Gingrich has what you might call a revolutionary disposition: He has great intensity and energy. His mind is drawn to stark and diametrical distinctions; he expects change to occur through cataclysmic clashes and so seems always to be seeking after ways to accelerate the contradictions. This allows him to much more easily thunder over his own inconsistencies and past changes of mind. But he has no discipline whatsoever, can be almost unbelievably erratic and unfocused, and is unironically conceited.
So says Yuval Levin in National Review. He goes on with some ideas about the difference in temperament between Gingrich and Mitt Romney, highlighting some of Gingrich’s key successes as Speaker and suggesting that some of his biggest failures were due to a nagging erratic-ism that’s also defined many aspects of his current campaign. Romney is staid (except when he’s not) and has a record of executive experience. I get it. I also happen to think that if this were study in cynicism and entitlement, Romney would win it going away.
If you’re a Republican voter in Florida next week, who do you go with, and why?
- Romney vs Gingrich: A contrast in temperaments (cbsnews.com)