Also on the intraparty unity front, there's a fascinating discussion going on over at OpenLeft (a site devoted to making the netroots more of an ideological force in the Democratic Party) spurred by Mike Lux, who suggests that any of the likely Democratic nominees are going to be more "Center" than "Left." The question he then poses is whether those on the Left are willing to accept a coalition "deal" for limited but real influence over the next Democratic administration, similar in some respects to the "deal" their ideological predecessors struck during the Clinton administration.

So far, the comment thread on Lux's post seems to indicate general acceptance of "The Deal," with discussion centering on those issues deemed non-negotiable (typically action on climate change, movement towards universal health coverage, rejection of war with Iran, and refusal to retreat on social issues).

While you are at OpenLeft, you should also check out Chris Bowers' post, which reviews the lack of any post-Nobel public demand for a Gore candidacy, and concludes Gore is more useful outside the presidential campaign. As it happens, Gore has already made a post-Nobel comment which, though it falls short of full Sherman Statement, indicates a continuing lack of interest in a presidential run.