It looks like our readers do care about appearances, but you clearly care more about integrity, education, and experience. The most interesting findings, below? While only 29% of you said you'd be more likely to vote for an attractive candidate, 44% of you said you might be less likely to vote for an overweight candidate.
And when it comes to upkeep, to maintain that veneer of attractiveness, you guys are torn. 41% of you were solidly against candidates spending considerable money on hair, makeup, and clothes, but 58% saw it as a necessary part of the process. Take to the comments with any other thoughts. We're dying to know.
Don't get us wrong, here. Our favorite part of election season is watching the debates (and not just when the likes of Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann are involved). We're pretty intrigued to see what's about to go down when two clever candidates like Obama and Romney (fingers crossed) take each other to task on the economy, the military, and health care. And this year, the issues promise to be even more incendiary than ever (gay marriage, anyone?).
But, all of that being said, we feel like it's entirely naive to pretend that people vote solely based on the issues. Admit it: Attractiveness, likability, and wealth always seem to factor in just as significantly as economic recovery plans ever do. We latch on to sound bytes and then react to candidates based on gut instincts. Human nature, right?
So, with some help from our friends at Weatherproof
® (hey, they're curious, too), we put together a little poll. We invite you to be honest and tell us how fashion, appearance, and all of the other pieces of likability contribute to your vote. And then, take to the comments with all of the questions you wish
we had asked.
Photos: Courtesy of Romney campaign and Obama campaign
Our favorite TV pols kind of change the equation when it comes to attractiveness, no?
Photos: Tony Goldwyn, Courtesy of ABC; Amy Poehler, Courtesy of NBC