Just a little side note, I suspect Palin and Perry know not to go up against a grizzley with a .30-.30
Romney would be the perfect candidate if he was actually a conservative. He’s made for TV. He has an answer even to unprepared questions just as we saw during the last debate. He’s going to make it very tough for Perry. I just don’t know what they’ll do.
“...having fatally un-presidential looks will doom even a stellar statesman’s chances”
When the situation in America becomes SO dire, (and we’re close) people will begin listening to ‘idea candidates’ with no regard for appearances.
This is how poeple SHOULD evaluate candidates. But it’s too bad getting to this place will take global insolvency, warfare or worse.
I would add to this article the idea that conservatives are in general just better looking than liberals. One only need look at the host of liberal women in comparison to conservative women.
Additionally, outward appearance is a reflection of the type of spirit one has many times. Look at the liberal dope smokers of the past just as one example. Long hair, unkempt attire.
Looking “put together” gives the impression of actually giving a damn about yourself and others around you. It’s why we don’t typically walk in to job interviews wearing Birkenstocks.
It’s true that candidates didn’t have to worry about appearance so much before the age of TV. The better case for that would be the televised debate between Nixon and JFK. Nixon won that debate, but Kennedy “looked” better. And the case against balding just doesn’t hold up in Eisenhower’s case- although he was thin on top, he had a commanding presence and inspired confidence; Stevenson was balding and “slouchy”, and weak (and he looked it). McCain didn’t inspire confidence. While he was weak looking and frail, I think he was refused because republicans and conservatives thought he was a liar, an unrepentant closet leftist, and weak.
How many thought Kerry and Gore were more “presidential” than Bush? It wasn’t enough.
As to the women in the race? I have said this before- and I’m surprised I haven’t been flamed for it- Americans will NOT elect a woman to that office. At least, not in the foreseeable future. I love Palin and Bachmann, but they will not-NOT- win. The pretty, smiling, good-ole’-gal-nextdoor just ISN’T the “Iron Lady”, and it isn’t “commanding”. We aren’t electing a bureaucrat in some European nation-state. We are electing the leader of the free world, and the voters are looking for someone who can go eye-to-eye with some of the most evil tyrants this world has ever seen.
Americans won’t elect a woman.
Many men can be stupid too. If their depiction on modern media shows and commercials is any indication, white men shouldn't be allowed to vote. The kingdom form of government may be best, except for the royalty getting rich and and inbred. Possibly a 9-king council sworn to middle class wealth would be a better form of government, similar to how the Supreme Court works. To get there we'd have to start a completely new country though. Voting/democracy is way overrated. No successful business is run that way.
I have said here on FR (I know the Palin people hate me for this) that Palin does not look the part of a president. She needs to be several years older, wear a suit and get rid of her dress that seems to be trying to appeal to a generation that is too naive to really care about things that are important. This means getting rid of the girlish painted toenails, too.
Bachmann much more looks the part, she's older and dresses a bit more matronly but probably not enough.
This author is right on the money about the men. Christy may be an interesting study. Frankly, I think that if Christy were to run for president, he would look authoritative and would get serious consideration. I have even heard that the heaviest candidate ususally wins. I have not researched that but if both Palin and Bachmann were heavier, it would probably help. They look too demure and fragile to be tough.
There’s no empirical evidence to your or the writer’s thesis.
No viable, attractive female candidates have lost in the US, but certainly attractive, viable female candidates have won in other countries. Argentina is a good recent example, but it’s not the only one.
With both men and women, people assume a certain lesser intelligence with stunning good looks. That’s especially so with athletic men. But attractiveness wins out in leadership over and over again. Would be nice if that weren’t the case, but it is.