The Republican Party is in turmoil and rife with infighting. This may lead Democratic strategists to argue that the best move for the party is conveying an image of unity and focus by quickly choosing a candidate in the 2016 presidential election and then focusing on the issues.

However, a healthy debate about the party’s values and who would best represent the face of the Democrats as Barack Obama’s presidency comes to a close could prove more constructive than immediately throwing support behind one candidate.

Despite currently holding no position in the government, Hillary Clinton has been garnering a significant amount of attention recently regarding a possible presidential run in 2016.

Although Clinton has not formally stated she will seek the Democratic nomination, her actions in the past few months have been quite candidate worthy. And a CNN/ORC poll from September found support among Democrats for a Clinton presidential run to be an astounding 65 percent.

At this point, it is safe to say that pressure from voters and the DNC will persuade Clinton to run — although I’m sure she decided to run a long time ago and completely on her own. But Democratic voters should not be so quick to accept Clinton as their candidate.

Although the Republicans have been floundering lately, there is something to be said of the voices of the young leaders in the GOP — Ted Cruz, Rand Paul and others. The Democrats could certainly benefit from selecting a candidate who is as dedicated — albeit more rationally — to a single issue as House Republican leaders were to defunding Obamacare.

That person could be Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren.

Elected to the Senate in 2012, Warren has quickly risen to stardom. Her work, beginning in 2007 when she was a professor at Harvard Law School, led to the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The Wall Street Journal called her a “thorn in the side of large Wall Street firms,” and she credits herself with creating the “intellectual foundation” for Occupy Wall Street. She is a champion of the middle class who works to regulate the big banks and close the income-inequality gap.

The issue of wealth inequality will feature front and center in the 2016 election. On this issue, Clinton will be out gunned by a much more knowledgeable and activist Warren. But on other issues, particularly foreign policy — not to mention sheer political experience — Clinton reigns supreme. Warren is obviously well aware of this and actually signed a letter with 15 other Congressional women, urging Clinton to run in 2016.

Another signature on the letter was from New York senator Kirsten Gillibrand. Like Warren, Gillibrand is relatively new to politics, and despite being overshadowed by fellow New York Senator Charles Schumer, is quickly building an impressive resume.

Her foremost venture in the Senate is bringing to light sexual assault in the military and changing relevant standards and regulations. This championing of a particular issue — like Warren with financial reform — is attractive to voters who reward candidates for commitment to an issue.

It is highly unlikely Gillibrand would run in 2016 and even if Warren ran, it is unlikely she would win the nomination. But both women sit in the Democratic ranks, waiting their turn, becoming more qualified as the years pass.

Despite the inevitability of a Clinton candidacy, debate among Democratic voters about the candidate possibilities is necessary and could prove constructive to the party.

Michael Hacker is a senior political science major. His column appears weekly. He can be reached at mahacker@syr.edu and followed on Twitter at @mikeincuse.

Published on November 21, 2013 at 2:32 am