with the filibuster is a bust. He is setting up his supporters for real disappointment when he can't move anything in the Senate because a rump GOP can block legislation.
