does the way a politician looks make a difference if you vote for them or not?

Answer 1

No. I don't care what they look like as long as they have agendas and ideas that are more the way I think.

Answer 2

Most of us would say no but we know it does make a difference, at least some difference, in how a candidate looks. Otherwise, politicians wouldn't have make-up artists and hairstylists traveling with them on the campaign trails. They also have wardrobe consultants working with them on how to dress, down to which shirts would go well with which ties.

Experts now believe the main reason Nixon lost his bid for President in 1960 against Kennedy was due to how he looked on TV during the presidential debate. A test showed the majority of those who listened to the debate without having the picture to look at (audio recording only) , rated Nixon as the debate winner. On the contrary, those who watched the debate on TV (or video recording) mostly rated Kennedy as the debate winner. Looks did make a difference indeed!

Answer 3

Absolutely! Must be male, good looking, tall and proportionally thin for me to vote for them. No, I'm joking. While looks do play a small factor, I mainly look at the platform the candidate is presenting. I try to be informed and with my job, I have oppty to meet most of the local candidates so I know something of their character. As for looks, photogenic isn't what I'm talking about, more a sense of pride in themselves and ability to do the job they're voted to do. Does that make sense?

Answer 4

if you look throughout recent history, mostly the better looking guys wins, examples: John F Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, George Bush Jr.(Kerry is not a very good looking man)
It definately effects the voters for some reason,

Answer 5

I vote for the candidate that most resembles Teddy Roosevelt. Bully.

Answer 6

It is proven that appearance has an impact.