must be good enough performers to persuade the audience that
they share the same dreams and interests. Such leaders have the
ability to turn a crowd into a community—or a mob. Charisma
is no small gift. FDR had it, JFK had it, Reagan had it, Clinton
had it. Tragically, so did Hitler. But it is always part of the
political equation, whether we like it or not.
More than ever since the advent of television, physical at-
tractiveness is a constituent of charisma, albeit a controversial
one. It has been noted so often it has become a cliché: virtually
everyone who heard the landmark 1960 debate between Nixon
and Kennedy on radio thought Nixon had won. It was only
those who saw the close-up visuals—a frowning Nixon, with
his five o’clock shadow, mopping flop sweat from his brow,
versus a youthful, athletic-looking Kennedy, comfortable in
his skin and flashing a ready smile—who knew that the victory
belonged to JFK. Beauty is more than symmetrical features. It
can be enhanced by behavior and our knowledge of the indi-
vidual. But it is routinely a factor in the leaders we choose.
Some leaders are so powerful they can rise above the way they
look. Lincoln used humor to mock his strange appearance,
once remarking to a rival who called him “two-faced”: “Do
you think if I had another face, I’d appear in public in this
one?” But appearance matters to voters as well as prospective
dates. An unkind but astute observer once remarked that
Nixon had a face like a foot. Did that contribute to his disas-
trous debate? Likely it did. Certainly Sarah Palin’s good looks
are part of her appeal, as Republican conventioneers from In-
diana crudely acknowledged with T-shirts that read: HOOSIERS
FOR THE HOT CHICK. And it is a fair bet that Obama’s athletic
grace and easy smile attracted more voters than his Harvard
law degree or his tax policy.
On Becoming a Leader