Politico came in for broad criticism on Wednesday over a story concerning whether Elizabeth Warren could avoid “Clinton redux” in her 2020 presidential campaign.
“How does Elizabeth Warren avoid a Clinton redux — written off as too unlikable before her campaign gets off the ground?” the website asked.
“She’s too divisive and too liberal, Washington Democrats have complained privately. Her DNA rollout was a disaster — and quite possibly a White House deal-breaker,” wrote reporter Natasha Korecki laying out the rap from critics. “She’s already falling in the polls, and — perhaps most stinging — shares too many of the attributes that sank Hillary Clinton.”
On New Year’s Eve, Warren became the first major Democrat to announce plans to seek the 2020 party presidential nomination.
“Every person in America should be able to work hard, play by the same set of rules, & take care of themselves & the people they love,” Warren said on Twitter, taking over an otherwise empty news day. “That’s what I’m fighting for, & that’s why I’m launching an exploratory committee for president. I need you with me”
Critics online — on both the left and the right — took issue with the framing of Politico’s concerns about Warren, wondering whether the same would be asked of Warren’s many male competitors.
“How dare you @politico?” Joan Walsh, a CNN contributor, said on Twitter Tuesday. “I am not endorsing anyone for a long time but you make me want to get into @ewarren’s corner fast. This is so offensive.”
“Why is @politico starting w/ this? She hasn’t even been on the campaign trail a day and @Politico already has this?” added former Fox News anchor Greta Van Susteren.
Reps for Politico did not immediately respond to request for comment from TheWrap.
In a video laying out her agenda, Warren focused on her record with economic issues and role in creating the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which has returned millions of dollars back to consumers cheated by big banks. She also took a pointed shot at Fox News’ primetime line up.
“Our government’s supposed to work for all of us, but instead it has become a tool for the wealthy and the well connected,” Warren said. “The whole scam is propped up by an echo chamber of fear and hate designed to distract and divide us. People who will do or say anything to hang on to power, point the finger at anyone who looks, thinks, prays or loves differently than they do.”
As she spoke, images of Carlson, Ingraham and Hannity flashed past. Warren also threw in the network’s morning show “Fox & Friends” — a Trump favorite.
— Joan Walsh (@joanwalsh) January 2, 2019
— Soledad O'Brien (@soledadobrien) January 2, 2019
I am not telling people to vote for or against @ewarren but I am w/ @soledadobrien on this – why is @politico starting w/ this? She hasn’t even been on the campaign trail a day and @Politico already has this? https://t.co/Q03S3pSCHk
— Greta Van Susteren (@greta) January 2, 2019
We can start by treating women as candidates for president, not homecoming queen. https://t.co/Qlwszu6Os0
— Connie Schultz (@ConnieSchultz) January 1, 2019
Lord. They misogynistic press coverage is starting early https://t.co/X2CYj3yDUp
— Neera Tanden (@neeratanden) January 1, 2019
Shame on Politico for this lazy, vapid take.https://t.co/XLktfpWP9C
— Brian Fallon (@brianefallon) January 2, 2019
She has to somehow will Politico out of existence. https://t.co/bkGORqnYwV
— Dan Zak (@MrDanZak) January 2, 2019
When did @ewarren become unlikable? Looks like you can pinpoint time of unlikability to moment she showed ambition to be POTUS. As far as women have come, people still find women w/ ambition vexing. “There’s something about her I just don’t like.” https://t.co/zfiDyCDq8M
— Jennifer Palmieri (@jmpalmieri) January 1, 2019