Has the uglier candidate ever been elected president?

I hope so, since I’m for Kerry… and he’s a ugly cuss.

Looking back the last few decades:

W. Bush vs Gore : hard to say
Clinton vs Dole : Definitely Clinton was better looking
Clinton vs HW Bush : I’d say Clinton was better looking
Bush vs Dukakis : I’d say Bush was less ugly, by a small margin
Reagan vs Mondale : Reagan = movie star
Reagan vs Carter : " "
Carter vs Ford : maybe this is the last time the uglier dude won. Ford was a
model in his younger day, IIRC.

Three letters:

JFK

Abraham Lincoln.

What, you think Nixon was better looking? I would think that would be a minority opinion.

Just confining myself to the TV era: 1952, 1956, 1964, 1968, 1972, 1980, 1984, 1988 and 2000 (although that latter requires a different definition of “winning”).

Have you seen any pictures of LBJ or Nixon? Reagan was a drooling prune. (Decades from being a Hollywood #2 actor.) And the Bushes give the British Royals a run for their money.

That’s waaaay too many exceptions to establish a pro case.

Instead, one can may a strong case that appearing to be stupid gives a big leg-up in a presidential race in recent (2+) decades.

I’m still laughing here…yeah, I answered the OP’s question backwards.

Hey, I met Richard once…in a Wendy’s in Dallas, about 15 years ago. He didn’t look that bad…

:smiley:

UR right, Kerry might be the ugliest ever. Nixon comes in a somewhat distant second, yet he won!

Yes I’m sure in his day, with sympathetic lighting, and if he had shaved he presented well enough. And JFK does look supernaturally tan (Addison’s, presumably) in those old debate tapes.
Re: the OP. I believe I have heard that the taller of the two major presidential candidates has won more often than not.

Height, you say?
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/116hhfif.asp

Not at all true, FDR probably didn’t even measure 4-foot. In 1972, 5-foot-11½-inch President Nixon defeated 6-foot-1-inch Sen. George McGovern and in 1976 Georgia Gov. Jimmy Carter, 5-foot-9½-inch defeated President Ford, 6-foot.

Saying FDR was four feet tall is weaseling if you ask me.

I did say “more often than not”, not “every single time without fail”.

The article in Blonde’s link mentions that the effect only applies in the TV era anyway.

Yeah, I thought he was kind of sweet looking as an old guy.

And I know what you mean about Kerry. I saw a clip of him ice skating in a hockey outfit. His body moved gracefully, but his face moved in this funny kind of side-to-side motion, which in conjunction with his glum expression, made him look like someone skating with a life-size picture of his face as a mask.

No, just the fact that the man couldn’t even stand up to be measured for his height and got elected 4 times.

Even prior to the TV era, generally the tall guy won. Madison was an exception. I think he was probably our shortest President. Just don’t ask for a cite.

During the 1960 Presidential debates, Kennedy wore TV makeup, but Nixon did not. I believe that I read that in The Making of the President, but it’s been several decades ago. The author may have been Theodore White.

The elder George Bush was a looker when he was young and the current President wasn’t too bad. I still prefer the young Al Gore.

The older I get, the better looking Eisenhower gets. :smiley:

I met Adlai Stevenson at a dinner once. He had the saddest eyes I have ever seen on a human being. It didn’t show up much his his photographs. Hazel eyes. Kind, but burdened.

LBJ was better looking in person. Ugly features, certainly. He was tall and he gleamed like sterling silver. It was eery.

When you are my age (60), Kerry is enormously good looking. He was hot thirty years ago. (Hubba, hubba)

How tall was Kennedy? I never met him. I did see Bobby when he was campaigning and was stunned at how short and slight he was – all head and hair. That was about 3 weeks before he was assassinated. It may be hard to imagine now, but Teddy was the handsomest of the youngest three Kennedy boys.

BTW, for the record, I find short men as attractive as tall men.

I think Abraham Lincoln was probably far more attractive (by the standards of his time) than his two main opponents. Our current ‘pretty boy’ and ‘hunk’ standards of male attractiveness are pretty recent. Just think of the men who were idols in the 1940s. Would Humphrey Bogart be considered all that “handsome” today?

Compare the virile, lanky Lincoln with his squat, toadlike opponent Douglas or the rather delicate looking Breckinridge.

I think in those days, women appreciated a fellow who could saw logs, split rails, and raise a whole barn in a day - in other words a useful man was considered more attractive than eye candy. For a 1860s gal, old Abe was a dreamboat.

Could it be that women are more attracted to the Party’s platform than the height of the candidate?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-12-17-gendergap-cover_x.htm

Just kidding! Bring on those tall guys… :smiley:

No, I don’t think anyone considered Abe a “dreamboat.” In his day there were many, many political cartoons that compared him to various species of primate other than homo sapiens.

I know I got carried away there…but still looks weren’t everything were they?

Interesting theories, but haven’t you folks ever seen pictures of Martin van Buren or John Quincy Adams?

In all seriousness, most people think that the 1960 campaign was the first of the modern media era. A majority of people who listened to the first debate by radio thought Nixon won that debate, but two thirds of those who watched on TV thought Kennedy won.

I disagree. Dole might be old, but at least he didn’t have a fat head. I’ve always been completely baffled that there are women for found/find Clinton attractive.