Mickalino Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 If not consciously, then subliminally ? Sounds crazy, but take a look at the elections over at least the past few decades. Every time, if not virtually every time, the better looking guy won. Some are really close calls - and to those, I will leave it up to the ladies of E.S. to decide. But we seem to have a nation that votes based on looks, if history is any indication. And the margin of looks, was usually the margin of victory - meaning if one of the contenders was a LOT better looking, he won by a huge margin. If he was better looking by only a hair, then the election results were a slimmer margin. Take a look back and tell me which elections you would disagree on this : Better looking man = winner of presidential election Obama - Check. No argument here. McCain GW Bush - Close, but Bush gets the nod, because Kerry looks like a Caricature drawing John Kerry GW Bush - Check. A young, dashing Bush versus stone-faced Gore. Al Gore Clinton - Check. Monica Lewinsky would agree. So would Paula Jones. So would Jennifer Flowers, So would.......... Dole Clinton - Check. No contest with the young Clinton, against the aging GHWB GHW Bush GHW Bush - Check. GHW wasn't stunning by any means, but like John Kerry, Dukakis looks like a Caricature drawing. Dukakis Reagan - Check. No contest. Mondale Reagan - Check. Again, no contest. Carter Carter - This is tough. I may have to lean on the ES ladies for this lifeline call. Ford Nixon - Close, but Nixon in his younger years was quite the Stud. McGovern Nixon - Check. See above. Or see a pic of Hubert Humphrey Humphrey LB Johnson - Check. Close, but LBJ gets the nod, because of Golwater's nerdy glasses Goldwater JFK - Check. Anyone who bangs Marilyn Monroe, among others, is a lock for the Prez Nixon Eisenhower - Check. Not even close Stevenson Eisenhower - Check. Not a duplicate. Same election contenders twice in a row. Stevenson Who wants to go back further ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubbs Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 Mick, I hate to break it to you, but this doesn't "sound crazy" to your average PoliSci student. The Nixon-Kennedy debate is studied for a reason. The answer is, yes, physical appearance matters quite a bit. If it weren't for his height, Mitch Daniels would have declared his candidacy and be leading the GOP presidential polls at this very moment. An incredibly sad reflection on human psychology, but simultaneously an inescapable part of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickalino Posted June 9, 2011 Author Share Posted June 9, 2011 If it weren't for his height, Mitch Daniels would have declared his candidacy and be leading the GOP presidential polls at this very moment. And probably the reason this guy dropped out last time ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enter Apotheosis Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 In related news... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSkinette Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 This is interesting, and I have to agree that it does play a factor. On the other hand, couldn't you argue that if this is the case, more women would be elected? Or is the problem that there really haven't been any good-looking women who have legitimately made a run for the presidency? FWIW, even though I think she's a nitwit, Sarah Palin is pretty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asking Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 In general, the better looking, taller candidate wins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 I don't know it's good looks, rather I think it's the ability to use TV competently. The popular wisdom is looks became a major part of presidential campagnes after Kennedy defeated Nixon in the 1960 Presidential debate. In that debate Nixon's campagne was so unknowledgeable with TV that their candidate didn't even where makeup for the event. The effect was Nixon was visible sweating under the hot TV lights while Kennedy looked cool and collected. Nixon went into the debate about even with Kennedy. It's said those who listenned to the debate on radio favored Nixon's victory on the basis of his verbal answers. However the vast majority saw the debate on TV believed Kennedy had won based on his TV presence, practiced manorisms, and relaxed delivery.. Kennedy's good looks played a role, but his ability to use the TV medium more effectively than Nixon was really what took him to office. I think Ronald Reagan put this more into focus for us. Reagan was 70 year old man when he became president for the first time. One wouldn't call him a good looking man in the fashion of a Kennedy. But Reagan knew how to use TV, which made him a feared debator and helped him to become one of our most popular modern presidents. The great communicator they called him. He evisorated Cater, and Mondale in the debates. His catch words for each are still folkloreish in political circles.. and often repeated in more recent elections... For Cater Reagan asked, Are you better off today than you were 4 years ago, if so vote for my opponent. For Mondale Reagan responded to the charge of being too old to return to office (74 as he took the oath of office for the second time)... "I will not comment on that, I refuse to take advantage of the youth and inexperience of my opponnent" which gave even Mondale a laugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busch1724 Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 I saw something the last presidential election that since 1900 or so, the taller candidate won every time except twice...if I'm not mistaken. Found it, what I said earlier isn't true but the chart at the bottom of the page is quite telling regardless http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heights_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States_and_presidential_candidates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 I think physical appearance is one of the top 3 factors. Ever notice at the start of debates when they shake hands, the taller candidate tries to draw it out for as long as possible? Pols know that people subconciously relate height to power/capability. I truly believe that shortly, parties will just start throwing out their best looking people. Isnt the guy that took Teddy Kennedys seat a former male model or something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 This observation goes all the way back to Ancient Greece - Plato in his criticism of democracy notes that noone would select their doctor based on who is the best looking or most eloquent speaker, but rather we select whoever we believe to be the most competent; the opposite, however, occurs when people select their leaders. No way would Romney be the front-runner for the GOP with his mediocre economic record in MA if he were bald and 6" shorter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 Absolutely. it factors into almost every facet of our lives, actually. ~bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 Absolutely.it factors into almost every facet of our lives, actually. ~bang Beauty paves most roads through life. Money gets you to the rewards most don't even consider. combination of both will rain gift-bags. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
War Paint Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 I wouldn't say it's looks. It's more about charisma. Charisma goes a long way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 There's a great scene in the John Adams miniseries where Ben Franklin points to George Washington and says to effect, "He's always the tallest man in the room so he naturally becomes the leader." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOF44 Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 I wouldn't say it's looks. It's more about charisma. Charisma goes a long way. It would have to be one charming ************* pig! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcsluggo Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 yes. (i needed the post to be longer than just "yes") Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
techboy Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 No. I believe that the American people as a whole are thoughtful, careful, intelligent, and possessed of a startling probity, so that each succesful candidate is voted in because, after a careful consideration of the issues and positions of each candidate, he or she is the most reasonable choice for the cirucumstances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
War Paint Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 lol, if it's truly looks that wins the presidency, then Romney will probably be the next president. He looks like he popped out of a Belk's and JC Penny sales paper or catalog modeling suits. "This weekend, save 25% on our line of suits". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 No. I believe that the American people as a whole are thoughtful, careful, intelligent, and possessed of a startling probity, so that each succesful candidate is voted in because, after a careful consideration of the issues and positions of each candidate, he or she is the most reasonable choice for the cirucumstances. :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickalino Posted June 9, 2011 Author Share Posted June 9, 2011 Ever notice at the start of debates when they shake hands, the taller candidate tries to draw it out for as long as possible? Pols know that people subconciously relate height to power/capability.I truly believe that shortly, parties will just start throwing out their best looking people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 I'll let others weigh in on the substance of the thread, but.. Mickalino, have you ever seen photos of Lyndon Baines Johnson? LBJ was so charmingly and bullyingly persuasive he could bend the will of kings and Supreme Court justices, but he was not a handsome man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 I'll let others weigh in on the substance of the thread, but.. Mickalino, have you ever seen photos of Lyndon Baines Johnson? LBJ was so charmingly and bullyingly persuasive he could bend the will of kings and Supreme Court justices, but he was not a handsome man. LBJ-Goldwater is probably the only example of where the obviously more handsome man lost in the tv age. Goldwater was quite good looking, particularly as a young man. LBJ looked like a catcher's mitt. Of course, LBJ was riding a wave of Kennedy mourning and the fact that he convinced the country that Goldwater wanted to blow up the world (a half-truth at best). LBJ was remarkably better at using tv though. Your "image" through television matters. Looks are obviously a huge part of that, but they can be overcome...occasionally...in 1964...probably not any longer. ---------- Post added June-9th-2011 at 11:21 AM ---------- Here is a question: If Sarah Palin looked like Donna Shalala, would she have even 5 percent of the support she has now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickalino Posted June 9, 2011 Author Share Posted June 9, 2011 I wouldn't say it's looks. It's more about charisma. Charisma goes a long way. Both. Obama had both. And accordingly, won by landslide. It would have to be one charming ************* pig! With lipstick on it !! This is interesting, and I have to agree that it does play a factor. On the other hand, couldn't you argue that if this is the case, more women would be elected? Or is the problem that there really haven't been any good-looking women who have legitimately made a run for the presidency? Or that there are still a lot of sexist voters. Or that a lot of male voters have caught the gay. I'll let others weigh in on the substance of the thread, but.. Mickalino, have you ever seen photos of Lyndon Baines Johnson? LBJ was so charmingly and bullyingly persuasive he could bend the will of kings and Supreme Court justices, but he was not a handsome man. But what about his competition, is the question ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcsluggo Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 This picture single-handedly won one election: and this one won another.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjah Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 This picture single-handedly won one election:and this one won another.... No, they didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.