Warren is a lightweight. I read her 2003 book (The Two Income Trap) and found it informative but, lacking in solutions that resonated with me. Just because she can identify some issues doesn't mean she knows how to solve them. Add in the lack of charisma and recent rookie mistakes (heritage, beer thingy) and she fails the heavy-weight test. We have 350million+ people from which to choose. We can do better than Warren. Much better.

That being said, rather than trying to identify the best third party solution/candidate, my opinion is that our efforts would have the greatest potential impact coupled with the greatest potential chance of becoming reality if we created a groundswell of support for; 1] greater states rights (less federal power) and 2] senate & congressional term limits. All of this federal power is exacerbating the political divide while simultaneously increasing the stakes. Dilute/diffuse the problem by marginalizing the players and spreading the power. Instead of rallying behind finding a candidate, let's rally around finding someone to lead us toward getting some constitutional amendments on a federal ballot.

And, that being said, I personally don't see why any logical individual would ever vote for a progressive/liberal/democratic candidate for president when comparing the current state of affairs in California, New York, Illinois versus those in South Dakota, Texas, Tennessee. I'm registered Non-Party Affiliated because I hate the politics on both sides, but hey, conservative leaders have done a better job state-by-state in the metrics that make sense to me. It's about as black & white as it gets.

And, before you pigeon-hole me as a biased conservative, I'm also a pro-choice (although it's a horrible choice to be faced with), pro-gay marriage (although straight), atheist (although I respect most God-fearing individuals for their moral compass & compassion toward others). I think for myself and methinks conservatives have proven better public leaders than have progressives.

It's science