Question

I wrote an article about this issue and about the conflict I have within myself on this point. I’d be happy if the Rabbi could comment on it and shed some light for me if he has any insights based on the article.
What is preferable—abilities or character traits?

I have to admit, I’m in a deep conflict with myself on this issue. I’ll lay out my dilemma for you, and I’d be glad to hear your opinion.

Anyone who reads my positions can probably guess (correctly) that within the Religious Zionism party, I’m camped in the Ben Gvir camp and not the Smotrich camp. To tell the truth, it’s strange that I’m in Ben Gvir’s camp. I like Smotrich’s views (not on everything). In some ways I even prefer him to Ben Gvir, because everything with him is thought out and reasoned, and he has actual platforms on certain issues. Unlike Ben Gvir, he’s even considered “kosher” by the general public, which gives him more options.
So what’s my problem with him? Smotrich is a person with way too much self-regard (you can fill in the blunter word yourselves). His demands in the negotiations with Ben Gvir were disgraceful. They weren’t based on polls or the reality on the ground, but purely on ego. Even if Smotrich did it in order to bring more “lite” religious people onto the list so as to attract Shaked’s voters—what did he think, that he had held primaries? He knew very well that no “lite” religious person would have registered for his list, and that all the young people are automatically more extreme because they’re young. But leave that aside—that’s not the point I want to focus on.
In the end, it seems from here that I prefer character traits over abilities (I do believe Ben Gvir has abilities, but even if he didn’t, I still think I’d prefer him).
On the other hand,
in the days when I was trying to find my political path (I was only 15 when this whole balagan started), of all the arguments around the elections, the yes-Bibi/no-Bibi argument rose above all the others. I always enjoyed hearing the claims from both sides until I heard an argument I didn’t expect to hear. It goes like this:
If you were on a military base under attack and you had two commanders—one is a nice guy that everybody likes, always pleasant and polite, but with no combat experience; the second commander, by contrast, is a convicted murderer and rapist, but he is highly experienced in situations like these and has a medal of valor for battlefield command. The question is: who would you want defending you, the first commander or the second?
As you probably understand, when I heard this, I didn’t need to hear the second half of the argument to understand the analogy. That argument made me think about this whole question: is there really any importance to integrity and moral character in politicians, or is the main thing simply whether they do a good job or not?
I’m not a Bibist, but I do like Bibi quite a bit. I think he was a pretty good prime minister (not at every point during his years in office, but overall I think he does a good job). I would choose him any day and any hour over Lapid, because I’m not interested in the man’s “morality”; rather, I saw with my own eyes Lapid’s weakness and unsuitability for the role, and Netanyahu—even if he may be corrupt—I prefer him many times over Lapid. From here it seems that I prefer abilities over character traits.
Maybe the two cases aren’t similar, and maybe the question I opened with isn’t really what’s bothering me. What do you think is preferable—abilities or character traits?