Just dropping this here, no particular reason.
Ezra Klein nails it. Sanders has a vision, but his notion of how to achieve it is Green Lanternism — somehow the sheer power of will will make it happen. Warren is almost as progressive, but with a real theory of change
1. A thread on this very fine profile of Warren - -, my own piece on Warren and public choice - and a nearly forgotten 2011 Internet spat. Short version: Elizabeth Warren is a left neo-liberal with a theory of politics.
I did the case for Bernie. Here’s ’s case for Warren for all the Mensheviks, Right Opportunists, and fellow-travelers of the Rykhov-Bukharin clique of wreckers and saboteurs.
The case for Elizabeth Warren: - She has the best understanding of America’s problems - She knows how to wield the powers of the regulatory state - She has the clearest plan to make governing possible again
Elizabeth Warren is the best candidate, the smartest person in the race, the most electable and the person who would make the best president. Also, I just really fucking like her.
"This is not a normal résumé for a presidential candidate. Most politicians don’t even read the briefing books the experts hand them. It’s extremely rare for a leading politician to be the expert who did the foundational work the briefing books rely on."
Vox is making the best case for the leading Democratic candidates. Last week, made the case for Bernie Sanders.  This week, I make the case for Elizabeth Warren
What’s really interesting about this argument in favor of Warren is that it really shows her evolution, and why she is so smart about policy and power. Being able to really learn and understand is such a rare skill, and she epitomizes it.
3. She is, far and away, the candidate with the clearest plan for making ambitious governance possible again Read the full argument, part of our series making the best case for the leading Democratic candidates
“Warren is the only Democrat running for president who has built, or directly managed, a federal agency. That gives her a form of experience that is unique in the Democratic field but central to the work of the president"
If you’re still deciding, give this a read. #PresidentWarren
Lots in this Warren endorsement from ⁦⁩ but pay particular attention to Warren’s understanding of how to wield power in Washington.
“The case for Warren, then, is clear: She is simply the best person for the job.”
The case for Warren: She understands America’s problems and she is, far and away, the candidate with the clearest plan for making ambitious governance possible again.
I found this essay on Elizabeth Warren fascinating. She’s not the guy I want to have a beer with, she’s the smart woman I would want to work with.
Previously: says Elizabeth Warren is the one with the experience and ideas to actually run the executive branch.
Previously: The case for Elizabeth Warren.
The most influential campaign endorsements are from podcast hosts, so in the primaries I’m backing Elizabeth Warren . The right combination of goals (structural change, increased fairness) and competence (smarts, experience, plans).
A reasonable shortcut here is to the extent your agenda can be accomplished through executive authority, there’s a lot the president can do. I make this argument at length in my piece on Elizabeth Warren
2. The second is making the case for Warren
2. Bernie Sanders can unify Democrats and beat Trump in 2020: 3. Joe Biden is the only candidate with a real shot at getting things done: 4. The case for Elizabeth Warren:
This piece by shouldn't be so remarkable. It does something that seems very obvious, but is nonetheless rare: it starts from what a president actually does and evaluates a candidate against those how well they can do those things
“The truth of the Medicare-for-all debate is that it is extremely unlikely any president will pass a single-payer bill, but Warren is the only candidate to propose an even glancingly plausible strategy.”
Matt made the case for Bernie. Now Ezra makes the case for Elizabeth Warren. What do you think?
Do read Ezra's case for Warren, though the pace as which we're publishing these makes me doubt we'll get to my "The case for Michael Bennet" before Iowa