The implosion of the Gingrich campaign is a reminder that a myriad of factors go into making a strong candidate and a strong president. There is a tendency sometimes to reduce it simply to where a person stands on the issues. (Do they score eight out of 10 on a checklist or 10 out of 10? Have they cast “heretical” votes?) But Gingrich reminds us that one’s temperament, character, and self-discipline matter too, and those qualities are often harder to discern. One also needs to take into account the passions and convictions of an individual. For example, candidates can say they’re in favor of certain positions — say, entitlement reform — but that doesn’t mean they’ll necessarily fight hard for them if they’re elected.
Arguably having a deep, sustained commitment when it comes to the most important issues facing the nation is more important than being on the “right” side of a long list of issues. And how do we measure a candidate’s political courage? Are they persuasive and can they mobilize public opinion? Is their judgment about people right? Are they intellectually curious and open to empirical arguments? Do they have a coherent political philosophy? Have they shown the ability to anticipate the arc of events? Do they have a record of achievement? Et cetera.
This is obviously not an easy thing to sort through, and different times require different strengths. Add to that the fact that certain strengths (someone who is a quick and firm decision-maker) can become weaknesses (stubbornness and rigidity) depending on circumstances. Persistence in the service of a wise and prudential decision is a virtue; persistence in the service of an unwise and foolish decision is a vice.
In the end, most of us rally behind political figures based on intellectual reasons and on intuitions, on things we can see and things that are almost impossible to know. That’s worth bearing in mind, I think, as some people try to apply easy-to-apply tests to different candidates. Some conservatives may believe, for example, that Sarah Palin is rock solid when it comes to her stand on the issues. Others might argue (as I would) that even if that were the case, she is deficient in several other critical areas. And that might tip the scales against her and in favor of someone else.
There’s no way, of course, to know all of these things in advance. Supporting a candidate and electing a president is, at least in part, an act of trust and an act of faith. And it’s worth acknowledging up front that politics, like most things in life, can’t be reduced to simple tests.
