Ok, I'll admit it, I prefer candidates that hold 'superficial' qualities.

[nickshepDEM]

I like the Bill Clintons, the O'Malleys, the Edwards, and the Obamas. Someone could be absolutely perfect on the issues, but if they don’t have that 'it' factor, I probably wouldn’t be as 'fired up' about their campaign as I would a candidate with the 'it' factor.

This probably contributes to why I'm looking at Obama and Edwards for 2008 and really no one else.

Anyone else feel this way (at least a little)?

[Viva_La_Revolution]

1. no

while I see they have those qualities, substance is what I vote for.

[Kelly Rupert]

2. Yep, though of course I try not to vote on it.

[MuseRider]

3. Nope. n/t

[Schema Thing]

4. cf: GW Bush

[sendero]

5. Whether anyone likes it or not..

... it is those "superficial" qualities that win elections in America. Anyone who thinks Americans really understand the issues or believe that an elected official's post-election actions will in any way reflect their pre-election rhetoric needs to wake up.

[lvx35]

6. No, I think that's what's cost us so many conservatives in the middle.

Kerry's "charm", for example, came across to swing conservative voters as effete elitist and metrosexual, his sophisticated politician ways came across as flip flopping, his wealth and "class" brought about the idea of the "limosene liberal" which cost us working class voters. Running flashy attorneys from the northeast is an expensive habit, its cost us a lot of middle of the road voters, not gained them.

[sandnsea]

9. Except

Kerry won the union vote, the under $50,000 vote, the no high school vote, and the independent vote.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html

[lvx35]

11. But check out most important quality:

Bush on left, Kerry on right.

Cares About People (9%)  24%   75% 	
Religious Faith (8%)     91%    8% 	
Honest/Trustworthy (11%) 70%   29% 	
Strong Leader (17%)      87%   12% 
Intelligent (7%)          9%   91% 	
Will Bring Change (24%)   5%   95% 	
Clear Stand on Issue (17%)79%  20% 

This says our candidate does not seem trustworthy, strong, or take clear stands on issues. These are the three biggest things after "will bring change" if you look at the percentages, they matter to people.

[sandnsea]

13. That's what the media peddled

The idea that George Bush is more religious, honest, or a better leader than John Kerry is ludicrous. If the media had been as honest in 2004 as they have been this year, Kerry would have won in the same landslide we just saw.

[lvx35]

14. It just goes to show we can't let them fill in the blanks...

as Kerry said. Same thing with Obama. If we focus too much on the bling bling brilliant attorney side, we'll miss the guy who comes from a gritty past, a very real humble guy. I'm saying I think that's the side we need to make sure Americans see of any candidate, or a quite different picture will be painted by the media, as you said!

[AtomicKitten]

7. Substance in a shiny package sells.

[LSparkle]

8. Yeah, we don't have to settle for one or the other: we have

JOHN EDWARDS!

[AtomicKitten]

10. I see that "it" factor

in Barak Obama, but I'd still like to see Gore have a do-over. Oh well, that's what primaries are for. :)

[DeepModem Mom]

12. Yes, indeed -- because I like to actually win elections...

not just feel righteous.

[tkmorris]

15. As a pragmatist, I agree with you.

In between elections I am an idealist, but when it's time to choose a candidate I am well aware that voters can be shallow, superficial people. Some people will just NEVER be elected president, and it has nothing to do with their politics. They just don't have what you call that "it" factor.

Believe me, I wish it were different, but it isn't. So, if we want to win, we must at least acknowledge that.

[lumpy]

16. After a belly full of Bush, I think that 'normal' voters

will be looking for a well-spokem, intelligent, charismatic presidential contender. Someone they can truly look up to with respect. Someone with the appeal of FDR, JFK, WJC. That added social appeal that speaks for the common man/woman. Visually, I do believe that people will ne looking for someone that has a look of serene confidence in themselves. Good clean looks do help. That is the one thing that has always struck me about George Bush, he doesn't have those qualities (clean looks as well). His rubber face, smirks and wisecracks is disconcerting, those traits just shout incompetence.

[Hippo_Tron]

17. Well I'm not voting for Vilsack or Bayh partially because they don't have "it"

But also because they are lame candidates without any original ideas or accomplishments. But I'm counting in Clark and Gore because while they only have a modest "it" factor compared to someone like Obama, they are accomplished and they will be formidable contenders.

Remember that Clinton didn't just have "it" and he wasn't just a southern Governor. He won over the liberal wing of the party because of his academic credentials and his anti-war protest record.

If Clinton were running again what would attract me to him is his intelligence and his willingness to listen to different opinions before making up his mind. I disagree with many of the things he did (or in some cases didn't do) as president but I know that he at least listened to the dissenting voices which is a quality that I truly admire in a leader.

[LWolf]

18. No. It is the antithesis of my values

to value others because of their appearance or surface charm. Frankly, that is just another outlet for bigotry, in my opinion. If it is no longer acceptable to judge people by gender, race, sexual preference, etc., we can at least judge them by their genetic makeup/physical features and fashion sense. We can heap adulation on extroverts, actors, performers, athletes, and ignore or marginalize the rest, whether or not their thoughts and lives benefit others. The beautiful are the more worthy, right? :sarcasm:

When it comes to people, I care about who they are. I determine that by how they choose to live their lives, and by what they value. I determine what they value according to their actions, not their words. When it comes to politics, I care about issues. Period.

Put people together with politics, and the person to get my vote is the one who stands for, and works for, issues. Not the one that makes the best sound bite or gift-wrapping.