Warren would be their best runner up. She has strong support from within the base of the party, is slowly becoming more and more of a household name, and her biggest policy strength and focus is something that is popular among voters from both parties. And she's really a pretty good politician overall. Her only real problem would be all the banks funding the other guy, which didn't happen in 2008.
I don't know why you're so against her running.
The most power you get is being able to appoint people to various positions of government. It would be far less likely for Holder to be in a position to say too big to fail when he gets appointed by a president that ran against that. And don't tell me that senate confirmation will block that, since there's basically a 99% chance the democrats will hold the senate in 2016 and I highly doubt democrats would fight back if she won.
She also made a foreign policy lecture a few months ago, saying that we need to care more about foreign civilian casualties. It's not going to be a strength, but she'll easily cut out a space for herself in foreign policy that makes sense. There's also a question about 3 things she'd change as president at
30:42. All 3 she can do as long as the senate democrats don't revolt against her, and I really doubt senate democrats would revolt against a brand new president like that.
