Well, I didn't talk about Kennedy's legal demeanor, but I think that figures into typographer's strategic analysis. Kennedy's record shows a strong conservative streak balanced by a strong and idealistic desire for "fairness." He's written a lot of opinions and dissents (authoring opinions is often the reward for being the swing vote in a case, and Kennedy is clearly in what passes for the middle on this court) so there's a lot of record to go on. You can see this in both his dissent on Hollingsworth v. Perry and his opinion on Windsor (that made Scalia have purple apoplectic kittens because he didn't like being called a meanie).

I do think typographer was a bit off on Ginsburg's strategy. Based on other comments she's made, I think she didn't want a giant precedent-setting decision any more than Roberts did, because she doesn't think the country as a whole is ready, and she doesn't want a Roe v. Wade level of backlash. I think she did want a ruling that would mesh with the prevailing opinion in 2013 California, though, and this was the way to get it.

As we see more states legislatively enact marriage equality, I think Ginsburg and maybe Roberts will fall in line for a decision on the merits in a future case. As it is, there are no marriage-related cases on next term's docket, I expect to give more states time to figure things out.