... progressives build the organization, with funding and such, to look for a candidate and get them across the Clinton / Biden battle which is likely and likely to be expensive. This was about to be a comment in the diary kos is wrong, but then I figured it might as well be a diary.
This is a point I've been making for the last few days on the subject of having someone other than Hillary Clinton as the candidate. Personally, like most of us, and probably even Kos if it were the right person, I'd like to see a credible progressive, populist candidate in 2016. However, Kos makes the case, which I mostly agree with, that we must get behind Hillary as she is likely to be the candidate and the office is more important than the person, although I don't think that Biden is by any means uncertain to be the candidate. He's at a disadvantage in the polls but he has time and the position to make a case for himself. I'm not quite sure if I would choose Clinton over Biden as the DLC was a disaster for the party and I don't think she's changed in that regard. We don't know what looking at Biden with fresh eyes will reveal, but some people will prefer him over her. And that includes progressives. But that folks, is likely to be the race. Unless we want to try something else.
While I can live with either of them being nominated if I must, we still have time to build the means to entice someone else as an example of a progressive who wants to run. That fight will actually help if we have a clear alternative. Someone to be well vetted by activist bloggers starting now, and someone who can win a general election. I think we have time to get a candidate into the race by late 2015. The kos is wrong diary argued that we need focus on 2014 instead of concerning ourselves the race. I believe largely the diarist gets it right but that 2014 will create the 2016 we face. Moreover a successful 2014 campaign would be our scaffolding for building the political machine (sorry, that's what it takes at this time) by winning more 2014 seats than we lose. It shows the political viability of progressive policies if we have winners.
That is, if we want to do this. It's a big job and it shouldn't get in the way of 2014. We have time for 2014 to be our starting point. However I doubt there will be another candidate in this race otherwise. At this time it ain't gonna happen. Most people think for an alternative there will likely be an ass-kicking without significant means of support. That is probably right.
Otherwise if Kos says it will be Clinton, then there's a good chance he's right. He seems to be OK with Clinton as well, and I think his instincts are trustworthy, so that's a bit reassuring for some of us. At the very worst, we need the office over the person. But, again to Kos, on this very site is what it takes to pick and deliver a DNC chairman and bring Dems to make a change in filibuster rules. A site that has called races with a high percentage of accuracy and that has helped put the messaging in place that the Democrats are now using. If we really want a candidate, we can try and get one. It would require a coordinated effort with all kinds of organizations. But I don't think it's likely to happen organically.
And if we try to do that and it fails? We give the rest of what we've raised and achieved and organized to the nominee and get behind them. But wearing our affiliation together brightly. If we want a bit more than incremental change, this is the time to try and do it while our messages that we are missing all kinds of equality of income and opportunity in this political environment are being heard and debated. It's a message people are becoming aware of at long last, with the GOP stalled in much disarray. If we want to try, beyond the next year I don't know if the iron will get much hotter.