Sherrod Brown would be great but I don't think he is interested.

We should be talking about other candidates and push them into the primaries. I don't want to vote for Hillary for a whole lot of reasons. She gets through the primary though she gets my vote.

and no one else will do.

I use progressive, since I am a life long liberal who does not tilt at windmills.

The "recruit Warren" campaign has revealed that there is a large well of support for the right candidate to tap. Warren's bold positions are a blueprint for a successful campaign for the person brave enough to take the ball and run with it.

Yes, she's increasingly visible as the template of how a populist should be participating in the political battles in Washington. We should keep pushing Warren to see if we can convince her, but if not, at least for others who might be more interested, they'll see a more definitive example of the kind of politician we really want for leadership at the top, so hopefully someone else might step up and give us the same value that she might have.

As I've noted earlier, Warren is probably more unique than most other politicians, as she more than any other pol will be attacked heavily by the corporate entities in Washington that view her as enemy #1 for their political agenda there. Therefore, in my book it is understandable that even if she might want to run, that she might hold back and not be committing to anything as a means of keeping that sort of attack away until she feels that the landscape is right for her to enter the race. Now it could be just as possible that she doesn't want to run either, but given that equation, I think it is still very important that we keep expressing our feelings that we need a populist like her in the race, and that we're not going to give up before primary season starts. In the meantime, other means of helping to fund this race and get her message out might become more apparent too, which might help persuade her later that winning such a race is more possible than perhaps she feels it is now with so many elite enemies aligned against her.

She does not like running or campaigning for office. We must be aware she was reluctant to run for the Senate. However, MA is a small state, but even there she did not enjoy campaigning for office. Not everyone has the fire in the belly required to run from place to place all across the whole US for a year and a half. She enjoys staying home and performing the duties she was elected to do. Speaking out on issues is very different from a presidential campaign. Please respect her wishes and understand this. At this point, it should be apparent to you she has no intention of running for President of the United States. Instead of wasting your time saying "run Warren run" you should urge, support, and help your second choice candidate in their run for president. Hoping Liz runs is just a waste of time and energy.

You are right that she is a human being and we need to respect what she ultimately decides to do. And when I'm saying that we should continue the campaign, it isn't something where we are telling her YOU MUST RUN OR WE WILL NOT SUPPORT YOU ANY MORE!

What she has done so far is really a good example of what we want out of a presidential candidate to run on in 2016. Whether it is her or someone else, it is hard for us to articulate what we want unless we can point to an example (her as a decent Senator working for all of us) of what we want that is much more visible to the public through the corporate media, than anything else the corporate media will allow being said in a more general sense. That is why us defining what we want by using Warren as the context of what we want is so important. Now if she has in her heart that she might want to run, but is waiting for certain roadblocks (some of which might be visible and others which might not) to be cleared, then she can know that she can enter later and she will have our support that we keep clamoring for. If we suddenly "shut up" and just "accept" the message that she won't run that so many from other Hillary or non-populist quarters try to push us in to saying, then the movement will die, and we might even have a hard time getting another candidate to step up to the bar to try and do what she's been doing too.

Ultimately I think it helps her down the road even if she decides to stay in the Senate, as she can tell her Massachusetts voters that serving them is so important, and how so many Americans want what she's been working on as a Massachusetts senator which is certain to buy her more support with the voters, and with other senators later too, when she is trying persuade them to work with her on other senate issues.

But she's not running so I'm hoping like hell Bernie runs. Before anyone freaks, he has said he would run as a Dem.

Is that like the "ivory tower elitists" singled out by the Bush campaign?

Take her at her word and leave it alone.

Really what damage has it done trying to get Warren into the race? If she says no, people can keep asking. If Sanders says no, people can keep asking him. Your assumption seems like a loaded question (pun intended).

regard Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders as our de facto Leaders now, and in these times. Like other great voices and activists, Sherrod Brown, Rep. John Lewis, Naomi Klein, Rev. Barber of Moral Mondays in NC, Code Pink, Occupy, Jim Hightower, Chris Rock, Bill McKibben, Jon Stewart, Cornell West, Sister Simone Campbell, Chris Hedges, Seattle millionaire Nick Hanauer and so many more!

rather than the historical model of declaring your candidacy. But that is not yet, and may never be, the normal M.O. So I've moved on to Martin O'Malley, who is probably better qualified than Warren anyway.