That'd be a cogent analysis based on our current practice of politics. Thing is, Gore's trying to break out of that box, and reform American politics, to get away from empty manufactured consent through slick ad campaigns, and to return to conducting politics through debate and public conversation. Resonates with me as a Zoner; Gore's on our wavelength as far as the process goes, and that's the thing I want to keep exploring.

I admit that Gore is rising in my esteem as I read his works and listen to him argue his points, not just for the ideas but for the fact that he's even trying to deal in ideas. The last eight years have been good for Big Al, as painful as they may have been in the early days. He's a better man today than he was in 2000.

But advocating conducting politics in a free marketplace of ideas means that I'm promising to listen objectively to all sides and ultimately vote for the person whose ideas I genuinely agree with. The winner of this process is hardly guaranteed to be Gore. It might be Gingrich, it might be somebody else; but the important thing is that the winner is chosen by a process more likely to produce a good leader than the process we're currently using.

It's about the reform, not the Gore.