i think a part of the misunderstanding is this idea that warren is a populist, quasi-socialist type. rather, she's a relatively conservative new deal capitalist that wants to recreate a regulatory system that will prevent capitalism from cannibalizing itself. in a more enlightened period, she would have been a centrist, liberal democrat - not the type that gets a lot of union support and runs on fiery anti-establishment rhetoric, but the type that wants to make relatively minor changes to allow for more accountability and ultimately gets most of her support from what is a different sector of wall street. elizabeth warren is very much a wall street democrat. she's just a different type of wall street democrat. but the current spectrum has reached the point where this once dominant ruling clique now barely exists, and voters are only vaguely aware that it even ever existed.

the truth is that clinton is within this same clique, and their differences are much smaller than their agreements.

the truth is also that the anti-regulatory, reaganomics clique on wall street actually despises clinton with every inch of their being. this is the clique that poured billions into obama's campaign to beat her.

so, why did she say this?

there's not a conniving, calculated reason. it's just an honest assessment. and, i agree with her. but that's so unusual in american politics that it didn't even cross your mind.