I have also found Jimmy to be one of the few not shrieking on either side. Segwit2x seems to be a total failure to accomplish the necessary scaling, while potentially injecting the possibility of intermediaries into Bitcoin transactions. It's fundamentally counter to my reading of the Bitcoin whitepaper, which specifically cites the efficacy of block size increases which would easily solve this issue.
The fact that one side argues against an easy solution with no clear technical drawbacks (that I am aware of) is a pretty good indicator they have ulterior motives.
While I likely agree with you politically on this, both sides have dirty hands. SegWit as a SF seems like an inelegant solutions that increases the tech debt and yields much less on-chain scaling than is being touted with higher actual costs to economic nodes. It was not originally an on-chainscaling solution but was re-appropriated as one politically. It's all sad to to even think about.