[LS]

This actually is pretty right on. One exception was Gore, who was slightly taller than Bush. Also, sociological studies have found hair is important: usually, the candidate with more hair wins. In the case of Obama/McCain, neither had hair but Obama had the perception of hair because as a younger black man, he “could” have it if he wanted. And I would agree with Reich that the “presidential look” is a very, very important attribute and one of the main reasons I don’t think Pawlenty has a chance. Cain, on the other hand, does.

[FreeKeys]

Your comments are always wise and valuable, sir.

[Retired Greyhound]

Kerry towered over Bush and had a much deeper voice.

But Bush was seen as the more manly candidate compared to the effeminate Kerry.

[MBB1984]

Agree that the article is mostly correct. Unfortunately, most voters in the general election are concerned much more with style rather than substance, with sizzle more than steak. In that regard, Romney has that going for him. However, in the primary more voters are substance and issue oriented.

My main disagreement is that Reich states that Obama acts Presidential. Obama actually acts feminine and indecisive and even frail.

[MattinNJ]

My wife, who is to the right of me (truly frightening if you knew me) say the GOP should go with Mitt because he looks presidential. When I point out that he is not a conservative and is a RINO at best, she gives me that Cuban stare and says "Do you want to beat Obama, or not?"

She guffaws at T-paw et.al..

Look, FReepers can make a great argument for an amazing, but obscure congressman like Mike Pence or Col. West (my favorites), but 1/3 of the voters will only pay attention in the last month or so.

You gotta look the part. Sad, but true.

Don't flame-if she or I could wave a magic wand we would be weeping tears of joy as Palin, West, or Pence were sworn in. Not gonna happen.