Warren fundraising off 'sexism' in tweet referring to her likability

Sen. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth Ann WarrenOn The Money: Inside the Mueller report | Cain undeterred in push for Fed seat | Analysis finds modest boost to economy from new NAFTA | White House says deal will give auto sector B boost Sanders announces first endorsements in South Carolina Poll: Buttigieg surges into contention with Biden, Sanders MORE (D-Mass.) is fundraising off a "gendered nonsense" tweet from Politico, which linked to an article drawing comparisons between Warren and former Democratic presidential nominee Hillary ClintonHillary Diane Rodham ClintonClinton campaign chief: Mueller report 'lays out a devastating case' against Trump Hillicon Valley: Cyber, tech takeaways from Mueller report | Millions of Instagram passwords exposed internally by Facebook | DHS unrolling facial recognition tech in airports | Uber unveils new safety measures after student's killing Heavily redacted Mueller report leaves major questions unanswered MORE.

The Politico tweet, which has received significant pushback online, posed the question, "How does Elizabeth Warren avoid a Clinton redux — written off as too unlikable before her campaign gets off the ground?"


It was posted shortly after Warren announced she will be forming an exploratory committee to run for the White House in 2020.

"Every woman who’s ever put her name forward for something – and every sensible person who recognizes how smart, powerful women are written about, and the names they’re called – knows what’s going on here," Warren's team wrote in the fundraising email sent out Wednesday. 

"In honor (if that’s the right word) of this terrible tweet, we’ve set up a way to do something productive when you see this stuff like this," the email reads, including links to donate to Warren's campaign. "Like a swear jar, except for gendered nonsense commentary." 

Some commentators responding to the article say it's sexist to compare the two figures, who are dissimilar aside from their gender.

"Clinton and Warren are not similar political figures," The New York Times's Maggie Haberman wrote. "They’re just both women." 

The piece itself quotes advisers who are trying to shake perceptions that Warren is "cold" or "aloof," both words previously attributed to Clinton during her failed bid in 2016.

"Others see sexism in the barrage of Warren criticism and alleged parallels to Clinton," the article states. "If there’s a public perception that’s personally rankled Warren, it’s the depiction that she’s cold, according to one of her former advisers."

"They say that about women — anybody who runs for president," Democratic strategist Mary Anne Marsh told Politico. "As you go up the political ladder and go up in the polls, you will get that criticism." 

In a response to The Hill, Politico pushed back against the criticism. 

"I would point out that neither the tweet nor the story refers to Senator Warren as 'unlikeable,'" a Politico spokeswoman said in an email.

"The story, which we encourage people to read in its entirety, quotes multiple operatives and people close to Senator Warren acknowledging that this is the case that some make against her," she added. "The story also directly acknowledges that this criticism is viewed by many within the Democratic party as unfair, if not sexist. We stand by the reporting." 

Updated: 4:57 p.m.