The Washington Post put the Vanderburgh County Sheriff on the front page (PDF of WaPo) today, exhibit A in a whole field of Democratic candidates with a "high hotness quotient."
Attractive politicians have an edge over not-so-attractive ones. The phenomenon is resonating especially this year. By a combination of luck and design, Democrats seem to be fielding an uncommonly high number of uncommonly good-looking candidates.
The beauty gap between the parties, some on Capitol Hill muse, could even be a factor in who controls Congress after Election Day.
Democratic operatives do not publicly say that they went out of their way this year to recruit candidates with a high hotness quotient. Privately, however, they acknowledge that, as they focused on finding the most dynamic politicians to challenge vulnerable Republicans, it did not escape their notice that some of the most attractive prospects were indeed often quite attractive.
There is a certain logic to the trend. Back in 1994, when Republicans seized power in Congress from Democrats, the GOP had a number of fresh-faced challengers who knocked off incumbents who had grown worse for wear after years of committee hearings and fundraising receptions.
This year, it is the Democrats who have several ripe opportunities to unseat Republicans, some of whom have grown gray and portly during their years in power.
...
The list is decidedly unscientific, but it includes several whose names come up often on Capitol Hill for reasons other than their policy platforms. Among those on it, in addition to Arcuri, are Brad Ellsworth, a swaggering Indiana sheriff.
...
The crop of eye-pleasing pols has party operatives calculating the politics of beauty. "There's a fine line, and you can't cross it," said Rep. Rahm Emanuel, chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. Voters don't like men who look like pretty boys or women who resemble bimbos. "If you're too good-looking, people won't take you seriously," Emanuel said.
Carl Forti, spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee, agreed that attractive candidates often have an early advantage. But he said voters' decisions in the polling booth are rarely skin-deep, especially in a closely contested race.
"When each side is spending four or five million, people know the records, and it doesn't have the same impact," he said. He noted that Shuler's popularity has declined in recent weeks following reports that his real estate firm was late in paying taxes. "That's gone back to being a close race."
