With the rift so clear in the Republican ranks with the Populism movement, and a rift that keeps getting bigger in the Democratic ranks between the near-socialists and the more moderate wings, there seems to be plenty of political population sitting where each of those parties is abandoning.

The rift in the Republican side is older and more pronounced. Kind of a direct lineage from the energy of the Tea Party movement, to the ascendancy of the Palin, to Trump.

I think we are just beginning to see the after-effects of Obama on the Democrats. Obama was a sudden surge leftward/governmentalist for the Democrats, and the surge of Bill Clinton's 'Third Way' that moved them centrist died with Gore losing. Even what can be considered 'moderate' for these days for a Democrat is a striking move leftward from Bill Clinton. And *that* rift is just getting started.

If the third party cannot make it with those tectonic forces pulling the older parties in direction that they are moving, then I do not see how any third party or movement would be able to do it.

And, imo, the consequences of not doing so would be terrible for the United States overall.

As an aside, you are are correct it will take a name recognizable and charismatic person to get this rolling. And, they need to be somewhat distanced from the knee-jerk 'moonbat' designation that some that you have listed enjoy.

Look, I have no problems with Johnson or Paul. Voted for Johnson the last go around. But the simple fact remains that for a good 30 per cent of the populace either of those name initiates an immediate 'moonbat' knee kick. That is not a personality 'asset' that a movement or party needs to be saddled with, and actually a nascent one cannot be saddled with.