Personalities of the GOP Candidates

Here is a great article on the temperaments of the GOP candidates.

Republican Temperament: A Guide to the Presidential Candidates | Intellectual Conservative Politics and Philosophy
Excerpt:
"As the presidential primary race heats up, the seven Republican candidates are fighting to define themselves in the minds of voters. In addition to experience, ideology, electability, and debate performance, temperament has arisen as a key factor by which candidates hope to be distinguished from their opponents.

Until now, “temperament” has served as a nebulous term, used to label candidates as “bomb-throwers,” “revolutionaries,” “executives,” and “flakes.” There has not, however, been any objective analysis of the varying temperaments of the candidates. Such an analysis is possible using the theoretical framework expounded by personality psychologist, David Keirsey, in his book, Presidential Temperament.

Keirsey’s temperament theory posits that every person has 1 of 4 temperament types: Artisan, Guardian, Rational, or Idealist. Furthermore, each of these 4 types can be divided into 2 subgroups, creating a total of 8 archetypes that characterize various personalities.

Fascinatingly, the 7 GOP candidates, plus President Barack Obama, account for all 8 of the archetypes, granting Americans a truly diverse field from which to elect their next president. The following is a breakdown of the candidates by temperament and archetype, including partial lists of other American political figures who have had the same temperaments."

Full article here: Republican Temperament: A Guide to the Presidential Candidates | Intellectual Conservative Politics and Philosophy

Anyone read this? Thoughts?

I just looked it over and I'd say I more or less agree with each one.

The comparison of Romney to Washington I thought was interesting, but not at all for the reasons given. In fact, I think the bit that Jefferson wrote about Washington (about him being slow to re-adjust/adapt) isn't true of Romney at all. In fact, I think Romney has shown he can adapt and re-adjust his positions and strategy at a moment's notice.

Washington was a guy who, at least to me, seemed motivated to achieve status and reputation, and his actions served that end. I think he wanted to be well liked, especially by important people. He wasn't motivated by ideology and I don't think he cared about power. I think he cared about money only inasmuch as it provided him with a certain status and the resources to build the reputation he craved. I think Romney is somewhat similar in that way. I don't think he wants the presidency for power, money, influence, or for reasons of ideology. I think he wants it for status and reputation. I think he very much wants to win the office and govern from the middle, focusing on the economy and on areas of social and foreign policy where most people agree. I think he wants people to like him and think of him as a great president. I think that's how he wants to go down in history and I think that's the legacy he wants to leave for his family.

Washington was also very prim and proper... almost kind of a prude. I think Romney is the same way. He's very politically correct and one of the few social issues on which Romney has been semi-vocal has been pornography. He doesn't like it.

Washington was also known as an exceptional leader with a temper. I think Romney could also be described that way. Although I think Romney is more even-tempered than Washingtom by far.

The additional comparison to Jimmy Carter though confounds me.

A former aide once told the New York Times that he thought of his boss less as a politician and more as “a Catholic missionary who happens to be in the Senate”.

http://www.economist.com/node/21542427

Click to expand...

Romney vs Gingrich, Paul vs Santorum - as the Primaries continue, the political "underbelly" of the Republicans/Tea Party becomes increasingly exposed - and its not a pretty sight!

Curious George,

I think you are spot on with your characterizations of both Washington and Romney. Although, I do think that Romney has trouble re-adjusting. I think you're referring to his well documented flip-flopping. To me, this is a symptom of his non-ideological nature. His shifts have come over the course of years. Jefferson's quote refers to near-term strategy shifts, which Romney has not demonstrated in his steady campaign.

The Carter comparison is less clear. Although, they were both moderate businessmen who were governors of states not normally kind to their political party. They are both highly data and detail oriented.

Yes, thanks for sharing the interesting link. Interesting that Mitt Romney shares similiarities with the very first US President.

Psycholitics said:

Anyone read this? Thoughts?

Click to expand...