Putney: Do we know Charlie?

(ht Daily Pulp)
Michael Putney asks the question:

Is Charlie the genuinely concerned Republican moderate/populist he professes to be (``I work for the people, they're my boss'')? Or is he a slightly ditzy, disconnected lightweight who has succeeded on the strength of great political instincts, an appealing personality and a Clintonesque (Bill, not Hillary) talent for making you feel like you're the most important person in the room for however long you're with him?

I want to ask Putney, who cares? What exactly does psychologizing about the "real" Charlie Crist accomplish? Thinking along these lines, it seems to me, culminates in a kind of lazy analysis. It's thinking that get you "Bush wins an election because he's the candidate we'd like to have a beer with"-type sound bytes.

By turning policymaking into character-driven narratives, you end up creating a knowledge gap for the elctorate. We know what we need to know about Crist by looking at his accomplishments. Anything else (including whether or not he's popular, a frat boy, or gay) is, or should be, meaningless.