.
When it comes to politics, how important is hair?
September 1st, 2011
06:00 PM ET

When it comes to politics, how important is hair?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

In Texas, Rick Perry is also known as Governor Good Hair.

In fact, when he jumped into the race just a few short weeks ago, fellow Texan Paul Begala described it as "when Rick Perry threw his hair in the ring."

Say what you want about the current Republican front-runner - love him or hate him - the guy's got great hair.

Maybe it will help Perry make it all the way to the White House.

In any case, it probably won't hurt him.

In recent memory, especially since when you could see these guys on TV, our commanders-in-chief have been blessed with the good hair gene.

In fact, you have to go all the way back to the 1950s and Dwight Eisenhower to find a bald-headed president.

Even if they go significantly more grey while in office, like Presidents Obama and George W. Bush, our presidents seem to have pretty healthy heads of hair.

Perhaps it's no coincidence that many of those aspiring to the office, like Perry, are blessed with good hair genes, too.

Look at Mitt Romney, or even John Edwards back in 2008.

Edwards reportedly went all out for his hair, spending as much as $400 for a haircut. Wait until he sees the haircut he could get in prison, but that's another story.

The point is: In the age of television, appearance matters. I don't expect we'll elect another bald president anytime soon, which is too bad. There are undoubtedly a lot of qualified bald people out there.

Anyways, all this got us wondering if there's something magical about good hair and politicians.

Here’s my question to you: When it comes to politics, how important is hair?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

John in Florida:
Look at some of our more popular presidents: JFK, nice hair. Bill Clinton, nice hair. On the other hand look at Eisenhower. Elected in 1952, won a second term, very popular. Not much hair. Just that button. "I like Ike." Maybe we should just settle for intelligence, honesty and someone that can speak to the American people without babbling.

James:
Hair is very important in politics as the voting public attempts to avoid both snakes and lions. How much a particular candidate looks like one or the other is a subconscious determinate for the electorate. The Founders, knowing this, insisted on leveling the playing field with wigs. Wise men indeed to have all the men look like women.

Mike in Minneapolis, Minnesota:
That's a really good point, Jack. If Michelle Bachmann ran as his V.P. on the promise of $2 a gallon gas and Rick Perry promised a cure for male pattern baldness, the White House would certainly be theirs. Sadly, that's just barely a joke.

Tammie on Facebook:
Maybe that’s why Trump decided not to run. He has a bad hair day every day.

Ken in California:
It seems we are asking what is more important: what is on top of the head r what is in the head? What has been coming out of the candidates' heads of late has been quite hair-raising indeed.

Robert in Paradise, California:
Well the last president who had a receding hairline was Ford and he lost to Carter. Yep, it must matter.

Tony:
All I can say, Jack, is that if "hair" is an issue, it's lucky for you that you're not running for office!

Posted by
Filed under: 2012 Election
soundoff (232 Responses)
  1. Larry Feierstein-Denver

    Here's the real choice, an honest bald politican? or a slick backed (hair is perfect) as we are faced with now? So, if its not hair, is it religion? color of eyes? height? weight? What kind of questions are these? Do you think the American public care – oh wait, they do like Donald Trump (speaking of faux hair).

    September 1, 2011 at 1:35 pm |
  2. ranch111

    I vote for the best hair.

    September 1, 2011 at 1:37 pm |
  3. Sean in Dallas

    For me it's not important at all. Cafferty for president!

    September 1, 2011 at 1:43 pm |
  4. J.D.

    Apparently very important. You can count the bald guys in Congress on one hand and the place has the largest concentration of toupes, hair plugs, comb overs and helmet heads in the nation.

    September 1, 2011 at 1:53 pm |
  5. Russ in PA

    Theirs or ours?

    Ron Paul in 2012...

    September 1, 2011 at 1:54 pm |
  6. Rhone Jones

    Hair or the lack thereof can't be too important. Otherwise, Eisenhour, and several of the Founding Fathers would not have been elected

    September 1, 2011 at 2:00 pm |
  7. Jim, Denver CO

    Jack,

    What?? This is politics and not a beauty contest. We should vote for the person with intelligence and common sense. Oh wait, that's asking alot isn't it.

    September 1, 2011 at 2:05 pm |
  8. David in Tampa

    Loved the music, Jack. Don't care about hair cuts being an old hippie. I'm concerned with substance not window dressing in our elected officials. Too bad none of them have any of that, so I guess I just don't care.

    September 1, 2011 at 2:10 pm |
  9. Loren

    Why, Jack? You thinking of throwing your hat in the ring and concerned that exposing your scalp to the fickle winds of politics would be a problem with voters?

    September 1, 2011 at 2:11 pm |
  10. David of Alexandria VA

    When Clinton was president, I had to wait on an airport tarmac for 2 hours while he got a haircut on Air Force 1 at the other end of the terminal. It was hot, inconvenient, and gave me a lot of time to think. I wound up thinking I wouldn't vote for him again - and I didn't. So, I guess hair is terminally important

    September 1, 2011 at 2:11 pm |
  11. Rick McDaniel

    Physical appearance in politics, makes a huge difference, and good looks, combined with charisma, is often all a candidate really brings to the table, to win.

    Sad........but absolutely true.

    We have no one to blame, but ourselves, however, as no ordinary person can even run for office. Only the wealthy and elite can even get the support to run. Our country is basically so close to being a dictatorship, it is ridiculous, than anyone calls this a free country. It is a dictatorship of the wills of the wealthy and powerful, no matter which political party is in power, and only the wealthy have any real cntrol over how the country is run.

    September 1, 2011 at 2:12 pm |
  12. Dave - Phx, Az

    Not at all, or Al Sharpton and Don King would be the kings of this Oligarchy/Plutocracy.

    September 1, 2011 at 2:13 pm |
  13. John from Alabama

    Jack: It has to be neat, and not block the view of the person who isrunning for office. Hair, make nup, and clothing are all part of the total package. They can not look like they slept in their clothes. Hair may get you noticed, but a politican must have something under the hair to win. Be clean, smile, and have the right answer over 50% of the time.

    September 1, 2011 at 2:14 pm |
  14. mycroft lake travis

    What a Question ? One would hope not at all. Will tomorrows question be; how important teeth or dare we ask something significant like why haven't were heard Obama ever mention another word about ending Scooter Libby Justice, once he was elected or perhaps:: when the Democrats held the House, the Senate and Obama in the Presidency, why did they not eliminate the Bush Tax Cuts for the wealthiest 2%. Maybe even really go out on a limb and ask why are we doing nothing in the area of bringing War Criminals to Justice ? Hair is that really the best you can come up with ? The dumbing down of americans, just doesn't belong to Fox News anymore. It's kind of ironic and pathetic that you have to go to the Daily Show or the Colbert Report, to get any intellligent news programing these days.

    September 1, 2011 at 2:18 pm |
  15. Robert from Ontario

    This has to be one of the dumbest questions ever askd by anyone. Who cares if they have hair or not. The question should be "What are their qualifications to be President?". The US needs candidates with substance over style and shallow answers to complex problems.

    September 1, 2011 at 2:19 pm |
  16. Robert from Ontario

    Sorry, the line should read "and not shallow answers...."

    September 1, 2011 at 2:20 pm |
  17. Tina Tx

    If you vote for some one because they have great hair over job experience then you are the bigger fool than what I thought. You best be looking into their record over good looks & great hair. Look at the loons that are running for office that have great hair, Gingrich, Perry, Bachman, Romney. You get the picture now?

    September 1, 2011 at 2:20 pm |
  18. Robert Allen, Paradise, CA

    Well the last President that had a receding hairline was Ford and he lost to Carter. Yep it must.

    September 1, 2011 at 2:22 pm |
  19. Fay in Abilene Tx

    Not much . Just ask Jerry Brown.

    September 1, 2011 at 2:22 pm |
  20. calvin

    None it's what under the hair that counts. All the women running are way better looking then and man out there but we need good problem solvers not democrats or replubicans. Just find good men and women who care for the USA not for any party . Face the problem and fix them for the best of americans. All americans

    September 1, 2011 at 2:30 pm |
  21. Kevin in CA

    Not! The Donald proved that.

    September 1, 2011 at 2:31 pm |
  22. john thomas

    Will look at some of our more popular presidents. JFK, nice hair. Bill Clinton, nice hair. On the other hand look at Eisenhower. Elected in 1952, won a second term, very popular. Not much hair. Just that button. "I like Ike." Maybe we should just settle for intelligence, honesty and someone that can speak to the American people without babbling. Hay, isn't Barack Obama?
    John Thomas Florida Keys

    September 1, 2011 at 2:35 pm |
  23. Jeff in Bishop, Georgia

    Mr. Cafferty, unfortunately, our nation's population is shallow & mesmerized by good looks, Having said that, if Obama had George Jefferson's hairline & Michelle looked like Weezy, he'd have gotten no farther than the state senate in Illinois.

    September 1, 2011 at 2:40 pm |
  24. Gary H. Boyd

    I can't recall any president being bald, or with a "butch" haircut so I guess a full head of well styled hair is essential both for women as well as men. The key being "well styled". Remember Bill Clinton's runway "do" at the LA airport or John Edwards $400 styling. Obviously the politicians see it as important.

    Gary in Scottsdale, Arizona

    September 1, 2011 at 2:43 pm |
  25. Ken from Pinon Hills, California

    It seems we are asking what is more important, what is on top of the head, or what is in the head?
    It must be important to all those dyed yellow haired cupie doll TV ladies that give us the news, and it may be that way as to politicians. What has been coming out of the candidates head of late has been quite hair raising indeed.

    September 1, 2011 at 2:45 pm |
  26. ImALibertarian

    When it comes to politics, the media is more interested in pretty hair than in political history, criminal background or governing philosophy.

    September 1, 2011 at 2:51 pm |
  27. Sandra

    Jack, it's very important. Why do you think we Texans refer to Perry as "Governor Goodhair"?

    September 1, 2011 at 2:52 pm |
  28. Jk from Minnesota

    To me it's not. What's more important to me is the quality of what's underneath the hair.

    September 1, 2011 at 2:56 pm |
  29. Karl in Flint

    Since we have had good and bad presidents with and without hair, it is not what is on the dome but what is under it that matters. Anyone, from either party, that takes a candidates coif into consideration as to that persons competence for the office they are running for, is not competent to vote in any election. Unfortunately the national IQ has sank to an even lower level then the favorable rating of congress. Perhaps the next poll should ask the question: Does a single digit IQ really hurt?

    September 1, 2011 at 2:57 pm |
  30. Tony from Southport, NC

    All I can say Jack is that if "hair" is an issue, it's lucky for you that you're not running for office!

    September 1, 2011 at 3:00 pm |
  31. Doug

    Hair is not as important as overall looks. In the case of Obama, he has a fairly full head of hair it seems. All the Republican candidates do. Ricky Perry has great hair but so doesn't Huntsman, and it hasn't done Huntsman any good. Bachmans hair seems to be equal to Palins. Hillary has a full head of hair but it seems out of control more often than not. Looks and charisma, and voice, do make a difference. But you already know that Jack. I guess you just couldn't resist taking another cheap shot at Ricky. Doug. Pepperell, MA.

    September 1, 2011 at 3:09 pm |
  32. James

    Hair is very important in politics as the voting public attempts to avoid both snakes and lions. How much a particular candidate looks like one or the other is a subconscious determinate for the electorate. The Founders, knowing this, insisted on leveling the playing field with wigs. Wise men indeed to have all the men look like women.

    September 1, 2011 at 3:10 pm |
  33. Rich McKinney, Texas

    Jack I can promise you that right now a bald one eyed Kangaroo could get elected president if he had an easy solution to the economical problems facing America. The last election people voted for a community organizer running on the platform of "Hope and Change". It is now 3 years later and America has yet to see hope and they have received no change so that slogan isn't going to work next time around. Obama promised a working government when he took office. Instead of doing what he promised Obama has divided the government and driven a wedge between both parties so that nothing can be accomplished in a reasonable amount of time that will benefit anyone. That is not leadership. That is called incompetence.

    September 1, 2011 at 3:13 pm |
  34. Lori - PA

    Jack,

    Well, the Scarecrow from the "Wizard of Oz" cared more about having a brain, and that's all I want for the next President of the United States to have. Instead, all we have is a bunch of bozo Presidential nominees who haven't got a clue that the big issue for the American people is the lack of jobs.

    September 1, 2011 at 3:21 pm |
  35. Bill in New Mexico

    Precisely!

    Since when has substance had any bearing?

    Only appearance and hair matters!

    Why bother?

    September 1, 2011 at 3:23 pm |
  36. Dave, Orlando, FL

    We in this country are a superficial lot, so it is one of the most important criteria for electing our national leader. Therefore, in spite of his realistic, intelligent, level-headed ideas, Jack could never, ever get elected president.

    September 1, 2011 at 3:25 pm |
  37. Alton Bledsoe in Dallas, TX

    Hair is very important. It needs to be resilient both indoors and outdoors. While some do's look good indoors and under the spotlight, you give it a stiff breeze outside and the whole demeanor changes in an instant. I think that is the advantage of being nappy headed. But the use of sprays and gels can work if the natural look is maintained. Besides nappy headedness I think tight pony tails work, too. Probably not pigtails, though, although I might be persuaded differently on this. Need to see it to believe it.

    September 1, 2011 at 3:26 pm |
  38. Ed from Texas

    Of our 44 Presidents, five were bald, five had full beards, and five sported moustaches. Hair is only an issue for the lady candidates and Donald Trump.

    September 1, 2011 at 3:27 pm |
  39. Ken Victoria BC

    Dear Mr. Cafferty. Hair was important in Germany in the 1930's as in Heir Hitler. As for today, a wise and wonderful bald gentleman state something about grass does not grew on a well used path. i.e. his brain was well used.Mr. Donald Rump must not use his very often. This question is superficial.

    September 1, 2011 at 3:27 pm |
  40. Tom Bulger, Canandaigua

    "Moderation in all things" (Aristotle)

    Too much hair makes politicians look like phonies. I think it's the hair.

    September 1, 2011 at 3:29 pm |
  41. Larry from Georgetown, Tx

    Ask Donald Trump, oh he just talks on the F network but doesn't run for office. All talk and no show. He bought all of his TV's from another country but said we need to buy American.

    September 1, 2011 at 3:30 pm |
  42. Bizz, Quarryville Pennsylvania

    Ron Paul should start wearing a wig. In the republican party hair seems to be very important. The people who have hair seemed to be doing very well, even though they do not have any brains underneath it. Ron Paul the only one that makes any sense out of the group doesn't get the recognition he deserves by his peers or the press. Maybe you hit on something here Jack?

    September 1, 2011 at 3:37 pm |
  43. Pat in Michigan

    I never trust a man or woman whose hair doesn't move in the breeze. They value appearance over substance!

    September 1, 2011 at 3:38 pm |
  44. RickFromDetroit

    In this country hair is probably more important in politics than the issues that the candidate represents, and if you were to poll people regarding the issue the hair would win by a landslide.

    September 1, 2011 at 3:40 pm |
  45. Alex in Bremerton, WA

    Hair has been important ever since the first televised presidential debate. Height and general appearance are also increasingly important. We seem to be hard-wired to want strong virile leaders and being good looking certainly helps with the woman voters. A fat guy like Taft or a short bald guy like Martin Van Buren couldn't get elected after universal suffrage was passed.

    September 1, 2011 at 3:51 pm |
  46. Steve, Clifton, VA

    Do we need to search any further back than Ronald Regan? His Hair and Smile got him elected twice...Rick Perry has the same hair and disposition and the uninformed electorate loves a personable good hair no substance president..

    September 1, 2011 at 3:56 pm |
  47. Paul From Austin Texas

    Rick Perry can be a showman that is for sure. As for his hair is it his color or not? Only his barber knows for sure because he would never go to stylist. That wouldn't be manly at all. He is in strong support of states rights in some cases is good but in many more is bad. I think his real goal is for Texas to withdrawl from the union. Look at some of what he has said in the past. "I do not want Texas to part of the Socialist States of America". If he gets in somehow his hair will start getting lighter within the first year. Being President has much more stress than being a Governor of even one of the biggest states.

    September 1, 2011 at 3:58 pm |
  48. marybeth, massachusetts

    Jack,

    We're involved in two foreign wars (unfunded), the economy is in the toilet and being flushed down the drain, unemployment is still high, we have the widest disparity between the haves and the have-nots since the 1920's, there are no or few regulations, making it easy for corporations to ride roughshod over consumers, the economy, and the environment, we have a Republican Congress that believes the only goal worthy of their time is to do everything possible to disparage, hurt, and bring down the President, even if it means rejecting their own ideas and not doing anything at all about the economy (they have the power of the purse), and you're talking about HAIR?

    I guess it just goes to show how superficial the media and the public are. I don't care if the next President is bald or has hair long enough to rival Rapunzel, so long as whoever it is has more than half a brain in his/her head and is prepared to work to tackle the many problems facing this country.

    If people are that shallow, that they would vote for someone based upon his/her looks, then maybe what is needed is to invite actors and models to run for an office of "fake" president. They won't be required to have any brains, just beauty. Then perhaps we can focus on electing a smart person to lead the country.

    September 1, 2011 at 4:04 pm |
  49. terence

    Jack, Its doesnt matter whats on top of your head. What matters is whats in your head to run the country. The only hair i see in both houses is grey hair. Whats up with that??
    Terence , NJ

    September 1, 2011 at 4:13 pm |
  50. Overby from Melbourne

    hmmmmm....you should be asking McCain, Giulliani and Fred Thompson that question maybe???

    September 1, 2011 at 4:17 pm |
  51. Peg from NY

    Hair is very important to Republicans. Trent Lott could be the poster boy for the importance of hair in politics.

    September 1, 2011 at 4:18 pm |
  52. Ros.....Illinois

    His hairdo doesn't mean squat to me. He doesn't seem to have anything inside of the head, like a brain. That is what it takes to run our country not hair. He sounds and acts like a Redneck Hillbilly with little education. We can do better than him by keeping the President we have now.

    September 1, 2011 at 4:20 pm |
  53. Kirt, Alabama

    Yul Brynner was the King of Siam, Jack. They had about 20 kids, so his wife and Deborah Kerr didn't seem to mind his
    shiner.

    September 1, 2011 at 4:21 pm |
  54. Rob in NC

    Unfortunately Americans don't elect people on their skills and talents, we elect them based on appearances and who lies the best. In the end it doesn't matter anyway because the President of this country is a figurehead and the Congress does what they, and the lobbies that pay them off, please. Rob in NC

    September 1, 2011 at 4:21 pm |
  55. curtis in philadelphia

    Are you jealous Jack?... I am.

    September 1, 2011 at 4:21 pm |
  56. Joe

    Jack,
    Hair in politics is symbolic of what is completely wrong with our society. Everything is about IMAGE, with little about issues and substance. We live in one big world with "NO EXIT."
    Joe, Binghamton, NY

    September 1, 2011 at 4:25 pm |
  57. Mark

    In our American "looks is everything" culture it is pretty important. Sadly, the American voter doesn't seem to care one Big Woop about what lies under the hair.

    September 1, 2011 at 4:25 pm |
  58. Pete from Georgia

    I guess it's pretty darn important.
    In the case of Rod Blagojevich, the jailed former Gov. of Illinois, can you honestly name ONE other possitive attribute he possess's ???

    September 1, 2011 at 4:25 pm |
  59. Denny from Tacoma

    Regardless of how much body hair they posess, politicians still prove to be hairy experiences to their constituents. How much hair can a hare-brain support?

    September 1, 2011 at 4:31 pm |
  60. DON IN WESTPORT, MASS.

    During biblical times, as you recall, Samson's strength diminished as he lost his hair so there might be something to it.
    I guess bald is beautiful but not in politics. If you think about it a President is just another celebrity, so yes, I guess more hair would be good in this case. I just hope people don't think that hair is more important than brains though.

    September 1, 2011 at 4:33 pm |
  61. Chuck from Maryland

    With Perry, Romney and Bachmann now the leading GOP contenders it's obvious that political success and good hair go much more hand-in-hand than political success and brains. Trump had no choice but to drop out. Anyone else notice that Perry's hair gets darker by the week? Kinda creepy...

    September 1, 2011 at 4:35 pm |
  62. Paul P.

    The fact we are even asking this question, shows how shallow and gullible we all are. I hope someone gets elected President, who, upon his first day in office takes off his high-end toupee, shocking us all. It would serve us all well in the long term. Where's Donald on this matter?

    September 1, 2011 at 4:37 pm |
  63. Eric Hatch

    Jack, hair may not create brains where there are none (especially in Perry's case). But having a full head of hair suggests vigor, youth, and decisiveness. Other factors outweigh hair - probably hair is low on the importance list - but it certainly does create an impression. Otherwise, who would bother buying Rogaine?

    September 1, 2011 at 4:37 pm |
  64. Aaron

    Gray hair by the end of their term is the only reliable quality of a politician.

    September 1, 2011 at 4:37 pm |
  65. Amy

    As a nation, we have sunk to a new low. Hair as an indicator of leadership? Please, in Illinois, our recently convicted governor had a great head of hair and nothing underneath it. I long for a time where we look for leaders with substance, not appearance.

    September 1, 2011 at 4:38 pm |
  66. Kirk in Apple Valley

    If I'm not mistaken, President Eisenhower didn't have a coiffed do when he was in office. Besides, is Rick's hair real or is it Memorex?

    September 1, 2011 at 4:40 pm |
  67. Ronda (from Canastota, NY)

    How important is hair in politics? Just ask Blago.

    September 1, 2011 at 4:40 pm |
  68. Mike in Minneapolis

    That's a really good point, Jack. If Michelle Bachmann ran as his VP on the promise of $2 a gallon gas and Rick Perry promised a cure for male pattern baldness, the White House would certainly be theirs. Sadly, that's just barely a joke.

    September 1, 2011 at 4:41 pm |
  69. marzxyz

    I hate to break it to you, Jack, but you'll never get the nomination - of either party!

    September 1, 2011 at 4:42 pm |
  70. VARob

    Unfortunately, physical appearance has become far too important in politics as well as entertainment. It's a crying shame that really good, smart people aren't perceived as highly because of baldness, weight, or just because they are not pretty or handsome.

    Americans have become far too shallow overall. Just read the vitriolic postings in the CNN columns to see disgusting ad hominem attacks because of peoples' opinions.

    September 1, 2011 at 4:42 pm |
  71. Justin

    Jack,
    I'm saddened to say that in America people actually do pay attention to trivial qualities like hair. Therefore it should come as no surprise that we have people serving in our government who lack the intellect to realize the implications of defaulting on our debt, you get what you vote for.

    Justin
    Hilton Head Island, SC

    September 1, 2011 at 4:43 pm |
  72. Hank

    Guys with good hair look better are more attractive and get more votes, and lots more from women. Reagan is prime example. If he had been bald he would never have made it to the Whitehouse. Look at US Senate. How many bald heads?? Look at the Governors. Full head of hair for most of them.

    September 1, 2011 at 4:43 pm |
  73. MK Carlson

    "Hair" today...gone tomorrow. Not too much between the ears of any of 'em anyway.

    September 1, 2011 at 4:45 pm |
  74. Mike from Texas

    When it comes to Rick Perry it is not important at all until a strong gust of wind blows it off!

    September 1, 2011 at 4:46 pm |
  75. Lucy from New York

    Hair doesn't matter, but Rick Perry is not a good choice for President. He would dismantle the environmental laws, which are all important and he would use his religion in deciding if people can have free choice in their private lives. Scary.

    September 1, 2011 at 4:47 pm |
  76. Peter, Tarrytown, N.Y.

    There's a saying that grass doesn't grow on a busy street. Think about for a minute. You'll get it

    September 1, 2011 at 4:47 pm |
  77. Remo, from beautiful downtown Pflugerville Texas

    Apperance is everything Jack. I defer to the Dukakis tank helmut incident.

    September 1, 2011 at 4:48 pm |
  78. Will

    Jack: great minds think alike. WSJ ran an op-ed piece today about "looking presidential" and wondered if the people of today would choose Neville Chamberlain over Winston Churchill because Chamberlain was tall and had a full head of hair.

    September 1, 2011 at 4:50 pm |
  79. Michael Bindner, Alexandria, VA

    For a second term President, gray is good.

    September 1, 2011 at 4:51 pm |
  80. Gary - Woodhaven, Michigan

    The candidates with the nicest hair would be Perry, Bachmann, and possible candidate Palin, so how important can hair be other than if these three are the measurement of good hair versus intelligence needed to be President, then hair would be the cause of America's doom.

    September 1, 2011 at 4:51 pm |
  81. Mike S., New Orleans

    Hair is probably as important to as many voters as is religion, height, weight, ethnicity, income, style, and so many other irrational reasons voters use to put someone in charge of our country. A dumb vote counts as much as a smart one.

    September 1, 2011 at 4:52 pm |
  82. prairiegal57

    I'm really tired of selecting our politicians on their looks rather than their brains and abilities. Hair means nothing to me, nor does height, age, gender, etc. As I'm listening to the usual political drivel I am reminded that Abraham Lincoln could not be president today, nor could Franklin Roosevelt because we are obsessed with the trivial and ignore the substantive. We need a Lincoln or a Roosevelt and we need to let them do their job. Hot looking? ... that's a big risk when there's nothing but air between the ears. I'm from Sioux Falls, South Dakota, a thoroughly Republican wasteland where independent thinking is endangered.

    September 1, 2011 at 4:52 pm |
  83. John

    Apparently it's important. Should Obama start sporting a fro?

    September 1, 2011 at 4:53 pm |
  84. mary -from oklahoma

    Going by President Obamas' changed appearance since being in office–I think voters need to decide which one of the canidates hair is going to look great with a lot more grey in it.

    September 1, 2011 at 4:55 pm |
  85. Arnie in Ohio

    Their hair is the only important thing of their head. What is below the hair is useless.

    September 1, 2011 at 4:56 pm |
  86. Andrew

    Jack-

    Every politician with over-the-top hair gets indicted or ends up enjoying the company of underage male companions in airport bathrooms. Stick to the guys without helmet hair and we'd have a brighter political future.

    September 1, 2011 at 4:57 pm |
  87. LA Belle

    Hair does not mean decent or smart. In fact, I'll take a bald-headed, knowledgeable, Eisenhower anyday compared to the pea-brains that are campaigning now. Hate to clue-in the Republicans, but we need a realistic American to clean up the mess and get this country back on track. Someone that truly loves this country and it's people is what most people are counting on as president.
    The NO, NO, NO, guys are not only hurting the President, they are selfishly destroying this country and the working taxpayers. What a mistake that would be to repeat the down-fall that started twelve years ago.
    Putting a bald-headed, toothless, ugly guy in office, as long as he/she is honest, decent and willing to fight for what is good for all, might be a good choice.
    Ruby (Louisiana)

    September 1, 2011 at 4:57 pm |
  88. RGZyne

    Just like in the Bible, Samson's hair is representative of strength, virility, and connection to the divine. Cut it off and they all suffer from impotence. But come to think of it, most of our federal politicians with hair or not are impotent in more ways than one. Rick from Baltimore.

    September 1, 2011 at 4:59 pm |
  89. Peter, Tarrytown, N.Y.

    There's a saying that grass doesn't grow on a busy street. From the height of you forehead your's is busy indeed.

    As long as it looks good it doesn't have to run good.

    September 1, 2011 at 4:59 pm |
  90. dale

    With the GOP, hair is as important as religion and far more important than coherent policy. Again they're catering to the vanity products corporations now.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:00 pm |
  91. Dawn

    I have long contended that guys with great hair get farther in politics...take a look at most current politicians – many have great hair and oddly enough many also have the same hair cut! John McCain didn't every really stand a chance did he?

    September 1, 2011 at 5:00 pm |
  92. Melissa Ringel

    Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I personally find his haircut odd. It is a haircut which is often seen on a man who might wear too much cologne or jewelry, smile too much, or stand too close. Maybe the fact that he's a Republican is clouding my judgement...

    September 1, 2011 at 5:01 pm |
  93. dave in nashville

    Hair Jack? Come on man, you are kidding right? Remove the makeup from the female contenders and tell me it doesn't hide ineptness underneath....what a dumb question.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:03 pm |
  94. Jake

    LBJ, Gerlad Ford and Richard Nixon didn't have good hair. Neither did George H. W. Bush. This story is pretty much bull

    September 1, 2011 at 5:03 pm |
  95. Fuzzbee Morse from Los Angeles

    It's pretty undeniable that Americans want neither a bald nor fat person in the White House, for better or worse. In Perry's case, to paraphrase Texans, it's all hair and no cattle. What lurks under those prodigious follicles? Just about nothin'. The man has an abundance of dead cells, most of them in his brain.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:04 pm |
  96. Walter

    As much as people disdain stereotypes, I honestly believe people think there is something "off" with men who are bald. Other than Gerald Ford, there has not been a bald (or the politically correct term "balding") president in my lifetime.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:04 pm |
  97. George

    Perhaps it wasn't Ford's vice presidency under Nixon that prevented his election, but rather that he showed more scalp than Carter.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:05 pm |
  98. Dion

    It was a great musical stage show that helped changed the American landscape.

    Otherwise, it is irrelevant even if none of the current Republicans can say, "I like Ike."

    September 1, 2011 at 5:06 pm |
  99. John Colorado Springs

    Superficially it counts a great deal, unfortunately, it is what is under that hair that counts. Our last President did not have much under the hair, our current one has more there, but doesn't use it.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:08 pm |
  100. Jared from wisconsin

    Hair isn't important in how a president runs a country. But it is important in if they get elected. Many times the American people want someone who is young looking, and looks like they won't keel over once they get into office. I would have to say this goes back to when debates were held on television for the first time. People chose JFK over Nixon because he was younger looking and probably because of his hair. So......hair to get elected, yes......hair to run a country....not needed.....using Rogaine to get your hair back....priceless.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:08 pm |
  101. Tom Williams of Desert Hot Springs, CA

    Like most windbags from Texas, under the hair "Ricky" has nothing but an empty jug.

    TW

    September 1, 2011 at 5:08 pm |
  102. Renee Peoria,Ill

    Seriously, Jack. Hair? What, slow day in the newsroom? I'm not voting for anyone based on their hair. Though I'm sure it's important criteria for Perry supporters, they're not exactly a brainy group.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:10 pm |
  103. S Hawkins

    Hopefully what is beneath the hair by way of brains and character is more important. These days we need subtance not show.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:10 pm |
  104. Kevin in Knoxville

    A beautiful mane of hair is extremely important in today's politics... the Farah Fawcette effect if you will. Maybe if our politicians wound spend as much time conditioning and grooming our government as they do their own hair then maybe we would not have a Senate and Congress with split ends!

    September 1, 2011 at 5:10 pm |
  105. bruce of DE

    Hair is unimportant.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:10 pm |
  106. PK California

    I'm sure hair can sway a lot of voters. But if Perry really wants the office, he'd better stock up on dye because the presidency is known for turning hair white!

    September 1, 2011 at 5:11 pm |
  107. Beverly - NYC

    I don't care about hair, I care about the brain beneath it. Dunces have great hair too, just ask Sarah Palin.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:12 pm |
  108. Victor

    If the American people really elect people on the basis of their hair...then they deserve the idiots they get.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:12 pm |
  109. Michael Arnott

    It's not, it shouldn't be and this question is ridiculous. When was the last time a red-head sat in The Oval Office?

    September 1, 2011 at 5:13 pm |
  110. Gigi Oregon

    My husband won best hair at our "Class of '55" reunion, nobody and I mean nobody would vote for him as President. These pretty boys are nice to look at but when I need a job...

    September 1, 2011 at 5:13 pm |
  111. Jim Tomlinsen

    Thank you Jack for sticking to hair. Picking on hair is much better than religion. Let's do one on middle names. Truman with his S (no period). Nixon with Millhouse. Do middle names matter? Go for it.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:14 pm |
  112. Susan Beatty

    There is an old saying :"grass doesn't grow on busy streets", meaning of course the more intelligent the less hair or the more you worry the less hair. None of recent Presidents seem to worry about us very much. Mid crisis George W. Bush took to the golf course. Mid economic crisis Barrack Obama goes on a vacation. So if Perry gets elected he will fit in. Even if they are attacking us he wno't worry so he can keep his hair..

    September 1, 2011 at 5:16 pm |
  113. Pamela

    Jack – It's probably important to Perry because that is about all he's got. I wouldn't be at all suprised if he has a wig – so many of them do.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:17 pm |
  114. jillmarie

    I worked for Hair Club for Men and that was actually a fact I learned during my training- there hasn't been a bald president since the age of television! I'm not sure if it's a coincidence or not, but men with hair IMO have a better appearance. Not a dig to bald men at all, there certainly are a lot of attractive ones, I just like hair better, personally.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:18 pm |
  115. John Cordasco

    That's part of the problem today, Jack. Too many people being concerned about a candidate's hair! Shouldn't where they stand on an issue be a bigger priority?

    September 1, 2011 at 5:19 pm |
  116. Ken in NC

    If their lips of a politician are moving the hair is of no importance.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:19 pm |
  117. Leonore H. Dvorkin

    Now that many balding men of all ages are wearing their hair clipped very short or even shaved off, I predict that having a full head of hair will become less important in future years. I sure hope so, as nothing is sillier than caring if the president has a lot of hair or not. It's what's inside the skull that matters. And for the record: I think that Perry's hair looks fake. It looks dyed to me. Yuck! I would never vote for such a right-wing loon, anyway. Obama/Biden 2012. (And yes, they WILL win.)

    September 1, 2011 at 5:20 pm |
  118. Brian

    Didn't work for Rod Blagojevich.

    From Illinois.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  119. Ralph

    It's what's under the hair that makes a difference. Perry would make a great televangelist.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  120. Adam_in_Mass

    How important is hair? I thought that height was the proven factor in winning a presidency. And I don't mean height of hair, I mean tallness in stature. Either way, I'd vote a short, bald man with bad skin if he had the best plan to get the economy back on track.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:25 pm |
  121. Larry, Boston, Ma

    You're losing it Jack. After Ike, perenial bad hair-day presidents include Johnson, Nixon, Carter, and Bush I. You may disagree, but any disagreement from you woukd presumably be due to the state of your own pate. No insult meant. Good Hair theory would also have predicted a Dukakis and Kerry wins. And Romney and Edwards lost, remember?

    September 1, 2011 at 5:28 pm |
  122. Derek Weinman

    If good hair is what we worry about when we vote for President & things like literacy and common sense don't matter, we get what we deserve.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:29 pm |
  123. Ed Sr

    I guess...........JFK was noted for his boyish hair................Reagan CLAIMS never to have dyed his hair..........and if hair importance is the case we have some balding politicians who are in deep trouble. You can include our friend from NYC.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:31 pm |
  124. Dan in Aluququerque

    Probably helpful in Perry's case, because it might insulate some of his right -wing, extreme thoughts from being exposed to the American people too soon.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:31 pm |
  125. AB

    What a silly and irrelevant question!! Rick Perry's hair style and color has nothing to do with his fitness for the US presidency any more than John Edward's $400 haircut, color and style. Edwards has great hair for all his money and it did absolutely notthing for his campaign for the Presidency. What matters is brains and political ability. The ability to formulate sound and practical public policies, to solve problems and to govern responsibly. Neither Perry nor Edwards possess the above attributes for POTUS.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:34 pm |
  126. Gary H. Boyd

    I can't recall a bald President although Eisenhower came close. A "Butch" haircut - never. Remember Clinton getting a trim in an airplane on the LA airport runway or John Edwards' $400 cut. In politics having nice hair is as important as not being ugly. After the movie "Gone With the Wind" Clark Gable could have probably beat out Roosevelt for President.
    Only problem being, pretty people with nice looking hair are usually shallow, ego oriented losers. Give me a bald, ugly candidate and he or she has got my vote. (Will be sorry for the "she").

    Gary in Scottsdale, Arizona

    September 1, 2011 at 5:34 pm |
  127. Richard, Santa Fe

    If we are picking our leaders based on their hair, it is no wonder why this nation is in some much trouble.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:35 pm |
  128. beevee

    Jack, if we elect a country's president base on hair on his head not on brains inside his head we are screwed. Perry won't make a good president in my opinion. I think it is a stupid question to ask in the first place.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:36 pm |
  129. Mike H

    Fayetteville, AR

    If it is important to us in any way, then shame on us! Many look at the current state of Washington politics in despair, but this must be of little surprise when we allow ourselves to be so easily distracted by such things as a politicians facade!

    September 1, 2011 at 5:38 pm |
  130. DNS - Austin, TX

    Rick, Gov.Good Hair, probably pays $700 for his hair cuts. While he cuts the Texas budget by laying off thousands of teachers.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:38 pm |
  131. Dixie AZ

    Jack, this is really a tough one. I was going along humming to myself and thinking of the problems of the middle east, our own stagnant economy, those hurt by Irene, etc., and you pop up with this hairy question. You of all people should know that the lack of of dome hair doesn't retard talent, intelligence or ambition. Anyone who votes exclusively for pretty or cute deserves what they get.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:38 pm |
  132. Ron WPAFB

    Hair, really Jack. I'd vote for you!

    September 1, 2011 at 5:39 pm |
  133. Michael in Albuquerque, NM

    I guess this means that your aspirations to be president are over, Jack. But, baldness is the consequence of using your head. To bad that there is no evidence of that in the current group of presidential candidates.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:40 pm |
  134. Paul Kent

    In accord withn Perry...Let us pray: Hair today. Gone tomorrow.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:43 pm |
  135. Lone

    I suppose Doc Brown in Back to the Future said it best, "No wonder your president has to be an actor, he's gotta look good on television."

    Why not hair, we've essentially lost all focus and professionalism in the last few years so it might as well come down to nonsense.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:43 pm |
  136. Shan

    As a (near) future baldy, I resent these good looking men with great heads of hair who get to be president. Even in my own organization, I am just stuck at VP level!

    September 1, 2011 at 5:44 pm |
  137. Ikefan1

    Eisenhower, the bald, was also the last good Republican President we've had. You've forgotten about Lyndon Johnson, the last bald Democrat President. Since Perry is a Christian and takes great pride in his hair, I wonder if he and his zealous supporters would be impressed with Jesus' hair. If depictions of Jesus are correct, he looked like a hippie and we know he preached love and peace... definitely would not have gotten the Bible belt vote if he were alive today. Makes you wonder what Christian means.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:45 pm |
  138. Nancy, Tennessee

    Of all the Presidents, the best hair award goes to President John F. Kennedy. If you ask the people over 60 years old who was the greatest President, many will tell you JFK. So the better the hair, the better the President. This country could use another great haired President. So why isn't Sean Hannity running?

    September 1, 2011 at 5:47 pm |
  139. Burbank from CA

    It does when the shallow American Idol crowd decides to vote. We would be better off if they decided to stay home and crack another beer. Idiots in the voting booths produce idiots in office.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:50 pm |
  140. Pam A

    Would rather have a president with a well rounded and developed brain, then well developed hair.....

    September 1, 2011 at 5:50 pm |
  141. Joseph Leff

    Let's face it, Jack. Running for, and being, President of the United States is a hair-raising experience.

    Joe in Delray Beach, Florida

    September 1, 2011 at 5:52 pm |
  142. Janice Mitchell-Grand Blanc, MI

    I disagree with your assessment of Rick Perry's hair (the guy's got great hair). That not quite a side or center part makes his hair look like a toupee. It also looks like he spends a lot of time maintaining it which for a man always comes across as vain and narcissistic. He reminds me of a slimy televangelist and frankly he gives me the creeps.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:59 pm |
  143. Pete

    Two words: John Kennedy....good hair is extremely important.

    September 1, 2011 at 5:59 pm |
  144. JR Washington, DC

    Unfortunately Jack, looks seem to trump substance in electing our political figures lately. Yet, for some reason we end up wondering why we have political figures as informed about this countrys problems as 2007's Ms. Teen South Carolina. Maybe it is time to re-evaluate our priorities.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:01 pm |
  145. victor

    This is why he is known as Governor Goodhair in Texas

    September 1, 2011 at 6:02 pm |
  146. Scarlett, TX

    I would say hair is important but so is overall appearance. It's no coincidence that the two GOP "frontrunners" are the 2 most attractive ones. If brains came first, then Ron Paul would be the frontrunner.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:02 pm |
  147. abby

    Hair? Who cares about hair? How about the brains underneath that hair (or absence thereof)? How about ethics, integrity, honesty, honor - oops - those are oxymorons in politics....

    September 1, 2011 at 6:02 pm |
  148. Hank Corbett

    I don't trust anybody with good hair. Don't worry, Jack, you don't have anything to worry about.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:03 pm |
  149. Gary - Woodhaven, Michigan

    Perry, Bachmann, and Palin all have gorgeous hair, and always will as I believe their hair reserve fills the empty void in their skulls. So is good hair and a hair reserve a prerequisite to being a Republican politician, I would have to say yes.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:04 pm |
  150. Taylor

    When applying for a job the better looking you are the more likely it is you'll be hired, regardless of skill or knowledge. Why should it be any different in politics?

    September 1, 2011 at 6:04 pm |
  151. Coriandre Moore

    Hair, is important to those who's opinion of someone is based off superficial indicators.
    The honest simple truth is. If you don't know what you think, you guess based off what you feel.
    Appearance is everything, if you know nothing else.
    Want an example. You wake up in a strange room, it's dark, and someone you don't recognize walks in. You don't even have to see this person, to be concerned if not outright scared.

    Good looks, must mean you are otherwise "good". Unless you know better for some other reason.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:05 pm |
  152. JT-Arkansas

    Of the 94 freshman members of the House of Representatives 11 are women (who rarely "go bald") leaving 83 men. Of those 83 fifteen are completely bald or very nearly so and several more–about a dozen by my count–are experience hair loss in various stages of progression. When it comes to races decided at the congressional district level where well-heeled partisans rule, policy and politics decides the outcome. At the national level, where fair-weather voters numerically dominate, Americans have frequently chosen beauty over brains.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:06 pm |
  153. Gerry in Hawaii

    I personally don't care if they are bald just as long as they do what they promise to when they get the White House.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:06 pm |
  154. Drew

    Hair is important in politics, hell, everything these days is about looks.

    Why do you think Obama is embracing grayness, it makes him look experienced, yet he dyed his hair in 2008 to look young to attract the young voters.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:07 pm |
  155. Marc B

    If the politician is Samson, very important, If the politician is competing in modeling hair may have an appeal, but if we want a politician who is smart, who will not act like a child, who will put the country ahead of his personal interests and seat, then hair has absolutely no value, what's under that space is.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:09 pm |
  156. charlie

    Not just hair, but height and weight. Who has time to read all the issues? Who reads? Judging candidates by the way they look is much faster and easier. Most Americans just wait until its time to vote and go for the candidate that looks "presidential", i.e. best looking.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:10 pm |
  157. Matt

    Jack,

    Hair is important for scalp protection from UV rays. Smarts, honesty, integrity, and the drive to do whats right for everyone, not just certain groups, is what is important in politics. I hope beyond hope that the American people finally get this and stop falling for gimmicks. The GOP field is full of people who know how to talk the talk, but they can't walk the walk.

    -Matt, San Diego, CA

    September 1, 2011 at 6:13 pm |
  158. Daniel Ontario

    Jack

    My father always told me- Kid what is truly important in life is not to be good at what you do but to look good. He went bankcrupt twice.....real american values.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:17 pm |
  159. Matt Kennedy

    Gray Hair? Does it matter? Where's the beef? That's my question. Show me substance, not fluff.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:18 pm |
  160. Clay F.

    Politics Hair = Donald Trump

    September 1, 2011 at 6:19 pm |
  161. Adnan From Connecticut

    Hair??? I couldn't care less if the next president is bald. But apparently some people judge a book by its cover. I just want someone with common sense.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:20 pm |
  162. Steve E.

    Jack, as far as I'm concerned, Ali Valshi can run for President and his head wouldn't make a difference for me. Take care Jack.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:20 pm |
  163. Joe from CT

    Hair doesn't mean anything to me, Jack. If you run for the presidency, I promise to vote for you. But only if you have Blitzer as your running mate.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:20 pm |
  164. Philo

    I would like to see a bald Sarah Palin in the White House. . . as a guest.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:20 pm |
  165. Dustin Klein

    Does hair matter? No. But for perry, it's more so the lack of brains under the hair.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:20 pm |
  166. Jim the Electrician

    as they say, if you dont have a hair on your (fanny), the presidency is PROBABLY not the job you should be seeking.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  167. ted woestendiek

    fact check: Cafferty just said Eisenhower was the last bald occupant of the white house. Remember Gerald Ford???

    September 1, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  168. Andrey, Albany

    Hair is by far the least and should always be least important factor in deciding who will be a good president. What people should realize is that the gray matter under the hair is more important than anything else!!!! On scale of 1-10 hair is negative 10.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  169. ron in los angeles

    Jack, Eisenhower was not the last President with his dome showing. What about Gerald Ford?

    September 1, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  170. Cliff Parrish

    The old adage Grass doesn't grow on busy streets says it all

    September 1, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  171. Nick D. Neighbour

    You're LOSING it Cafferty! And I DON'T mean HAIR!!
    Nick. N.
    Pasadena.
    CA.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  172. anthony

    Let me know when a person without the good stuff (hair) runs for election, and I'll let you know!!

    September 1, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  173. Dana

    As I see it this GOP field is a bunch of hair brains.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  174. Matt

    It's not just the hair, Jack – it's overall physical appearance. The voters in this country are very superficial, after all. It's my own belief that presidential campaigns and the history of this country, and the world changed completely when Nixon's makeup ran on national TV.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  175. John In Bellevue, NE

    Dear Jack,

    I noticed that all of our elected leaders had full heads of hair long ago. I often wondered, are there NO qualified, bald people out there? I think it just goes to show how fouled up our country is, when a full head of hair, is now a requirement, for running our nation.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  176. Liz H. Baltimore

    Are you kidding me , Jack? Do you remember the words? Sing it with me..."Give me a head with hair, long beautiful hair. Shining, gleaming, streaming, flaxen, waxen...!

    It's all about the hair, Jack. It's all about the hair.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  177. Kerry

    This one answers itself, Jack. Where do you think all these hair brain ideas come from?

    September 1, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  178. Dustin Klein

    Does hair matter? No. But for Perry, what matters is the lack of brains under the hair.

    Dustin- St. Louis, Missouri.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  179. Randall in Houston

    I don't believe that hair itself gives political candidates a leg up. The larger point is the fact that research has proven consistently that those who are rated more attractive are more likely to land a job and it is no different for politicians. The more attractive candidate is more likely going to win the race.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  180. Ron

    Good hair doesn't mean anything, especially with this guy.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  181. Jim Beverley

    Very important, particularly when it nicely covers a brainless idiot politician.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  182. LARRY E BLEY

    Jack,
    Maybe it is time to go "bald" in the White House. My father was bald and he always said, "You can't have hair and brains too". Maybe he knew something that most politicians do not!

    September 1, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  183. Patrick

    If a candidate could fix this economy to the point that an honors college graduate such as myself could actually find gainful employment, he could have a mohawk for all I care.

    From New Jersey

    September 1, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  184. Bob, in Florida

    Jack: Here is the answer....has a hair ever solved a math problem? has a hair ever solved an economics problem? has a hair ever solved a hunger problem? has a hair ever participated in a discussion? has a hair ever solved a religious problem? has a hair ever solved a global problem? has a hair ever solved an energy problem?

    Hair can only be associated with ego and vanity......PERIOD!

    September 1, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  185. andy Fairfax, VA

    Jack, It should be obvious but it is not the hair. It's a smidgen below the hair. It's called the brain. The president has a brain. The majority of Republicans certainly do NOT!

    September 1, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  186. David P Vernon

    Tucson, AZ – Appearances have been as important as substance in Presidential elections since the Electoral College itself became elected instead of appointed. Warren Harding, Franklin Roosevelt, John Kennedy and Ronald Reagan all got elected essentially on their looks. Eisenhower's opponent, Adlai Stevenson, looked even more bald than Ike looked. If Sarah Palin had the looks of Golda Meir, she would probably not be of any interest as a candidate today. In fact, if you are good-looking enough, you can get elected repeatedly while having the brains of a canary, i.e., Michele Bachmann. Of course hair makes a difference – but so do 30 second sound bites and credible attack ads.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  187. Jan

    Hmm hair vs. brains. Jack Cafferty for president.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  188. jerry Hart

    I dont care if my president has good hair
    i just want him to have balls

    September 1, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  189. Claudia, Houston, Tx

    I prefer bald men like James Carville, he's sexy and he's smart.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  190. Vickie

    I don't care if Rick Perry has great Jim Morrison hair, I wouldn't vote for him under any circumstance.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  191. Erwin from El Paso, TX

    That is retarded. What is news coming to? Who cares how good their hair is. What does their hair have anything to do with fixing the economy or anything political for that matter? Let's stop the retarded questions and focus on what's important. Man...these presidential candidates are the best we got,..good hair and charm, huh? Well, another 4 years of retarded politics it is, then.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
  192. Kent Fitzsimmons

    Find the next Telly Savalas, put him on the ballot, and i think he could get the GOP nomination. You aren't gonna win against Kojak. Lol

    September 1, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
  193. Carla Land

    Jack I think you've hit upon something here, only bald canidates for President! I'd give my eye teeth to have a bald intelligent honest man like Eisenhower anyday, than full hair buffons like Rick Perry! I'd vote for James Carville today!

    September 1, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
  194. Chuck

    Gee, I think you're on to something, Jack. Someone like Eisenhower might be just what we need right now. Do we have any bald retired 5 star generals out there, ready to bring back the 1950s?

    September 1, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
  195. kathy from peoria az

    How important is his hair? Maybe if he was running a beauty shop which I'm not sure he would be good at because you need some kind of brains to even do that. Could we stop asking such silly questions Jack and ask something like "When will the Republicans grow up and stop acting like spoiled children?" I would like to turn everyone of them over my knee and give them a good spanking.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
  196. James Alton Farmer II

    While we are generally thrust into situations where appearance out weighs mental prowess? I am reminded of an old adage used when referring to balding men! "GRASS NEVER GROWS ON A BUSY STREET!" In the case of Eisenhower, truly a busy street there! When will Quality over rule Quantity? Your guess as good as mine! A Libertarian for OBAMA! jaf2

    September 1, 2011 at 6:27 pm |
  197. Bill Boyan of naples, Florida

    You are more right than you realize. Dwight Eisenhower may not have had much hair, but he had a lot more than his two time opponent, Adlai E. Stevenson.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:27 pm |
  198. Don O'Toole

    The hair which shows how deep and thoughtful we are.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:27 pm |
  199. Gregg, San Diego

    Jack,; Seems like another case of "Hair today, Conned tommorrow"! If what's beneath is merely a hair support system, then woe is us! What if one of them has a " bad hair day "? Global Meltdown or just a " fluff and dry "?

    September 1, 2011 at 6:27 pm |
  200. Ken in NC

    What's between a candidates ears no longer matters since there's no matter there so I guess it's what's up top that matters.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:27 pm |
  201. Austin from New Hampshire

    It is as important as their shoes! Shiny shoes (like shiny heads) are associated with high priced lawyers and bankers while scuffed up shoes are more associated with the working man. The right amount of hair must not lean to much toward one or the other. That's why we have presidents that happen to be balding during their presidency.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:27 pm |
  202. Ralph Nelson

    How many bald presidents have we had? Maybe that's the problem? Vote bald!

    September 1, 2011 at 6:28 pm |
  203. Geminga Stevens

    If a candidates hair is indeed a factor in the voting box, with our economy tanking and Congress collectively staring at their respective navels, then that would be a new high in the dumming down of the America.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:29 pm |
  204. Shaun Wisconsin

    I should have be in politics, that might have saved my very bald head. If they all have great hair we should have a have a Bald-O-Meter. Every time the polls get to a certain level, they say dumb things or don't listen to the people that put them there they will find a pile in there sinks. Most of them would be as bald as I am by now.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:30 pm |
  205. ted wa.

    From what I've seen from our elected leaders their brains have been used as fertilizer for their hair

    September 1, 2011 at 6:30 pm |
  206. Jane DeMichele

    Come on Jack. Down through history the men with the longest, thickest hair were usually the smarmiest sleezebags. I will take a nice, humble bald man any day when it comes to trust issues. The long hair usually equals big ego and big jerk. Same goes for men with hair pieces. Look at Trump. Look at Strauss-Kahn. Look at Liberace! Big hair? Yucko!!

    September 1, 2011 at 6:31 pm |
  207. SONNY

    Jack,

    My dad was a pretty smart guy but was bald and he always said “Bains and hair don’t mix". Go figure could that be the answer?

    Sonny

    September 1, 2011 at 6:31 pm |
  208. paul

    Bottom line is an election is a popularity contest, we all know the talking points and they don't vary much from candidate to candidate within a party. So all things being equal Ken and Barbie will win the election as long as they can remember their lines. A short fat bald man would have to be a charismatic genius.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:33 pm |
  209. A. Wagner

    I don't think hair has anything to do about running for the White House. But it does seem to think that the more the hair dye the more the liar they are. Haven't you heard the old saying "Grass doesn't grow on a beaten path." I think James Carville should run on the Indpendent ticket. He would win, and disprove this theory. Andy, Jackson, TN.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:33 pm |
  210. CAMuller

    Just ask John F. Kennedy

    September 1, 2011 at 6:35 pm |
  211. Alyssa

    Hair? Isn't there any more important news topic to report on??

    September 1, 2011 at 6:35 pm |
  212. Johnny Yates

    As mentioned in an earlier post, we see rampant "toupees, hair plugs, comb-overs, helmet heads" and may I include, very obvious usage of hair coloring by many male members of Congress. Hell, these guys are more vain than the ladies in the senior choir at church! Anytime I watch C-SPAN I am truly amazed and amused at the sight of these prima donnas. They obviously think "hair" is very important in politics.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:36 pm |
  213. Greg in Cincinnati

    Simple mathematics. There are more women voters than men. Women will first pick the man that has the best looks before a man that's not so good looking. Hair, even though doesn't make a better or stronger man, makes an ALLUSION of a man that is viril and strong. Women vote for a man that is stronger, or looks stronger, than a man that doesn't have the looks of a stronger man. They do this when they look for a husband. They want a man to be able to take care of them and their family.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:36 pm |
  214. Randy Richards

    Being the Jedi hairdresser from Dallas that I am, I will offer my expert analysis. It comes down to our basic, primate instincts. Hair either represents beauty, in regards to women, and strength with men. (See Sampson and Lady Godiva) Like I tell my clients, hair is the most important thing you wear. So to answer you question, if you look good baby, things are good.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:36 pm |
  215. Andy, Covington

    I guess that all depends. On one hand, you have President Obama, who apparently doesn't have any hair on his posterior when it comes to dealing with Congress. On the other hand, you have Michele Bachmann, who continually proves that she's dumber than a sack of hair.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:36 pm |
  216. Diane

    Of course the fact that Perry is tall and has great hair will help him win the Pube primary. It has always been so for the last 40 or so years. But last that I heard, even Karl Rove is afraid of Perry running, in case he should win. Horrors if the the rest of the electorate should wake up and not buy his matinee looks and white skin. Yes, I'm a Democrat. And BTW, that nickname was given to the Governor by the late, great Molly Ivans. Columnist for the the Ft. Worth newspaper and available online. She was a great and funny writer and sadly missed.

    Diane in Dogpatch

    September 1, 2011 at 6:37 pm |
  217. Cookie Romero-Kirvan

    Jack This is a no-brainer. Only his hairdresser knows for sure....
    Cookie Romero-Kirvan
    Palm Coast FL

    September 1, 2011 at 6:38 pm |
  218. Sean Phila Pa

    Jack:
    It is not the hair on their head but the brain that matters i.e. it did not matter to G W Bush as pres he put this country in economic hock and the current pres with good hair and the brain that match cant get the Tea Party hostage takers of the Republican Party to get things right ( pun intented) to get this country back on track if their life depended on it: rather see the U.S. fail than allow the 1st African American pres and the country to succed, hair doesn't matter its a pres who has the guts to stand up to the Tea Party Wackos, pres Obama brush your hair and brush the Tea Party Wackos out of office in the up coming election, please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    September 1, 2011 at 6:39 pm |
  219. Donna

    ya know, we all talk about good hair & bad hair
    no matter your looks, i'm a believer of good hair
    i spend at least 150.00 for good hair & it does wonderfull things for my frame of miind
    so thumbs up to good hair

    Donna D
    New Castle, DE

    September 1, 2011 at 6:40 pm |
  220. Stephen Handley

    Hair on a president is not as important as height. As you mentioned Jack, a bald candidate can be elected (Eisenhower) or even Mr. Trump is he wasn't such a wack job. Who knows if we'll ever see say, a short. Jew. I'm 5' 4" and wouldn't stand a chance.
    Stephen Handley
    Bristol, VT

    September 1, 2011 at 6:41 pm |
  221. Di

    Jack, if hair were important in politics, we would've voted in Fabio years ago.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:43 pm |
  222. Carlos Sepulveda

    Hair is absolutely not necessary for politics or TV. If you don't have enough, just wear a wig like so many of the anchors on FoxNews, male and female.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:46 pm |
  223. Joe Scottsdale, AZ

    Unfortunately hair is important. Looks have become more important than the message the candidate is sending. This says a great deal about our American society. We've become more interested in the looks of the candidate than what they actually say and believe in. If people would actually listen to some of these polititions talking points most of them wouldn't be in the race.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:47 pm |
  224. flobina

    Sorry, I don't think it's such great hair. It looks like a wig.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:48 pm |
  225. MattSky.com

    This is an intriguing point because it has been a while since we've had a bald president. That being said, I don't think it's out of the question, Giuliani while he ultimately lost miserably in the primaries was really politically quite popular in polling until it became apparent he was too liberal for most republicans. Also John McCain came close, and I think probably had a real shot of winning had he not proven his lack of executive decision making skills by selecting Palin as his VP.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:50 pm |
  226. connecticut

    our eleventh president james knox polk isn't talked about too much. his looks and receding head of hair didn't matter to anyone. he worked harder and accomplished more in four years than any president i can think of in that amount of time. he died in his 50"s months after not seeking a second term. it is because we are allowed access to what a candidate looks like from television etc. that voters might not think clearly.would abraham lincoln stand as much of a chance at being elected?? think back at his accomplishments!!!

    September 1, 2011 at 6:50 pm |
  227. Justin is tired of the teapublicans.

    So his hair qualifies him to be president? cmon people this guy is disgusting.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:50 pm |
  228. Calvin Klein

    What foes that say for Palin? Bachmann?? Maybe we coul use a bald president. One less thing he can hide under.
    The hair didn't do Gov Blogo any favors

    September 1, 2011 at 6:52 pm |
  229. CSnord

    In business, good marketing of bad engineering beats bad marketing of good engineering every time. If that were not true, then companies like Microsoft and IBM would never have made it. I don't see any reason it would be any different in politics.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:53 pm |
  230. Jeantte, Spearfish SD

    Politicians and revival preachers, gotta have the hair! And since he kind of both...well, he's got it. Just hope we don't!

    September 1, 2011 at 6:53 pm |
  231. Doug

    Bald men are disadvantaged in every arena that involves image. How many bald musicians make it big? How about bald actors? The only ones I can name are the ones who went bald as they aged and somehow managed to hang onto their fame. But there are few of them. I'd hate to be a young musician with big dreams who never gets the recognition he deserves simply because he doesn't have hair.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:56 pm |
  232. frank Schvuntz

    Let me just say that if President Obama had looked like Dick Cheney, it would be President Hillary Clinton calling the shots now.

    September 1, 2011 at 6:58 pm |