How most people choose a candidate

[Freddie Stubbs]

The average voter doesn't simply go through a list of issues and compare each candidate, and then backing the one that they agree with on the highest percentage of issues. If that were the case, Al Gore would have beat Bush by a more than comfortable margin in 2000.

Oh course issues count, but they are not the only factor that people use to determine who they are going to vote for.

Personality counts for a lot. It is one of those intangables that you just can't measure. It is one of the reasons why some candidates fail while other thrive. Taller, better looking candidates are also at an advantage over shorter, less attractive ones.

Yes, I know that it isn't fair. But its human nature, and you're not going to change that.

[La_Serpiente]

1. Geography as well

on edit: it doesn't work for everyone. Even Gore lost his home state.

[Freddie Stubbs]

2. You are correct

My point is that there are lots of factors that determine who people support. Issues certainly isn't the only one.

[ochazuke]

5. DC had become his home state

I think the people of Tennessee figured Al Gore was no longer a native of their state. Bush's phony machismo, anti-intellectualism, and religiosity has a powerful appeal, I guess. (Makes me sick)

I think we have to consider personality traits when choosing a candidate as well as physical appearance and the sound of his voice.

I used to choose based solely on issues, but I'm an adult now.

[ShimokitaJer]

3. So Kucinich should start trying to look taller?

I mean, no offense. It's definitely a valid point you raise, and an unfortunate reality of the personality driven media coverage. But I wonder what we can do about it.

Do you think we should nominate someone who is taller and better looking in order to appeal to swing voters in the GE? Or do you think we should buck the trend by voting based purely on the issues.

Dems tend to be unfairly criticized by the media for any attempt to "change their image." Just look at Gore's "earth tones," Kerry's "hair," and Clark's "sweaters" making headlines while issues are ignored. At the same time, the pundits praise Bush for looking "presidential" while they ignore the obvious contrast with his lack of presidential policy.

It's a valid comment, but I don't think we can or should do anything about it.

[Freddie Stubbs]

7. A candidate that is all personality and lousy on issues would be a mistake

also. What is needed is balance.

With personality, you either have it or you don't. Clinton certainly had it. Gore didn't but tried to fake it. It didn't work.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

4. As one who goes digging for the issues - that's depressing

I certainly would hesitate in voting for a person who has a horrible personality and wouldn't get along with others BUT to vote for someone strictly by their personality is so lame.

[Freddie Stubbs]

6. Personality certainly isn't everything

But it is definetely an important factor.