And the G.O.P. Candidates Are …

Brendan Smialowski/Getty ImagesNewt Gingrich spoke at the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast in April.

Gail Collins: David, this is an extremely exciting week. Newt Gingrich is preparing once again to announce the formation of a presidential exploratory committee. I don’t think I’ve been this excited since last week when a guy came to read our gas meter.

Suddenly, we’re knee-deep in Republican presidential hopefuls! So today I thought we could share our opinions of the whole bunch, beginning with Newt. He’s the kind of politician you want around when it’s time to brainstorm and you need an unfettered intellectual id to juice things up. But isn’t an undisciplined bomb-thrower the last thing you want in a president? Even the adultery-multiple-marriages saga is about a guy who gets carried away.

David Brooks: Gail, these guys will make you love them. You may be skeptical of the G.O.P. field now, but they will woo, and you will resist; they will woo, and you will resist; and at last stout ardor will win fair heart; and as the harvest moon rises you will be smitten with Michele Bachmann, gaga over Gingrich or even languid at the thought of that Godfather’s Pizza guy. You’ll see, by the time this is over, you’re going to say nice things about one of the Republicans, at least.

I’m not sure it will be Newt, though. He loves his ideas powerfully but not long. He has 14 world historical ideas per hour, two of which are good and the rest of which are around the bend. Sources of mine who worked in and around the speaker’s office still marvel at his ability to disorganize any operation. When it comes to management he has the power of the Harvard Business School except in reverse, and that will be his undoing.

Darron Cummings/Associated PressGov. Mitch Daniels of Indiana

Gail Collins: On the total other side of the pack, what about Mitch Daniels, the governor of Indiana? He’s supposed to announce his intentions soon. I find his whole I-don’t-want-to-do-this-but-duty-calls routine off-putting. When I was a kid, the nuns showed us pictures of saints who were summoned by God to go forth and be martyred in a den of lions, and they didn’t look as reluctant as Daniels does.

David Brooks: I just saw Daniels in Indianapolis last week. He had just passed his education reform package, which makes Indiana the leader in the nation when it comes to school reform. I saw him at an event after a signing ceremony and, as charged up as he was, his emotional range still doesn’t go above folksy. He described the bill in a way that was detailed and enthusiastic, but without the soaring sense of purpose that almost all other politicians either master or fake.

The older I get, the more I like self-effacing people, and I’m really curious to see if someone self-effacing can win the presidency in this day and age. I’m also curious to know if someone who is honest about our fiscal predicament can win, even in a G.O.P. primary.

I really hope Daniels runs, because he is managerially impressive, and because I want my curiosity satisfied.

Gail Collins: Mike Huckabee. I used to have a sort of soft spot for Huckabee. He seemed to have a genuinely saintly streak, which caused him to defend illegal immigrants and give pardons to criminals who were perhaps a little less rehabilitated than he had imagined. Now he’s repudiated all of that, and the only difference between him and the pack is that he knows less about foreign policy.

David Brooks: Huckabee is a wonderful guy to be around. I just don’t think he feels in his soul that politics is the most important venue for social change. I think he is more drawn to the word and the prayer than to the bill and the federal agency. I don’t blame him for thinking these things (I think them too) but I don’t think he’s running because he is not passionately committed to governance.

Gail Collins: Do you want to throw a bone to any of the guys who showed up for that Fox debate in South Carolina? The consensus seemed to be that Ron Paul and Herman Cain got the most traction. Paul is a sort of Dennis Kucinich of the right, with an intense but narrow following and an almost painful quotability. (“How many people here would use heroin if it were legal? I bet nobody.”) Cain is the lovable-longshot that shows up in almost every race. But I suspect he’s the first sympathetic also-ran to vow that as president, he would totally discriminate against one religious group (Muslims) when hiring an administration.

David Brooks: Well, there’s Tim Pawlenty. My big question is this: Is there something distinct about the way he sees the world? He has a working-class background, which is good, but so far he has presented himself as an orthodox Republican. That may make him seem a little too eager to please. It may rob him of any flavor and spice.

Gail Collins: Every time a new potential hero shows up in the Republican pack, I see it as another cry of desperation: Please not Mitt Romney. What is it that everybody hates so much about this guy? That he pioneered the Obama health care reform plan in Massachusetts and now denies it? That he’s ardently anti-abortion after having run for governor vowing endlessly to protect abortion rights? That he drove to Canada with the family dog strapped on the roof of his car? Or is it just something about the hair?

David Brooks: I’m going with the hair. It’s true that outside of New Hampshire there is very little love for the guy. A political consultant friend tells me that the anti-Mormon sentiment is deeper than I think.

I wonder if he’s going to be a different candidate this time — if he’s going to go all economy all the time. I sure hope so. That is his authentic self, and if the unemployment rate is about 8 this time next year, then Obama will certainly be vulnerable. Romney may not be the perfect candidate but if the country is in the mood to dump Obama, he certainly would be acceptable.

Philippe Lopez/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesJon Huntsman

Gail Collins: The latest save-us-from-Mitt entry seems to be Jon Huntsman, the former governor of Utah who was ambassador to China until a minute or two ago. (And as President Obama keeps saying, one terrific member of his administration.) In his first post-ambassador address, Huntsman said he thought the country needed “a new set of eyeballs” in Washington. There’s something grisly about that image.

David Brooks: I confess Huntsman is probably closer to where I am politically, but I just don’t see how anybody who worked with Obama is well positioned to do anything but get humiliated among primary voters. I could be wrong, but I remain to be convinced.

The final thing to say is this. Candidates don’t make campaigns. Campaigns make candidates. One of these people is going to look a lot stronger in a year than they do today. And at some point through the coming fall and winter, I’m going to get you to love one of these men or women.

Gail Collins: Let’s consider that a challenge. Game on.