She wasn't a good candidate.
Liz Warren in theory was a perfect candidate ideologically. She was halfway between Biden and Bernie, but she lacked charisma and was a Harvard professor.
She could have run as a non-socialist economic populist that would have had mass working-class appeal but instead went all in on the PMC vote at the expense of the multiracial working-class.
That is what she ran as! She was basically a 21st century version of the anti-monopoly, trust-busting Progressive Republican. The problem is she was getting flack from the left for allegedly having a healthcare plan that was too stingy (remember, if you don't unreservedly support Bernie's specific M4A plan lock, stock and barrel, you literally want people to die), and the Democratic Establishment had been throwing the kitchen sink at her every time she started doing well in the polls.Her campaign was drunk on idpol, so that's patently untrue. Also your statement about her health care plan doesn't make any sense: the candidate with the
least "state run" health care model, that gives the most leeway to private insurance, won the primary in a landslide, so this idea that Warren was targeted by Democratic voters because it wasn't M4A is absurd. The Democratic establishment took to her candidacy very well, hence why she was endorsed by the NYT and every major news organization lamented the suspension of her campaign as some kind of death knell for equality of the sexes. Sounds to me like you're projecting your anti-Bernie sympathies here more than anything else
