Height matters. Because Americans are so brain dead. So by all means let's choose a tall neanderthal to lead us in the 21st century.

No, height does not matter. A physical appearance has nothing to do with good leadership. All we need is a person with a good and honest soul, and a great leadership skill.

Tall presidents have always been the rule rather than the exception, and presidents who were average or shorter than average have had to suffer the malice of their opposition for it. In the most famous campaign song of our history "Tippycanoe and Tyler Too," (1840 Election between William Henry Harrison and incumbent 5′6″ Martin Van Buren), the lyrics referred disparagingly to "little Van." James Polk, the 5′8″ 11th President, was called "Jim Thumb" by his opponents (a reference to P.T. Barnum's sensational midget Tom Thumb). This is not a new phenomenon, just an unfortunate one.

Is it just me or are the photos of George W. Bush & Bloomberg (fourth from left on each) identical?

What a silly article. Mary just pointed out "incumbent 5′6″ Martin Van Buren". What, was he running against a 5′5″ guy or what when he GOT ELECTED the first time? Or does height only matter sometimes? Remember all that fuss about George W. being short too when he debated Gore?

Did you even read the article, Mary?

"based purely on the numbers…size does matter: shorter candidates generally win."

Height (and physical appearance) are naturally associated with prominence and success in human beings, so yes, height does matter, and whether or not you like it, it's simple human nature.

Another interesting observation:

While I didn't exhaustively research this or anything, I found it interesting that we haven't had a bald or obese president since television became mainstream.

In fact, all of the presidents since television was popularized have been pretty handsome with a nice full head of hair… or they were previously an actor! I mean, have you ever seen William Taft? That guy would never be elected in this day and age.

Ive noticed that most bosses in general are tall. I think people are more apt to listen to someone that suggests "father-figure". (not sure if that goes for the fairer sex)

Bush is 5′8 or 5′9 at the most, not 5′10.

But I'm with Brenda. Who cares? Bloomberg is just playing games. People would not vote for him because he is 5′7…but because they just don't like him.

Kucinich is shorter than all of the other candidates!

This has been shown to be true when employers are hiring in the general job market - taller people are often chosen over those considered 'short' and on AVERAGE make more money. Of course, height takes a subconscious role when selecting for the job of President of the United States. And yes, the article was slightly ridiculous.

It does not matter if it is a dwarf. As long as he has a brain and is not just stubborn and surrounds himself with yes folks we will be way ahead.

I would like to think policy, not height, decides who people vote for. Maybe as a study, at a debate, everyone stands on boxes of varying heights causing everyone to look the same height. It might not be scientific but it would be interesting to see if opinions changed due to no perceived height differences.

Obviously height and appearance should not "matter." Honesty, integrity, and leadership are more important.

Good news America, Al Gore is 6′1" and has all of the above, so we can have it all in '08!

Additionally, Americans have shown a slight underlying preference for a variety of characteristics - a light Southern accent for example. I'm not saying you specifically agree with the height or accent theory but history has shown this.

Michelle,

It's definitely not you, the photos are exactly the same, and I'm pretty sure they're of Bloomberg. Sloppy, CNN, albeit not as sloppy as that horrid Death Penalty interactive.

Incidently, if I remember correctly G W Bush claimed he was 6′2 when he first ran against Gore, which was absurd because that would have made him an inch taller than Gore. He shrank for 2004, but I still think he claimed he was 6 feet. He also insisted, despite being taller than Gore on paper, that his podium at the debates be raised so that they'd be the same height, so he clearly thought it mattered.

Height matters. It should not but that is the way it is….

Who's Lincolnton?

so how tall was Ross Perot, 4′3″?

JFK is not in your graphic, but he is in the caption.

It was ridiculous because I can't even tell how tall they are on TV, so that couldn't possibly weigh in on my decision. I always thought W was much shorter!

Height has absolutely nothing to do with one's ability to be President. It is my sincere hope that the next President will be honest, truly educated, willing to compromise, not pander to either the extreme right or left and be willing to admit to his or her mistakes. If they were also a good public speaker it certainly would present a much better image of our nation.

No, you fools! It's not height, it's width! Width, I tell you! Three words: "William Howard Taft." I rest my case.

how about the size of ones heart?
in that category I am sure Dr Ron Paul beats them all!

The only thing any person's height reveals about them is how tall they are.

Hitler, Mousilini and Tojo were little guys, as was Napolean.

Giraffes are tall too. I'd rather have a sly fox. I am with Brenda on this.

Yes, no chance in hell Bloomberg would be elected. This is a direct effect of women's suffrage. Women's #1 criteria in judging the quality of a man is height.

Therfore, many women (but not all) will vote for most alpha looking male, b/c somehow that is "safe".

Height differences are much more noticeable in pictures and on TV screens. Because a persons focus is on the candidates face, height differences become more noticeable. But as far as I can see even though Bloomberg is 5′7″, it didn't prevent him from becoming a billionaire and extremely successful in his own right. American society puts way more emphasis on physical appearance than do other countries. For example the leader of Iran is 5′4″ and the leader of North Korea is 5′3." It's quite embarassing that height is really an issue when it comes to selecting a person for president. They are running for the presidency, not the NBA.

Fun article.

LBJ was 6-foot-3, but for awhile a giant on the national stage.

First of all, Al Gore lost in 2000 not 2002, and according to wikipedia, Abraham Lincolnton was never president.

Height does matter. Im 6′6″ and taller than any boss I've had in my career. I honestly think I was passed for promotion many times because my Tom Cruise wannabe (err…I mean my boss) felt threatened by my height.

As far as running for President is concerned, the "height" of your bank account is what counts. But if you're bald/ing, short and wealthy, you ain't got a chance.

Just Plain Ridiculous.

I want to be President and I'm 5′2″!!

Height matters? Absolutely, from my experience in the corporate world. Whether male or female, our "bosses" are all tall, on average.

I work for a large corporation and it seems rare to find a male manager under 6 feet tall or a female under 5′ 7″ approx. Both these heights are above the national average, I believe.

Of course, all this is circumstantial based on my observations, but I haven't seen a lot of "Napoleons" over the years.

This is wonderful because it is delightful and meaningless. How about a survey on eye colour or hair colour or size of feet, etc., all grist for the proverbial mill.

I collect trivia and I will save this.

In addition to being really tall, Abraham Lincolnton was really overweight, too.

Sorry…just plain ridiculous.

Someone has already commented on the "2002 election" mistake. Someone has also commented on the "President Lincolnton" mistake. Here is another mistake for you: George H. W. Bush was president when he lost to Clinton. It is incorrect to refer to previous U.S. president as "Former Vice President." Who wrote this article? Did they read it before they posted it?

Does size really correlate to leadership capability or are we a society that is still so simplistic as to judge others by their color, their shape … their size. What a person can accomplish for our country is not a function of height. I am one 4′6″ American who has always done her best every day to enhance the world for the people around her. I concourage everyone to make their choice for President based on capability, not something so irrelevent as height.

Short is sweet - vive Napoleon!

Look closely at the top picture. Teddy Roosevelt is in black and white, and easily overlooked. The captions are correct — the pics of Bush and Bloomberg are not identical, and I see JFK!

Until I see a president who's 6′11″, as I am, I'm not going to care. I'd vote for Tom McMillen.

Short People For Kucinich!!!!!!!!!!
Dennis - Short in stature but long on intelligence;
King George W the Inept - Tall in stature but can't spell intelligence.

Come down with all us Brenda from New York, what America doesn't need is another pretentious citizen.

To become President of the United States in this modern age, one must possess the following characteristics: male, white, Christian, full head of hair (with no facial hair), slim (exception - Bill Clinton), and at least a multimillionaire. Being good looking helps too (remember JFK vs. Nixon?) Based on those criteria, we should see Mitt Romney vs. John Edwards in the general election.

This has to be one of the most useless
comparisons in history… and evidence
that much of the mass media is only
interested in distracting the public,
not informing them.

Who is Abraham "Lincolnton"?

There are two opposites to short. (Sorry, Hilary.)

Short people are generally viewed as "untrustworthy". It is more to do with confidence. Height inspires confidence, and no Americans want their leader to look shorter than other world leaders on a TV screen.

As many have stated, height SHOULD NOT matter, but it does. Would George Bush be a better president if he were 6′6″? No, he would be better president if he were more intelligent and honest.

Let's rate presidents and candidates on intelligence, integrity and leadership skills.

Yep this is ridiculous!! What kind of nation have we become? So I guess size really does matter??

Russia is rising back to ascendancy led admirably by a 5ft 5in ex-KGB.

If the U.S. got hold of someone like him, would height matter then ?

JK

I would vote for a candidate who is four feet tall and six feet wide. I would also vote for a candidate who is seven feet tall and one inch thick.

Lord knows the existing president is far too thick.

Slow news day, eh?

I think what "should" matter most, is the character and leadership of a candidate, but in the real world, one's height is a factor people consider, whether they admit it or not.

Height holds no extra's from my perspective, and I hope people don't base their choice on such an insignificant measurement. The question is not ridiculous if it reflects some truth, it would help those who don't believe, to believe that we evolved via the primate lineage. What am I saying…I only need to see the portraits of D.C. rep's to arrive at that same conclusion.

As a graduate student in clinical psychology I am amazed to see how often height really comes up in the assessment of another person's intelligence/"confidence"/competence/"leadership abilities" etc.

Folks, it is a worthy topic. It matters. The empirical evidence suggest its a problem. Those who dismiss it or chortle at it are doing a great social disservice. Would you also dismiss racism or sexism as chimeric problems?

Interesting article — should not be dismissed so quickly. Height is an important factor, esp in the new age of TV, internet, and 24-hours news coverage. Just like certain innate qualities such as leadership, loud voice, and wisdom are important (which can also originate from experience and not genes), tall height commands respect. To select a President solely based on height is nonsense. To include height (as an implicit factor) in one's decision is realistic.

I think as unfortunate as it is, size matters like looks of a person or their dress matter. And this is not only in presidency I think this is even more of a reality in our everyday living and in our society. It is not an ablsolute factor of succes obviouly but one amongst many.

Yes, America should elect a tall president who can scare all of our little enemies!!!

Wow. You guys are really stretching this "news" thing, huh?

In America there is indeed a correlation between height and how electable a candidate is. But it is just that - a correlation, and one that is by no means universal throughout the world. In France, for example, new president Nicolas Sarkozy, who stands at a mere 5′5″, managed to easily defeat 5′9″ Ségolène Royal. Due to increasing influence of television and the internet on the vote, if height is indeed an issue, it is one issue that will become increasingly irrelevant. Height can be manipulated by a candidates staff through use of something as simple as adjusting a chair or adding a platform for the candidate to stand on during a speech. In an age where a black man and a woman stand a strong chance to become president, it seems ridiculous to wonder if a short person can too.

I think perceived charisma is more important than height.

Unfortunately it's true that on average the taller you are the more power you have. But if you are a hard working positive person then height means nothing.

It really does matter. When George HW Bush was running against Michael Dukakis, his poll numbers (particularly among women) rose considerably after the first debate, one which almost every observer at the time Mr. Bush LOST. But later analysis indicated that the moment at the end of the debate was pivotal for the switchers, as the two met in the center to shake hands and reveal their half-foot difference in height.

While the article notes that "shorter" candidates have won, it does so only among two candidates who are both taller than average. There is NO WAY in the current environment that a man shorter than average [5'8"] gets elected as president of the U.S. He will not be viewed as "Presidential." Not that this is right, but it reflects the biases of the culture. This is also true in large corporate environments as well. The leaders of large corporations are invariably women or TALL men. The only exceptions are those companies that are led by founders (such as during the period when Mr. Bloomberg was the leader of his company); Mr. Bloomberg himself was succeeded by a tall man.

This is something as can be adequately measured only against the average height of American males or females at the time of a given candidate's bid for office.

Our ancestors were shorter than our average today. Considering that everything we are and have is built on what they did, well . . . short in stature doesn't mean short on ability or leadership.

I think height does matter. I would suggest carrying your survey a little further and getting the height of as many CEO's of companies as possible. It may matter less with Presidents because while they're in the public eye a lot, the average American has no real way to measure their height from TV or other media sources. But I do think that (of course there will be exceptions), leadership does have the tendency to go to taller individuals, which is why I suggest including other figures in commanding positions. Might look at generals and naval officers too, though that may be an exception.

Oh, yes, these are probably the most significant facts that will ever be written about these candidates.

A number of people have pointed out that their bosses have generally been tall. I worked for General Electric, and would duly note that our long time head, Jack Welch, considered to be one of the greatest CEOs in history, was by his own description, a short, bald guy with a stammer.

But, he was very bright, capable and highly driven. Perhaps height somehow matters in leading mediocre companies staffed by shallow, mediocre people … but in more substantial settings, talent shines above all, as it should.

I think "just plain ridiculous' sums it up nicely. And a total waste of somebody's time.

This is the sorriest group of mediocre
contenders that I have seen in 50 years. I have a good mind to vote for
Homer Simpson. At least he knows what he is about.

As for any contender, "size" does not matter. I think Bloomberg would be an excellent choice. As for the rest, put them 'out to pasture'………~!

Very stupid….Do you call this news?

No I don't think height matters, neither does your race, your gender or your financial status. This is the United States of America we are talking about. A nation of freedom, where abyone has a real chance to become president. So let's go out and elect another RICH, WHITE MALE FOR PRESIDENT in 2008.

Michelle, Eileen,

I think CNN is right and you both are wrong. Please see that both pictures lists the 4th person as Bloomberg. Can you check one more time.

If you really think that the American people are voting based on height, then there is a major problem with the election process. (Not saying there already isn't) I highly doubt that anyone goes to the ballot thinking "Ok, this candidate is this tall, and the other is this tall….I'm going to go with the one who is ____." I'm sure that the heights of previous presidents who beat out an opponent who happened to be taller is simply coincidence.

I remember watching one of those "investigative reports" on TV a few years back about this phenomenon. They took groups of women into a room with a one-way mirror view of a room filled with men and asked them which they were more attracted too. Then they began to fill in some details about each of the prospects to see how much difference their stature made. Apparantly tallness is a big factor for most women. The group of men were all over six feet save one who was like 4′11″ or some such. The short guy was described as good with kids, an excellent cook with a prosperous career while his taller competition were described as ex-convicts and former wife beaters. Never the less, the short guy came out dead last.

Oh, and I also noticed that the article didn't mention Fred Thompson whose supposed to be somewhere around 6′5″. Maybe that's the reason he's coming up in the polls.

Height matters in that it determines a person's personality and level of confidence. It's been said that a person's adult self is largely determined by his high school self. This may be more true for males than females. But… a person generally develops his confidence level in high school, and one of the leading indicators of how confident a man will be in his adulthood is his height and his athletic ability from when he was in high school.

That being said, it doesn't so much matter what a person's height is when he's a full grown adult as much as when he was a teenager. For example, if two boys are both 5′6″ when they 16 yrs. old, they will have a similar amount of confidence as adults, regardless of whether one reaches a full height that is significantly taller than the other.

Just another psycho survey collecting meaningless data because the real issues are too hard to report in a sanitized media environment.

Nice trivia!

My initial reaction is that this is rediculous. However the more I think about it I do believe that it does play a subconcious factor in the mind of a swing voter. It would not matter to me. I vote based on moral issues so I have never voted for anyone who was not a Republican. Extreme liberals are going to vote for a Democrate no matter what. However the swing voters (and swing states) typically decide who the president will be. Therefore I feel that this is a very important factor.

Height doesn't matter to me. I'm not abdicating we vote for neanderthals, but I don't mind having a president who is taller than other world leaders. Take for instance, the recent photos of Bush and Putin at G8–if George W. Bush ever had to brawl with Putin, my money is on W. I would love to see some photos of Ahmadinejad next to the 08 candidates–even Hillary could top him.

HA what a joke. Why should it matter how tall you are. Short people rock no matter what!

Of course height doesn't matter, as suggested earlier… Honesty,
Experience, Integrity, Generosity, and Trustworthy
are the characteristics we should look for in a new President. Wait…the words do spell HEIGHT, may be it does matter after all.

Heightism is as damaging as racism. If you replace "height" with "black" or "hispanic" in some of these comments, those people would immediately be ostracized as racists. It astounds me that people to still view short vs. tall as any sort of qualitative criteria.

BTW, Napoleon (5′6″) was taller than the average European male for the time he lived.

Only an idiot will come up with that dumb ideology that height has something to do with choosing a president. What matters MOST is that a candidates' ability to lead a nation without compromising his judgement as the leader of a civilization.

In this world (of double standards and increasing number of stupid voters) height is important … but so is charisma … but above all is one's capability to be immensly smart. The President (of USA or a local Lions Club) is like the face of that unit he heads. A President should know both how to walk the walk and talk the talk else they would end up being a Clinton (not smart) or a Bush(not smart and zero charisma).

Ibelieve that a taller person would tend to have more self confidence in him/herself and may affect decision making and how a president may respond or act upon advice from those who work for him/her.

If you look at the Presidential contenders since 1960, Nixon being the exception, the more handsome candidate won each time. One of the closest races was Bush/Gore, both men being attractive. I'm not saying the better candidate won in each case, I'm just saying we are an image conscious society.

You must be this tall to be president

Ok your graphic shows people who look to be between 5′ 5″ and 6′. Well that seems to be about the average size of most people. So how tall do you need to be?

I wonder how this applies to women? Men usually prefer woman to be a bit shorter than they are. If Hillary were 6′2″, that's all we would hear about her. It would of course, be way above average, and it would not be a positive attribute.

I think initially, a taller person can have an advantage. However it is that same T.V. coverage that exposes this that can be used to outweigh this initial advantage. If a presidential candidate speaks to the people with clear solutions and displays remarkable intelligence, I think that person will get the vote. Right now, I'd like to to see Angelina Jolie run.

Of course it makes a difference whether someone is tall or not. I'm short (5′4″) and I find myself with a bias against short people. It is a real shock when I realize half the time they are taller than me.

Prejudice is certainly part of human nature and right now the only groups you can openly express that disdain are (1) short people, (2) fat people and (3) smokers

I think it would be very immature and ridiculous for the American people to give any consideration to a candidate's heigth when deciding who to vote for. Our country, and the world, is in bad shape and we need the best man/woman available. In my opinion, that would be either Al Gore or Michael Bloomberg.

The data flucuates too much to make matter. Height doesn't affect the elections because, as Craig says, all the presidents are in the average height range of around 5′5″-6″

Height shouldn't matter with anything but it does, it used to be the taller person became president. Americans suffer from heightism, that is why most CEOs are over 6 feet tall, taller men make more money than an equally qualified shorter male, and statistically women will choose a tall male over a shorter male 90% of the time. That article would have been completely wrong pre-1992.

do one on hat size and then maybe we will get somewhere!

Size shouldn't matter, intellect should matter
If I ever choose a president based on height, I will tell my kids to have me committed because I would be too ignorant to be given the privilege of voting.
Bloomberg would be an outstanding president. He's thoughtful, a visionary, makes policies good for the betterment of society and is incredibly intelligent.
But Americans must have other criteria, given they voted for Bush twice. The closest to great that I see: Edwards/Obama in '08.

I want to THANK Bloomberg for reminding people just how shallow and superficial Americans are.

It's nice to see that Ron Paul is still not considered enough of a candidate to make yet another story. I'm glad to see that CNN's favorites are still represented.

Of course it's ridiculous! Why would that possibly influence the elections? That's just plain absurd…
So why was it again that many people think Obama and Clinton can't win?

Fram a psychological perspective, height may suggest leadership ability, but that does not explain Napolean.

Why didn't you put Fred Thompson in there? He is the tallest and would tower over those other midgets!

Interesting but completely irrelevant.

REDO YOUR RESEARCH!!!!

you said it eould seem shorter wins- but you're looking at only four elections. the reality is that less than 10% of the male population of the U.S. is 6′ or taller, BUT 70% of all American presidents hve been 6′ or taller. that is a clear descrepency.

The CNN editor needs to review this article. The editing of "former Vice President George H.W. Bush" was not removed such that there is "Vice" with a line through it. Intersting article, though.

I thought it was really interesting.

Height, on its own, doesn't matter to me. However, it affects the candidates prescene on stage and when speaking, so it has an indirect impact.

Corey from Bellingham, WA I think someone must have hacked into Wikipedia because the first sentence on the Abraham Lincoln page is:

"Abraham Lincoln (February 12, 1809 – April 15, 1865) was President of the United States from March 4, 1861 to April 15, 1865″

This article shouldn’t even mention the people’s vote but rather the Electoral College votes.

Who's the genius at CNN that added Michael Bloomberg to the photo of Presidents? Last I checked, he hadn't been elected. NYC editors playing a practical joke to start the weekend?

Absolutely hieght matters. Plenty of research has been done based on height and success. More CEO's are taller. More succesful salespeople are taller. Presidents are taller. Taller folks grow up in a world where there is level of superiority because you are tall. That confidence, advantages that come their way give them more security in who they are. The other side of the coin–most folks want to follow and they'll follow a tall person more times that a short one.

Cute CNN.
However, I think media bias is a bigger issue than candidate height. Where is Dennis Kucinich in your graph? In fact, where is your coverage of Dennis Kucinich period? You bothered to at least post an article about Gravel's bizarre youtube videos- how about a little coverage of the one man running for president who consistently talks about (and votes for!) the peace and change we all want to see in the world.

Isn't it your place to help level the information playing field for the American People?

bloomberg would be an excellent choice. he is "head and shoulders" above anyone else we have today..harry truman wasn't that tall..but he was great…bloomberg is in the truman mold

If the American public is using height to determine their canidate (which I'm sure the brain dead populace is) then we are in serious trouble.

It matters, to the extent that the more information I have when evaluationg and comparing candidates the better.

Lack of height would be a factor when judging personality and temperment.

For me, a short male candidate would need to be comfortable with who they are; not overcompensating for who they are not.

By the way, does anyone know how tall Senator Webb (D-Va) is?

it might sound ridiculous, but height does play an important role even when it comes to get a regular job. And people seem to pay a lot of attention to it. Take for example the former mexican president, he, for the first time was taller than the US president, and Mexicans felt really good about it.
Although at the end of a term, the height of the president is the last important thing, in the case of GW Bush, we are fortunate that he is not taller, otherwise the taller the more mistakes he will make.

I think the interesting thing here is not that the taller or shorter of two candidates prevails. It's that we seldom give the time of day to a candidate who isn't at least above average height. Bloomberg, the noted shortstack is apparently an exception; though only somewhat. While he did win his re-election in 2005 by the largest margin in the history of NYC, his campaign spent nearly five times that of his opponent(Wikipedia). Self-financing in this case was the pair of stilts Bloomberg needed. And they worked. But he is what you may call a statistical outlier. Hopefully we're not eliminating shorter, more qualified candidates before they're even out of the gate in the presidential race. In the book "Blink" Malcolm Gladwell calls this The Warren Harding Error. It may be human nature, subconscious behavior, whatever. But we should all try open our eyes a little bit. We may miss big things from those of smaller stature.

Princeton researchers have found that taller people earn more because they're smarter. Perhaps height should be a consideration.

How many people actually see the candidates in person?

CNN must be getting pretty desperate for story ideas.

Height has nothing to do with it. Americans know what's important and everyone knows that the winner is always the one with the better hair. A new study is on he work…

Height doesn't matter but if the President is 5′11″ and arrogant, it might matter.

It all depends on how high you want to pile the crap!

Along these statistical lines — Most presidents were born at home — the first US President to be born in a hospital was Jimmy Carter. My six year old daughter was born at home. Since very few children are born at home nowadays this makes her very likely to be president one day :)!!!

I agree with Brian and Carl. Being tall saved me from many fights but could of been a hinderence trying to climb the "corporate ladder."

Many short men are insecure. How many "alpha" males do you know that are short-statured.

The last thing we need is an insecure president that feels compensates for his height by trying to show his power. Look at Kim Jong Il of North Korea. His diminutive height certainly factors into his actions.

All short men aren't insecure. It's just that the majority of the voting public discounts the shorter guys. Look at Kucinich - few take him seriously and largely it's because of his short stature.

Yes, I think it matters.

Look back at Michael Dukakus, a short guy from Massachusettes some two decades ago. The US would be embarrassing if we see Mr. Dukakus standing next to either Mitterand or Chiraque of France.

Just like we have been saying "Dress for Success" great images of a US President do count.

I can only wish that someday there will be a minimum requirement of a US presidential candidate, that is "he must be at least 6 feet tall" or "she must be at least 5 feet 8 inches tall"

As made evident by our current president, intelligence is not a requirement for the office. Neither should height.

Someone I know was reassigned from Bloomberg's campaign because he was too tall next to the mayor. He was 6′5″ and made him look too short.

Ridiculous. Height doesn't matter - people are people.

It's silly that height and gender are even considerations nowadays.

Maybe short people are just bad people. Is there truth to the "Napolean Complex"? Or is it just bigotry?

Do you have any idea how discriminatory and insulting you are being to short people? Any at all? Like I said before, replace "tall" with "white" and "short" with "black", and tell me what you read.
Did any of you ever stop to consider that the reason you think being tall matters is because that's what you were taught by your parents, and them by your grandparents? How is this preconceived notion of superiority based on height at all valid? Have you ever met a short statured adult whose level of confidence caused you to take a step back, or better yet, forward, perhaps to follow them as you seem to think everyone wants to follow you? Have you ever considered how ridiculous it is to judge people solely by their physical attributes, as if life is just a beauty pageant? How would you like it if you went somewhere and were discriminated against for being too tall?
Heightism is no different than racism and sexism. Each of these three serious maladies in this country are based on incorrect, preconceived notions handed down from generation to generation, feeding a superiority complex built up to make people feel good about themselves at other peoples' expense. And yet you think nothing of it, because you're conditioned through years of self-affirmation of your elitist attitude. Wake up and realize what you're saying.

Not only height matters but also the shape of the face and the letter the name begins with. Better to be tall, have an oval face and have your surname start with a letter that comes earlier in the alphabet. Short people with round faces whose name starts with S and later in the alphabet do not have a chance to get elected. It's sad but true that people vote for candidates for reasons other than who is the best candidate. These factors make a good impression, even if it is misleading. Just look at Geo. W.

Although i am of short stature myself, i do not believe that height plays a considerable role in the presidency. Its just an excuse used by people to explain why they were beat out by their taller competitor(s).

It might be the consideration with men, but I don't think its the same consideration with women- for e.g- all powerful women in the US are not too tall (Fortune 50 most powerful women)..so Hilary is safe here.

I hope height does not become a factor in the upcoming election. I worry though; in the last two elections Americans voted for a man they could feel comfortable having a beer with. A man of less intelligence then most of them, look at what happened! We elected the “Village Idiot.”

Height does not matter. It has nothing to do with one's potential fitness as a president. Many people only THINK it matters. We are genetically predisposed to consider height a value because our caveman ancestors required physical characteristics, such as height, far more than we do today. Nowdays, who cares? Unless one is a professional basketball player, or some other athlete requiring height, when does one's height give anyone a true (rather than perceived) advantage? It has nothing to do with actual skills required involved for nearly all managerial-type professions.

Oh, and isn't it ironic that the wealthiest among all the candidates (Bloomberg) is also the shortest?

Ohio Governor Ted Strickland defeated Ken Blackwell in the 06 election. Blackwell was at least 4 inches taller and much bigger than Strickland. Strickland won by 23% of the vote. The main issue was the GOP corruption and I am sure height had no impact on the election. Furthermore, fmr. Senator Mike Dewine is a meager 5″ 5′ at the most and won twice in Ohio. Majority Leader Harry Reid and Republican Leader Mitch McConnell do not appear that tall either. And theyre head of their respective parties in the Senate!

A normal height has the greatest chance of seceeding that some one at the extrems. James Madison as the shortest president was known as "Little Jimmy". In the world of management the person slightly taller then normal has the big edge. Historicaly Abe Lincoln was way outside the normal height of his day. He either slept in specially made beds or slept caty-cornered across the bed. Abe's times were unusual so a very tall president became president (mainly because the democratic vote was split by more the one cantidate (north-vs-south). It all comes down to who appears to be the most successive in how they are portrayed. Medium height will win!

Very few people would claim that height plays in consciously to a determination of worth as a candidate.
However, it is undeniable that height does subconsciously color the public's view of a person, just as race, gender, and religion do. Numerous studies over the last few years can attest to this fact. This was shown in politics when Dukakis had great troubles in 1988 overcoming the image as a weakling. His short stature certainly did not help him.
This most likely would not be an issue, however, if the media did not address it so extensively. Most do not know of Tom Cruise's height, and he is as spotlighted as any presidential hopeful. The very fact that this type of story appears damages the objectivity of the American public.

I think that size doesn't matter because it is showing that then James Madison would have had a very bad chance. Sure looks tie up everything but, people want what you are going to do for the country. As John F. Kennedy said,
"Find what you can do for your country, not find you can get for your country.

Perhaps height matters in the back of our minds, but the truth is that not many Americans get to see the presidential hopefuls in the flesh. Height only truly has an impact when one is right there to feel the strong presence of a man or a woman who is over six feet tall.
Furthermore, let's hope that the people that are voting based on height/physical appearance will opt to stay at home on election day and read perezhilton.com all day.

I'm 5′10, my best friend is 5′5, and my brother is 6′2. We're all men, we're all political moderates, and we'd all be a disaster as president. 'Nuff said.

How about we ask this question, does skin color matter in running for presidency?

Somewhat interesting, but certainly bordering on stupid.

Yes height does matter, playing a factor just as great as looks, personality, and character.

Napoleon!

Ridiculous. James Madison was 5′4″, not to mention 100 lbs.

Height doesn't matter, but looks certainly do. I think that Mitt Romney will go far, not based on his views, but because he looks the most presidential of all the candidates.

The size of the heart matters, however it seems like when comes to stupidity there are no limits. I'm thinking of the current president.

Why should height be a factor? Afterall, we currently have a President that was born without a brain. Compared to having a moron in office, a short President would be a dramatic step in the right direction regardless of whom it may turn out to be. Maybe we should make sure that it is a requirement that any candidate from this point on is able to read, write, and enunciate most words in the English language.

Actually, and oddly enough, height does matter in a Presidential race. We live in a media driven society that makes snap judgments on personal appearances. The Kennedy Nixon debate proved that. A candidate with a good stature will have an edge and more likely impress both in public and on TV.
Americans want there leaders to be tall and fit. I would guess that 5′11″ would be the minimum that could command respect and anything above 6′3″ should probably just stick to basketball.

I found it interesting

Is this really what we are polluting our minds with? Well, I'm not losing any sleep analyzing the idiotic trend of presidential height, even though I am 6ft4 and could state that taller is better, but that's not the case. What voters should do first is analyze who they relate to based on candidates policies, voting trends, party affiliation and other important things to weigh in when picking the next leader. Actually, the first thing voters should do is register, and secondly, GO AND VOTE, because it seems to me that many people hopped on the Michael Moore bandwagon and rallied against Bush the last time around (and by all means, I don't blame them one bit), but when election day came around, they were "too busy." Well, thanks to all of those whose apathetic stance cost us "four more years" of war-ridden deficits, lies and endless corruption on all levels of government. This time around, MAKE YOURSELVES HEARD, and not only in the anti-war rallies or in arguments with co-workers, neighbors and friends but when it counts: in November.

Is this some sort of joke? Correlation does not imply causation. Further, are we seriously wasting our time reading a news article about this? Is this what our mainstream media has come to? You, right there, the one reading this sentence, close this window and go read something from which you can actually learn.

I think it is bull it wrong ok theirs a myth that if your not tall that means your not weathly and you are poor and mulnurtation.

Size matters. You have to be at least 6 feet to have a reasonable chance. 6 1 3/4 Obama will beat 6 2 Romney!!

STUPID IDEA!
SMALL PEPPER IS MORE SPICY. BRAIN, EXPERIENCE, POLITICAL CAREER,
FAMILY ROOT, FAITH AND COLOR WILL MATTER MORE THAN HEIGHT.

Well, the minute I spent reading this innane story is a minute I'll never get back. The 30 seconds I've spent typing this message is another wasted amount of time!

The recently elected president in France (Zarkosy) I thinks is about 5′7″.
We will have to see if like Napoleon(also not very tall), Zarlosy does a good job…he did very good as minister
If he does maybe size does not matter..

Indeed size does matter in today's standard because appearance plays on the minds of voters, but this was not so in the yester-years–when visual mediums were limited. We don't want to admit this superficial side our social conscious, the truth hurts in this case.

There is never a black president, maybe not just height matter but also race and the color of a persons face. And if height determine presidency, not many women will be president or there will never be any.

All these comes to the questions and wonders of hey how about models, can fat people be models? This is one reason it drive women in our society to depression and ideal perfection.

If you ask me, if you go by his stature in terms of achievements and accomplishments, W is an inch off the floor!

I'm dumber for having read this column.

Ridiculous. I would hope that your political commentary will be more substantive in the future. If you wish to be taken seriously, act serious.

"Hitler, Mousilini and Tojo were little guys, as was Napolean"

-yes, but Winston Churchill was shorter than all of those guys (except maybe Tojo). It's funny that when people give examples of short world leaders, they always pick the "bad guys". Also, the new president of France is 5′5″.

Who cares?

One question. On CNN when they did this report, they said that Romney was 6′2″, and that Obama was at least 6′1″. So why does Obama appear to be taller in the picture?

Are you trying to say height is now one of the qualifications to be U.S. President-or do you mean a tall idiotcan be President?

Shorty Bloomberg would be an excellent addition to the mentally short field of Democrats.

The post was interesting, but useless. A more meaningful analysis would be one conducted not long ago. It shows that since 1956, there was only ONE President who left office with higher approval ratings than when he came in. Only ONE. It wasn't Ronald 'Gipper' Reagan. It wasn't Richard "I am not a crook' Nixon. It wasn't George H. W. 'Read my lips' Bush, or even Gerald 'Oops!' Ford. That's right folks! The ONLY President since 1956 to leave office with higher approval numbers was William J. Clinton! Take that, right-wingers!

I am taller than half the candidates, and tower over Sentator Clinton so I guess I will be the first female president. Send me money so I can start running ads with me standing back to back with each candidate!!

Earlier today, in this space I posted that in the last 50 years only one President ended his term with higher approval ratings than when he began. I failed to attribute the source of that analysis. The article appeared in the Wall Street Journal online edition and covered the years from 1945 through 2005. The Gallup organization appeared to have supplied the raw data and the WSJ appeared to have performed the analysis. If anyone wishes to verify, the link is: http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-presapp0605-31.html

The height of a leader does matter to the public. When world leaders gather the public actually compares height first and for some unknown reason height does matter to the public. Call it stature, credibility or just the idea of command prescence but height does matter to them.

Travis and Rob: I wrote: "Tall presidents have always been the rule rather than the exception." No one (I hope) consciously votes for a president, based on height, but what is impressive when you review the heights of our 43 presidents is that MOST of them were taller than average. It is unfortunate that height should be an issue at all.