Michael Silverman 1 Michael Silverman 3-10-2008 AP US History Mr. Martin Paper #3 - Final Characteristics of Presidential Candidates: Do They Matter? For over two hundred and ten years, the election of the Executive in Chief has fascinated pollsters, citizens, and political scientists alike. The battle of parties, issues, and morals invites debate among the general public nationwide over which candidate it supports in the next general election. Whether it is the Republicans against the Democrats, debate over the budget and overspending, or the decision to allow women to vote, there have always been multiple candidates competing for the votes and minds of America. But what if the issues did not matter or affect the outcome of the presidential election? When one examines presidential characteristics throughout the 55 elections that have taken place, trends appear to indicate that candidates are selected not on their positions on the economy, foreign relations, health care, or civil rights, but largely on factors such as likability, their physical attributes, which college they went to, and their previous careers. Additional patterns begin to emerge when the psychological and societal factors that affect voters in their choice for president of the United States are evaluated. Data collected will demonstrate multiple trends that indicate that these factors and presidential characteristics may override the issues in an election and that they may also determine which individuals even attempt to run for President of the United States. Michael Silverman 2 For example, while the issues politicians discuss are sometimes complicated and not easily understood by voters, the candidate’s religion is very simple to understand, and in a presidential election, the voter will usually know which faith a candidate belongs to.1 Since the inception of the United States, a candidate’s faith has appeared to play a role in whether he has been successfully elected to the highest office in the United States.2 This is supported by the fact that every single president has had some form of Christian religious affiliation.3 As over 85% of the country has statistically belonged to some form of religious group and close to 70% of Americans believe that it is important for a president to have strong religious beliefs,4 the significance of a candidate’s religious convictions determining a voter’s choice cannot be underestimated. However, this is only if the candidate has a relatively mainstream faith, which has historically equated to some form of Protestant Christianity.5 The appeal of a candidate with a Protestant based faith is best shown via the following percentages: 25% of elected presidents have held Episcopalian beliefs, 17.3% have held Presbyterian beliefs, 15.4% have held Methodist beliefs, 9.6% have held Baptist beliefs, and the remaining 32.7% have held various Protestant based faiths except for one president, John F. Kennedy, who held Catholic beliefs.6 These statistics are telling in that the candidate’s religion may help to determine the viability of his/her candidacy, possibly eliminating candidates of other faiths in a system that is commonly believed by United States citizens to be “democratic” and “free from religious bias”. While there are no written laws prohibiting an individual of any faith from running for president, there is a statistical trend that seems to indicate that candidates of the Protestant faith have the best chance of succeeding. Michael Silverman 3 Another fascinating variable that may have determined who seeks the presidential office at different points in history is whether the individual belongs to one of the most secretive societies on earth, the Freemasons. Many of the most famous political, social, and religious figures from the 1800s onward have belonged to the Freemason Society. 7 While conspiracy theories abound that the Society of Freemasonry is a group that breeds world leaders who determine the world order to the disadvantage of humankind and the advantage of a select few, no concrete evidence has been found that proves either a positive or negative influence that can be attributed to the Society of Freemasonry. However, Freemasonry’s involvement in the upper echelons of society cannot be denied, especially in the case of the United States presidency; 32.7% of all elected presidents have been Freemasons.8 In addition, Freemason candidates were elected 66% of the time over non-Freemason candidates.9 For a society that historically claims no more than 6.5% of the general populace nationwide,10 to have a member elected to the highest office in the country over 30% of the time is not a coincidence. This statistically significant trend may be due to the influential members already in place in the U.S. government and other connections that the candidate may have made within the Freemason society, or it may simply be due to the improved speaking skills and self-confidence that individuals purportedly gain by their membership in the society.11 While it is not usually known by the voter whether the candidate is a Freemason or not at the time of the election due to the secrecy of the society, it still appears that being a member of the Freemason society is a common element to many successful candidates a significant amount of the time. Michael Silverman 4 One factor that is normally hard to gauge, yet appears to be pivotal, in the election of the President of the United States is how “likeable” and physically attractive the candidate is. As Greg Barrett of USA Today states on the subject of presidential hopefuls’ chances of success, “It has everything to do with whom you would rather have over for dinner.”12 These factors, while hard to consistently and accurately determine in public opinion polls, generate clear trends when analyzing previously elected presidents and their attributes. For example, one attribute that is generally deemed attractive in American society is a full head of hair.13 This is clearly evidenced by that fact that only 5.5% or three out of the 55 presidents elected were bald1.14 While a full head of hair seems to be statistically beneficial for a presidential candidate, the same cannot be said about facial hair. Over 70% of successful presidential candidates did not have any facial hair.15 While there were nine presidents who had facial hair, there seems to be a statistical preference for clean shaven individuals. Another interesting example of how large a role physical attractiveness may play in the election of a president is how frequently the taller individual is elected. In heights gathered from a limited sample of 18 elections,2 the taller candidate has won 70.6% of the time, while the shorter individual has won 29.4% of the time.16 These statistics indicate a substantial advantage for the taller candidate. This advantage may largely be 1 To further clarify, there have been 55 elections in the course of United States history. Out of 55 elections, only 3 candidates were elected that were bald. While there are only 43 presidents due to the re-election of some candidates, all statistics in this paper evaluate each election independently, so that election statistics can be gauged, not just presidential characteristics. 2 This sample of elections includes: 1789, 1792, 1796, 1820, 1824, 1828, 1836, 1840, 1852, 1888, 1892, 1912, 1932, 1960, 1976, 1980, 1984, and 1992. This set of data was not handpicked to form a trend; this sample includes all elections where height data was available for both the candidate elected president and the losing candidate. Michael Silverman 5 because of our society’s focus on appearance, which even in the early days of our nation, before the advent of television, was significant. Although voters in early presidential elections had most likely never seen imagery/photos as detailed or as frequently as voters do today, they were most likely still aware of a candidate’s image to a certain extent due to the publication of political cartoons and political discussion among the general populace.17 For example, one of the principal reasons responsible for Abraham Lincoln’s popularity was his outlandish height, which was frequently publicized and sometimes ridiculed in newspapers of the time.18 Studies have shown that tall politicians “literally stand out from the crowd.”19 An increased height is also associated with a dominant and confident character, qualities that most voters would like to see in a Head of State.20 In general, “people vote for the most powerful looking,” says Beryl Wing, President of the Association of Image Consultants International, “We want the top dog to lead us.”21 Interestingly enough, while some may deem voters as superficial for judging presidential candidates’ worthiness based on height, there is strong evidence that the taller the presidential candidate is, the greater that president will perform in office. Historically, the taller the president was, the more leadership qualities he possessed, the higher he ranked in his accomplishments and crisis management, and his political skill was rated higher than that of his shorter counterparts.22 Further research confirms this statement, as the majority of the greatest and most well-known presidents were also the tallest. For example, the following table illustrates the height of some of the greatest presidents. Michael Silverman 6 President Washington Jefferson Jackson Lincoln FDR Reagan 23 Height in Inches 74 74.5 73 76 73 73 All of the presidents in the table above are over 6 feet tall, which is 3 inches above the average height of a male in the United States, 69 inches.24 Americans respect and trust taller individuals more, and while some will continue to deny this social and psychological bias, there are statistical trends that indicate height may matter and that “the visual phenomenon is so powerful it puts people in office.”25 Hair and height are not the only characteristics that may affect a candidate’s likability; age may also play a large part in the election of a candidate, but not in the way one might think. Statistics show that an older candidate has a slight advantage against a younger candidate: the older candidate will win 58.2% of the time.26 This advantage that older candidates enjoy stems largely from two concepts: the psychological fatherfigure, that is, a feature of American society and the notion that the general populace trusts older individuals more. The impact that the father-figure has on a candidate’s image is powerful because of its ability to authenticate the candidate and to make them seem more trustworthy in voters’ minds.27 One clear example of the father-figure concept is during the election and re-election of President Ronald Reagan, who is currently the oldest individual ever inaugurated as President. In a study entitled Ronald Reagan in the Public Mind, researchers found that Reagan’s success was largely Michael Silverman 7 attributable to his “father-figure” personality. They found that voters viewed him as a “father-figure and a throwback to simpler days,” that he was “level-headed and made logical decisions,” and that Reagan “…gave [respondents] a feeling that safe, stable times” had returned.28 These sentiments felt by voters led Ronald Reagan to the Presidency twice with an average electoral vote win margin of 88.45% and an average popular vote win margin of 13.65%.29 The father-figure advantage is also present when evaluating how many children winning presidential candidates have had versus the amount that losing presidential candidates have had. Of the successfully elected presidential candidates, the average number of children that they had was 2.7. Of the 40 (data available on 40 of 55 runnerups (out of 55 elections)) candidates who ran for president and lost, the average number of children that they had was 2.3. Even though the fertility rate in America has varied throughout 220 years of elections, from families having as many as 10 children to the current census where over 70% of families in the United States have had one or no children,30 these statistics seem to indicate a slight preference for candidates who have had more children. This possible appeal of the family man may largely be due to the voters’ ability to relate to the candidate and the likability factor that comes along with having children; it appears they respect someone who has taken on the responsibility of raising children. In addition, the family man/father-figure concept appears to be easily understood by voters, unlike policy issues, which are frequently much more complicated and harder to fully grasp.31 In addition to the benefit that a father-figure personality may lend to an individual campaigning for the presidency, the simple fact that the candidate was born earlier than Michael Silverman 8 his opponent appears to influence how trustworthy the general populace deems him to be. In a study of which groups are most trustworthy, ranging from political affiliations to whether an individual is a city dweller, we generally consider older individuals to be more trustworthy than younger individuals.32 This candidate “trust boost” that older individuals seemingly receive from voters may stem from the belief that the older candidate is more experienced and will be able to handle future problems and challenges in a better fashion than the younger candidate. Whether the claim that an older candidate’s ability to handle challenges is better than a less experienced candidate’s is true or not is outside the scope of this paper; however, statistically, older candidates running for president have had more experience in government and have often held more positions than their younger counterparts.33 In addition to the voters’ perception that experience in Washington is generally favorable,34 candidates who have held other positions in government generally have better public awareness of their policies and what they stand for. The “public awareness” benefit just described is statistically very similar to the benefit that incumbent candidates appear to enjoy. In fact, voters’ response to the idea that one should not change horses in midstream, first set forth by Abraham Lincoln in 1864, appears to give incumbent candidates a vast advantage over their non-incumbent opponents.35 Out of all 55 elections in the history of the United States, incumbents have won 20 out of the 30 times they have run for re-election.36 This significant trend may be attributable to two distinct psychological characteristics that affect every single voter, both subconsciously and consciously. The incumbent may enjoy a large subconscious advantage because of the human mind’s fundamental resistance to change and the desire to stay the course.37 Michael Silverman 9 Change is often associated with danger, the unknown, and in some cases fear. This ambiguity felt about the opposing non-incumbent candidate, the uncertainty regarding what he/she will actually do once elected, is a strong enough barrier to most voters that they have voted for the incumbent candidate over 66% of the time. This subconscious desire for familiarity has been overcome a select few times throughout history. For example, Bill Clinton’s charismatic personality and political talent persuaded voters to change horses in midstream and hand him a victory over incumbent George H. W. Bush. Another example of when the incumbent lost was when Jimmy Carter lost to Ronald Reagan due to the public’s negative view of Carter and its strong support of Ronald Reagan.38 Incumbents appear to command a much stronger lead in public awareness, and unless there has been a highly publicized event that the incumbent has handled poorly, such as Jimmy Carter and the Iranian Hostage Crisis, incumbents appear to gain a sizeable advantage due to the fact that voters already know how they will act when elected.39 In addition to the knowledge and public awareness that incumbent candidates seem to receive, the experience that candidates acquired in the profession(s) they have held prior to their run for president appears to be a significant factor in determining whether they are elected or not. The following table shows an interesting breakdown of the previous occupations of our nation’s past presidents. Career % of Presidents to Have Worked In Occupation (Presidents were counted independently for each career. For example, if a president had previously been in the military and a senator, he would be counted in both percentages.) Lawyer Governor of X 56.4% 38.2% Michael Silverman 10 Army-(Soldier, General, etc.) Senator of X Representative of X Secretary of State 40 38.2% 29.1% 29.1% 16.4% As can be observed in the table above, prior experience in the United States government seems to practically be a requirement for a candidate running for President. This is an interesting contradiction to a survey that asked participants which professions they felt were most honest and had the highest ethical standards. The survey showed that both state office holders and Congressmen were rated very low on the honesty and ethics scale.41 Another interesting contradiction is that over half of all elected presidents have been lawyers or hold a degree in law, while lawyers rank near the bottom of the ethics and honesty survey.42 If 5 out of the 6 previously held occupations by presidents are disliked and felt to be so dishonest and unethical by voters, why do voters elect so many into office? This over-representation may be caused largely by the nature of the legal profession and the attributes that lawyers tend to naturally have. Lawyers are often very good at speaking on their feet, they have exceptional leadership skills, they have a psychological need to be in a dominant social position, they are extremely ambitious, and they are incredibly competitive.43 While these characteristics are not indicative of every individual in the legal profession, they do match up very well to attributes needed to run for a position in the American government. Another possible reason for the overrepresentation of lawyers, who are traditionally less than 1% of our nation’s work force, is that their profession allows the individual a large degree of career flexibility, so that if they lose an election or are between election cycles, they can go right back to practicing law: very few occupations offer this kind of career flexibility.44 The only career that a Michael Silverman 11 significant portion of elected presidents have served in that that is viewed positively by voters is the military. Serving America in the Army has long commanded respect from the majority of the population both during an individual’s service and after the individual returns home, and politicians have long exploited the fact that military service has traditionally been one of the top 5 respected professions.45 The public’s general respect for the Army and its leaders has led to the election of some presidents solely on their battlefield accomplishments, such as Ulysses S. Grant and Dwight D. Eisenhower.46 Another interesting statistic that may determine which individuals are even given an opportunity to run for president is where elected presidents have attended college. College Harvard Yale Princeton William and Mary Columbia Self Taught West Point Military Academy Top U’s- Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Oxford, Cambridge, Columbia, John Hopkins, Stanford, Duke 47 % of Elected Presidents that Attended 17.7% 9.7% 8.1% 8.1% 8.1% 8.1% 6.5% 46.8% The table above illustrates a trend that those at some of the top universities in the country appear to stand a much better chance of having the opportunity to run for President. This over-representation of “Top U”3 graduates may be due to the many contacts that candidates make in college. The old adage that states it is not what you know, but who you know has probably never been truer. With a large network of alumni 3 The phrase “Top U” students/graduates is in reference to the table on the previous page and includes the colleges in the cell starting with “Top U’s”. Michael Silverman 12 already in successful positions48 and willing to give “Top U” graduates a leg up in the competitive world of politics, it is no surprise that this trend exists. In addition to the advantage “Top U” networking most likely gives to potential candidates, former “Top U” students are also perceived as being more intelligent because they attended a name brand university. In the case of running for the head of state, the fact that a candidate is perceived as intelligent may be much more important than whether a candidate actually deserves the diploma from the college he or she attended.49 If a candidate is thought intelligent, he is trusted more, considered more attractive, and, as can be seen in the previous table, elected more often.50 With over 45% of Presidents coming from “Top Universities”, over 50% including West Point, the advantage of attending one of the nation’s top universities cannot be undervalued.51 One remarkable characteristic that is common among top universities is that they are generally located on the East Coast of the United States. When one examines the birthplaces of the Presidents of the United States, a similar pattern begins to emerge. Birthplace Virginia Ohio New York Massachusetts East Coast4 East Coast + Ohio 52 % of Presidents Born There 20.4% 14.8% 11.1% 9.26% 53.7% 68.5% The concentration of Presidents’ birthplaces on the East Coast is most likely due to the fact that the states mentioned above have simply existed in our country longer. The 4 East Coast includes Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Delaware, New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North and South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida. Or all states that touch the Atlantic. Michael Silverman 13 percentage of Presidents born on the East Coast has decreased over time however, due to the U.S. population’s migration westward and the establishment of states on the West Coast.53 While the percentage of elected President’s born on the East Coast is peculiar, it can likely be attributed to population settlement patterns rather than any sort of actual “birthplace advantage” accorded to presidents born on the East Coast. As statistics and research have shown, what determines who is elected president depends on many factors. The success of a candidate’s bid for the presidency may rely partially on characteristics that were under their control, such as their chosen faith, occupation, college, and the number of children they have had. However, it also appears to depend greatly on attributes outside of their control, such as whether they belong to the Freemasons, how tall they are, which color hair they have, and the state they were born in. Interestingly enough, the issues that voters bicker over throughout the course of every election and that political strategists determine will make or break their candidate’s pursuit of the presidency, appear to matter little in the countless array of factors that determine voter choice and candidate eligibility. Instead of trying to figure out which issues matter the most to voters, statistical trends seem to demonstrate that political consultants should be figuring out a way to make their respective candidate into an Episcopalian male that is 70.62 inches tall, 55.5 years old, has had 2.6 children, is an East Coast born “Top U” grad, practiced law while in the army, and is a member of the Society of Freemasons.54 However, even with countless trends and ample statistics to back the claim that voters seem to elect the most likable candidate that has made it through the many preliminary hurdles, none of it may matter, because as Joseph Michael Silverman 14 Stalin’s aphorism states, “The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.”55 1 Luke Ebersole, "Religion and Politics." Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 332 (1960): 101-111, In JSTOR [database online], (accessed February 15, 2008). 2 "Pew Research Center: The Faith Factor at the Polls," Pew Research, http://pewresearch.org/pubs/720/the-faith-factor-at-the-polls (accessed February 16, 2008), 1. 3 See Election Sheet table in Election Spreadsheet.xlsx "The 2008 Statistical Abstract : Religion," Census Bureau Home Page. 4 http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/population/religion.html (accessed February 16, 2008), The Faith Factor at the Polls, 2. 5 The Faith Factor at the Polls, 1. See Election Spreadsheet.xlsx Freemasonry, Answers.com,The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition, Columbia 6 7 University Press., 2003, http://www.answers.com/topic/freemasonry, accessed February 17, 2008. 8 See Election Spreadsheet.xlsx See Election Spreadsheet.xlsx "53 FAQ ABOUT FREEMASONRY," Grand Lodge of Tennessee F&AM LONG RANGE 9 10 PLANNING COMMITTEE Home Page., http://www.gmwp.org/vision2013/53q.html (accessed February 17, 2008). 11 53 FAQ ABOUT FREEMASONRY, 33. "USATODAY.com - Likability swings votes of everyday people, pundits say," News, Travel, 12 Weather, Entertainment, Sports, Technology, U.S. & World - USATODAY.com. http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-09-28-likability_x.htm (accessed February 17, 2008). 13 "Physical attractiveness – WikEd," Main Page – WikEd, http://wik.ed.uiuc.edu/index.php/Physical_attractiveness (accessed February 17, 2008), 14 See Election Spreadsheet.xslsx Nicholas Whyte, "Facial hair and Presidential elections," Nicholas Whyte, 15 http://www.nicholaswhyte.info/presbeards.htm (accessed February 17, 2008), 16 See Election Spreadsheet.xslsx Political Cartoons. Answers.com. Encyclopedia of American History, Answers Corporation, 17 2006. http://www.answers.com/topic/political-cartoons, accessed March 08, 2008. 18 Keith E Melder, HAIL TO THE CANDIDATE, Washington, DC: Smithsonian, 1992, 12. Lisa Tossey, "Is presidential race a simple matter of standing tall?" Elon University., 19 http://www.elon.edu/e-web/pendulum/Issues/2004/onlinefeatures/election/tall.xhtml (accessed February 16, 2008). 20 Simple matter of standing tall, 1, Sidney Kraus, Televised Presidential Debates and Public Policy (Lea's Communication), Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1999, 63, 21 Simple matter of standing tall, 1. Paul Sommers, "Is Presidential Greatness Related to Height," The College Mathematics 22 Journal 33 (2002): 14-16, In JSTOR[database online]. (accessed February 18, 2008). 23 See Election Spreadsheet.xlsx See Election Spreadsheet.xlsx for Presidential Heights, Cynthia Ogden, Cheryl Fryar, 24 Margaret Carroll, and Katherine Flegal, "Mean Body Weight, Height, and Body Mass Index, United States 1960-2002," Advance Data CDC 347 (2004): 1-18. 25 Simple matter of standing tall, 2. See Election Spreadsheet.xlsx Leighton Mccutchen, "The Father-figure in Psychology and Religion," Journal of the 26 27 American Academy of Religion 40 (1972): 176-190, http://www.jstor.org/view/00027189/ap050022/0,181. 28 Dan Thomas, and Larry Baas. "Ronald Reagan in the Public Mind," Political Psychology 14 (1993): 55-75, In JSTOR[database online], (accessed February 18, 2008), 64. 29 See Election Spreadsheet.xlsx Herbert Klein,"Hoover Institution - Hoover Digest - The Changing American Family," Hoover 30 Institution, http://www.hoover.org/publications/digest/3020821.html (accessed February 24, 2008), "People of America," Encyclopedia of the New American Nation. http://www.americanforeignrelations.com/Pa-Po/People-of-America.html (accessed Feb. 24, 2008), "The 2008 Statistical Abstract : Households and Families," Census Bureau Home Page, http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/population/households_and_families.html (accessed February 17, 2008). 31 Jeff Grabmeir, "Family Values Could Score With Parents Voting in the 96' Election," Ohio State Research, researchnews.osu.edu/archive/famval.htm (accessed February 18, 2008). 32 Olof Johansson-Stenman, "Who Are the Trustworthy, We Think?" Economics 222 (2006), www.handels.gu.se/epc/archive/00004994/,1,4. 33 See Election Spreadsheet.xslsx Joseph Carroll, "Which Characteristics Are Most Desirable in the Next President?" 34 Gallup.com. http://www.gallup.com/poll/28693/Which-Characteristics-Most-Desirable-NextPresident.aspx (accessed February 16, 2008). 35 "Don't change horses in midstream," The meanings and origins of sayings and phrases | List of sayings | English sayings | Idiom definitions | Idiom examples | Idiom origins | List of idioms | Idiom dictionary | Meaning of idioms, http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/115400.html (accessed February 17, 2008). 36 See Election Spreadsheet.xlsx 37 "American Environics : Methodology : Political Psychology," American Environics, http://www.americanenvironics.com/methodology/polpsy.shtml (accessed February 17, 2008). 38 Cinammon Stillwell, "Jimmy Carter's Legacy of Failure," SF Gate: News and Information for the San Francisco Bay Area, http://www.sfgate.com/cgibin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2006/12/13/cstillwell.DTL (accessed February 17, 2008), “American President: President Jimmy Carter: Campaigns and Elections," Miller Center of Public Affairs, http://millercenter.virginia.edu/academic/americanpresident/carter/essays/biography/3 (accessed February 17, 2008). 39 James Campbell, "Forecasting the Presidential Election: What can we learn from the models? - Brookings Institution," Brookings – Quality, Independence, Impact, http://www.brookings.edu/articles/1996/fall_elections_campbell.aspx (accessed February 17, 2008), John Harris, and Richard Morin, "Debate Helps to Sway Undecided (washingtonpost.com)," washingtonpost.com - nation, world, technology and Washington area news and headlines, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A33723-2004Oct14.html (accessed February 17, 2008). 40 See Election Spreadsheet.xlsx "Lobbyists Debut at Bottom of Honesty and Ethics List," Gallup.com. 41 http://www.gallup.com/poll/103123/Lobbyists-Debut-Bottom-Honesty-Ethics-List.aspx (accessed February 16, 2008). 42 Lobbyists Debut at Bottom of Honesty and Ethics List, 2. Susan Daicoff, "The Lawyer Attributes." Welcome to Florida Coastal School of Law, 43 http://www.fcsl.edu/faculty/daicoff/schma.html (accessed February 18, 2008). 44 "The 2008 Statistical Abstract : Employed Persons," Census Bureau Home Page, http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/labor_force_employment_earnings/employed_ persons.html (accessed February 16, 2008), Tyler Cowen, "Marginal Revolution: Why are so many lawyers politicians?" Marginal Revolution, http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2008/01/why-are-so-many.html (accessed February 18, 2008). 45 Lobbyists Debut at Bottom of Honesty and Ethics List,2. See Election Spreadsheet.xlsx See Election Spreadsheet.xlsx The IvyGate Index: Calibrating Hegemony Since 2006 - IvyGate, the Ivy League blog," 46 47 48 IvyGate: The Ivy League blog, News, sports and more at Brown, Columbia, Cornell, Dartmouth, Harvard, Penn, Princeton & Yale, http://www.ivygateblog.com/blog/2006/08/the_ivygate_index_calibrating_hegemony_since_20 06_1.html (accessed February 18, 2008), Thomas Bartlett,"Yanking (the Chains of) the Ivies Chronicle.com," The Chronicle of Higher Education, http://chronicle.com/temp/reprint.php?id=x7hxmlb7q48y8c0jbtzj2zvsf42q39q1 (accessed February 18, 2008), "Does an Ivy League or elite "brand" degree give an unfair advantage?" The Chronicle of Higher Education, http://chronicle.com/forums/index.php?PHPSESSID=lkrb5d9uu0ord2nqh1qvonb8k5&topic=38 463.msg573870#msg573870 (accessed February 18, 2008). 49 James Heskett, "How Important Is "Executive Intelligence" for Leaders? — HBS Working Knowledge," HBS Working Knowledge, http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/5449.html (accessed February 18, 2008). 50 Sadie Dingfelder, "A presidential personality," American Psychological Association, 19 Feb. 2008 , "Rice University | Explore Rice," Explore Rice, http://www.explore.rice.edu/explore/NewsBot.asp?MODE=VIEW&ID=8796 (accessed February 17, 2008). 51 See Election Spreadsheet.xlsx 52 See Election Spreadsheet.xlsx See Election Spreadsheet.xlsx See Election Spreadsheet.xlsx "Quote Details: Joseph Stalin: The people who cast... - The Quotations Page," The 53 54 55 Quotations Page - Your Source for Famous Quotes, http://quotationspage.com/quote/39718.html (accessed Feb. 24, 2008). Works Cited - Characteristics of Presidential Candidates: Do They Matter? "53 FAQ ABOUT FREEMASONRY." Grand Lodge of Tennessee F&AM LONG RANGE PLANNING COMMITTEE Home Page. http://www.gmwp.org/vision2013/53q.html (accessed February 17, 2008). "American Environics : Methodology : Political Psychology." American Environics. http://www.americanenvironics.com/methodology/polpsy.shtml (accessed February 17, 2008). "American President: President Jimmy Carter: Campaigns and Elections." Miller Center of Public Affairs. http://millercenter.virginia.edu/academic/americanpresident/carter/essays/biography/3 (accessed February 17, 2008). Bartlett, Thomas . "Yanking (the Chains of) the Ivies - Chronicle.com." The Chronicle of Higher Education. 18 Feb. 2008 . Campbell, James. "Forecasting the Presidential Election: What can we learn from the models? - Brookings Institution." Brookings - Quality. Independence. Impact.. http://www.brookings.edu/articles/1996/fall_elections_campbell.aspx (accessed February 17, 2008). Carroll, Joseph. "Which Characteristics Are Most Desirable in the Next President?." Gallup.com. http://www.gallup.com/poll/28693/Which-Characteristics-Most-DesirableNext-President.aspx (accessed February 16, 2008). Cowen, Tyler. "Marginal Revolution: Why are so many lawyers politicians?." Marginal Revolution. 23 Jan. 2008. 18 Feb. 2008 . Daicoff, Susan. "The Lawyer Attributes." Welcome to Florida Coastal School of Law. 18 Feb. 2008 . "Does an Ivy League or elite "brand" degree give an unfair advantage?." The Chronicle of Higher Education. 18 Feb. 2008 . Dingfelder, Sadie. "A presidential personality." American Psychological Association. http://www.apa.org/monitor/nov04/president.html (accessed February 16, 2008). "Don't change horses in midstream." The meanings and origins of sayings and phrases | List of sayings | English sayings | Idiom definitions | Idiom examples | Idiom origins | List of idioms | Idiom dictionary | Meaning of idioms. http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/115400.html (accessed February 17, 2008). Ebersole, Luke. "Religion and Politics." Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 332 (1960): 101-111. In JSTOR[database online]. (accessed February 15, 2008). "First Impressions Of Beauty May Demonstrate Why The Pretty Prosper." Science Daily: News & Articles in Science, Health, Environment & Technology. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/01/060124223317.htm (accessed February 18, 2008). Grabmeir, Jeff. "Family Values Could Score With Parents Voting in the 96' Election." Ohio State Research. researchnews.osu.edu/archive/famval.htm (accessed February 18, 2008). Harris, John, and Richard Morin. "Debate Helps to Sway Undecided (washingtonpost.com)." washingtonpost.com - nation, world, technology and Washington area news and headlines. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A33723-2004Oct14.html (accessed February 17, 2008). Heskett, James . "How Important Is "Executive Intelligence" for Leaders? — HBS Working Knowledge." HBS Working Knowledge. 18 Feb. 2008 . Johansson-Stenman, Olof. "Who Are the Trustworthy, We Think?." Economics 222 (2006), www.handels.gu.se/epc/archive/00004994/01/gunwpe0222.pdf . Jones, Jeffery. "Bush Second-Year Approval Rating One of Best Ever." Gallup.com. http://www.gallup.com/poll/7600/Bush-SecondYear-Approval-Rating-One-BestEver.aspx (accessed February 16, 2008). Klein, Herbert. "Hoover Institution - Hoover Digest - The Changing American Family." Hoover Institution. http://www.hoover.org/publications/digest/3020821.html (accessed February 24, 2008). Kraus, Sidney. Televised Presidential Debates and Public Policy (Lea's Communication). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1999. "Lobbyists Debut at Bottom of Honesty and Ethics List." Gallup.com. http://www.gallup.com/poll/103123/Lobbyists-Debut-Bottom-Honesty-Ethics-List.aspx (accessed February 16, 2008). Mccutchen, Leighton. "The Father-figure in Psychology and Religion." Journal of the American Academy of Religion 40 (1972): 176-190, http://www.jstor.org/view/00027189/ap050022/05a00040/0. Melder, Keith E.. HAIL TO THE CANDIDATE. Washington, DC: Smithsonian, 1992. Ogden, Cynthia, Cheryl Fryar, Margaret Carroll, and Katherine Flegal. "Mean Body Weight, Height, and Body Mass Index, United States 1960-2002." Advance Data CDC 347 (2004): 1-18. "People of America." Encyclopedia of the New American Nation. http://www.americanforeignrelations.com/Pa-Po/People-of-America.html (accessed Feb. 24, 2008). "Pew Research Center: The Faith Factor at the Polls." Pew Research. http://pewresearch.org/pubs/720/the-faith-factor-at-the-polls (accessed February 16, 2008). "Physical Beauty Involves More Than Good Looks." Science Daily: News & Articles in Science, Health, Environment & Technology. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/04/040416011549.htm (accessed February 18, 2008). "Physical attractiveness - WikEd." Main Page - WikEd. http://wik.ed.uiuc.edu/index.php/Physical_attractiveness (accessed February 17, 2008). Political Cartoons. Answers.com. Encyclopedia of American History, Answers Corporation, 2006. http://www.answers.com/topic/political-cartoons, accessed March 08, 2008. "Quote Details: Joseph Stalin: The people who cast... - The Quotations Page." The Quotations Page - Your Source for Famous Quotes. http://quotationspage.com/quote/39718.html (accessed Feb. 24, 2008). "Rice University | Explore Rice." Explore Rice. http://www.explore.rice.edu/explore/NewsBot.asp?MODE=VIEW&ID=8796 (accessed February 17, 2008). Sommers, Paul. "Is Presidential Greatness Related to Height." The College Mathematics Journal 33 (2002): 14-16. In JSTOR[database online]. (accessed February 18, 2008). Stillwell, Cinammon. "Jimmy Carter's Legacy of Failure." SF Gate: News and Information for the San Francisco Bay Area. http://www.sfgate.com/cgibin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2006/12/13/cstillwell.DTL (accessed February 17, 2008). "Summary of Findings: Who Votes, Who Doesn't, and Why." Pew Research. http://peoplepress.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=292 (accessed February 16, 2008). "The 2008 Statistical Abstract : Employed Persons." Census Bureau Home Page. http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/labor_force_employment_earnings/emp loyed_persons.html (accessed February 16, 2008). "The 2008 Statistical Abstract : Estimates and Projections--States, Metropolitan Areas, Cities." Census Bureau Home Page. http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/population/estimates_and_projectionsst ates_metropolitan_areas_cities.html (accessed February 16, 2008). "The 2008 Statistical Abstract : Households and Families." Census Bureau Home Page. http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/population/households_and_families.ht ml (accessed February 17, 2008). "The 2008 Statistical Abstract : Religion." Census Bureau Home Page. http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/population/religion.html (accessed February 16, 2008). "The IvyGate Index: Calibrating Hegemony Since 2006 - IvyGate, the Ivy League blog." IvyGate: The Ivy League blog. News, gossip, sex, sports and more at Brown, Columbia, Cornell, Dartmouth, Harvard, Penn, Princeton & Yale. 18 Feb. 2008 . "The Wise Oldheads are Back." No Title. wps.pearsoned.com.au/wps/media/objects/1368/1401050/ce_Wise_old_hds_ch01.ht ml (accessed February 18, 2008). Thomas, Dan, and Larry Baas. "Ronald Reagan in the Public Mind." Political Psychology 14 (1993): 55-75. In JSTOR[database online]. (accessed February 18, 2008). Tossey, Lisa. "Is presidential race a simple matter of standing tall?." Elon University. http://www.elon.edu/e-web/pendulum/Issues/2004/onlinefeatures/election/tall.xhtml (accessed February 16, 2008). "USATODAY.com - Likability swings votes of everyday people, pundits say." News, Travel, Weather, Entertainment, Sports, Technology, U.S. & World - USATODAY.com. http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-09-28likability_x.htm (accessed February 17, 2008). Whyte, Nicholas . "Facial hair and Presidential elections." Nicholas Whyte. http://www.nicholaswhyte.info/presbeards.htm (accessed February 17, 2008). Wise, Julia. "How We Measure Up: Height and Psychology." Serendip's Exchange. http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/biology/b103/f03/web2/jwise.html (accessed February 18, 2008). Works Consulted Characteristics of Presidential Candidates: Do They Matter? Bike, William S.. Winning Political Campaigns: A Comprehensive Guide to Electoral Success. Juneau: Denali Pr, 1998. Flanigan, William H., and Nancy H. Zingale. Political Behavior of the American Electorate. Washington, D.C.: Cq Pr, 1994. George, Alexander L., and Juliette L.` George. Presidential Personality And Performance. Oxford: Westview Press, 1998. Goehlert, Robert U., and Fenton S. Martin. How to Research Elections. Washington, D.C: CQ Press, 2000. Polsby, Nelson W., and Aaron Wildavsky. Presidential Elections: Strategies and Structures of American Politics (Presidential Elections). New York: Seven Bridges Press, Llc, 2000. Schoen, Douglas. On the Campaign Trail: The Long Road of Presidential Politics, 1860-2004. Bob Land: Amazon Remainders Account, 2004. Simpson, Dick. Winning Elections: A Handbook in Modern Participatory Politics. New York: Longman, 1997. Works Cited - Excel Spreadsheet "About McClellan." McClellan Society's General George Brinton McClellan Home Page. http://www.georgebmcclellan.org/aboutmac.html (accessed Feb. 14, 2008). U-S-History.com. http://www.u-s-history.com/ (accessed Feb. 14, 2008). Degregorio, William. The Complete Book of U.S. Presidents--6th Edition: Includes Material through 2005 (Complete Book of Us Presidents). Fort Lee: Barricade Books, 2005. Kane, Joseph, Janet Podell, and Steven Anzovin. Facts About the Presidents: A Compilation of Biographical and Historical Information (Facts About the Presidents). New York: H. W. Wilson, 2001. "The Political Graveyard: Index to Politicians." The Political Graveyard. http://politicalgraveyard.com/bio/breckinridge.html (accessed Feb. 14, 2008). "Winfield Scott." About North Georgia. http://ngeorgia.com/ang/Winfield_Scott (accessed Feb. 14, 2008). Presidential Elections 1789-2004. Washington, D.C: CQ Press, 2005. Works Consulted - Excel Spreadsheet The following sources were used to double check some statistics, but were not cited. Boller, Paul F.. Presidential Campaigns: From George Washington to George W. Bush. New York: Oxford University Press, USA, 2004. Diller, Daniel C., and Stephen L. Robertson. The Presidents, First Ladies, And Vice Presidents: White House Biographies, 1789-2005. Washington, D.C: CQ Press, 2005. Eckes, Alfred E., and E. H. Roseboom. A History of Presidential Elections from George Washington to Jimmy Carter. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1979. Hamilton, Neil A.. Presidents: A Biographical Dictionary (Facts on File Library of American History). New York: Facts on File, 2001. Israel, Fred L.. Student's Atlas of American Presidential Elections 1789-1996. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly Books, 1997. Roseboom, Eugene Holloway. A History of Presidential Elections. New York: Macmillan, 1959.