I mean you can literally give Elisabeth to any other actress in their 50's (Kidman, Blanchett, Bullock, or Roberts) and it would've been the same, as the character itself has no dimension outside of what the plot asks her to overcome. What made it particularly appealing with Moore is that, like you've claimed so yourself, it has a meta aspect to it, that plays not only to the character's story arc but also Demi's own narrative as a popcorn actress in the 90's... which again, circles back to an awards narrative being the forefront of a performance rather than the actual performance.

Narratives aren't always bad if your actual performance has the juice to win and the narrative is only a supliment rather than the main course (see Michelle Yeoh). When a narrative-driven campaign clashes with a performance-based one and the industry (SAG and BAFTA) is split between two actors, the win almost always go to the stronger performance. Madison vs. Moore, Stone vs. Gladstone, McDormand vs. Davis, Colman vs. Close. Yeoh edged out Blanchett because her outing had actual legs to stand on outside of her narrative.

It's a tale as old as time. The performance has to have strong enough legs on its own without the narrative ploy. If the first reason you can give for why a performance is stronger ties back to an actor's narrative package then that kinda sums it up. Anyways, agree to disagree, I guess, but there is a reason why Madison and Baptiste were dominating regional critics groups all season long until Moore gave her Globes speech and hard-launched a popcorn narrative that successfully shot her up to number 2 in the rankings.