A party hack who's elected is beholden to the party for putting him/her in office, and not the voters, and is obligated to work to advance the party's interests, not the constituents'.

I think that Gore is freer to speak his own mind these days--he can let Al be Al--not only because he's not in office, but because he has little to do with the Democratic Party any more. He's not on their radar, and apparently they aren't on his; and that's a good thing.

I'm less sure about Newt's ties to the GOP these days, but I suspect that he's in a similar boat as Gore. There's probably little to restrain him from speaking his own mind.

If I ever see my dream of two independents fighting it out for President, and it's Gore versus Gingrich, I'd prefer Gore to win, but I'd rather have Gingrich as President than any of the hacks who have been put forth by the party machines. It's not that Gingrich's politics are more acceptable than any of the machine Democrats or Republicans, but simply because winning through the process I describe is more honest and honorable, and thus more likely to produce a truly good leader. With either one, we can be more confident that what we see is what we get.