Wouldn’t the following many good things logically happen if Tom Harkin started campaigning today for the 2016 Democratic Presidential nomination?
Wouldn’t an immediate start to such a campaign be consistent with (and actually add substance to the rhetoric of) Harkin’s recent statement that nothing significant can be passed by the Senate during 2013-2014 because of the recent failure to adopt substantive filibuster reform? (See: http://www.slate.com/...)
Wouldn’t such a campaign generate more publicity for Progressive criticisms-cum-alternatives that Harkin might like to make of non-Progressive positions and actions of office-holders (and of other 2014 candidates for any offices)?
Wouldn’t such a campaign demonstrate the popularity, especially among potential Democratic primary voters and caucusers, of such criticisms-cum-alternatives?
Wouldn’t such a campaign pressure other candidates to declare their views on such criticisms-cum-alternatives?
Couldn’t such a campaign develop a voter-mobilization infrastructure that is independent of OFA, and thereby prevent an OFA monopoly on selecting the 2016 Democratic nominee for President?
Wouldn’t such an independent infrastructure broaden the Democratic voter-mobilization tent by (more easily than OFA) reaching potential voters that have turned negative on Obama?
Couldn’t such a campaign infrastructure help support 2014 candidates, for other offices, that Harkin might like to endorse?
Couldn’t such a campaign infrastructure be transferred to a later-declared Presidential candidate who Harkin might decide to endorse? (Wouldn't such a candidate benefit from infrastructure-development getting started long in advance of candidacy being declared?)
Couldn’t such a campaign, if it resulted in a non-trivial number of convention delegates pledged to Harkin, give him direct influence on selection of the 2016 Democratic Presidential ticket?