America’s fascination with Presidents’ height revealed – and how 5ft 2in Kamala would be shortest ever

A Kamala Harris presidency would be historic, but not for the reason you think.

The vice president’s late entry into the 2024 presidential race has increased the chances that America will have its shortest leader ever.

At 5 feet 10 inches, Harris is the shortest president since the 6-foot-3 George Washington took office in 1789 (though Harris insists she is about 5 feet 3 inches tall).

Statistics show that the status of candidates plays an important role in choosing the next president.

Two-thirds of the US presidential candidates who won the most votes were taller than their rivals. The average height of US presidents is about 1.80 metres.

Experts have stated that our animal instincts play a role in choosing a leader, similar to the animal kingdom where the largest males usually take the lead because they are better at beating their rivals.

‘The argument I’ve made is that people have that preference because in the evolutionary environment, people who had allies who were physically formidable were more likely to be able to acquire and protect vital resources – [like] food, shelter and partners – [who] would help them fight for resources,’ Dr. Gregg Murray, a political science professor at Augusta University, told DailyMail.com.

In 2011, Dr. Murray conducted a study in which 467 American and international students were asked to draw a picture of an average citizen and a national leader side by side.

The study found that more than half of the participants drew the leader longer than the citizen.

This is reflected in most US presidential elections. In total, nearly six in ten (58 percent) of successful candidates who won the Electoral College were taller than their opponents.

But if you look at who got the most votes overall, also known as the ‘popular vote’, two-thirds of the winning candidates (67 percent) were taller than their opponents.

For example, in the 1828 election, John Quincy Adams, who was 5 feet 7 inches tall, won the presidential election, even though Andrew Jackson (6 feet 1 inch) won the most votes.

Previous presidents such as Abraham Lincoln (6 ft 3 in), who was much taller than his rival Stephen Douglas (5 ft 6 in), won both the popular and electoral votes in 1960.

Franklin D. Roosevelt (6 ft 1 in) was the only president to serve more than two terms, defeating four other candidates, only one of whom (Wendell Willkie) was an inch taller than he was.

James Madison, the fourth president of the United States, was the shortest person to hold the office. He was 5 feet 4 inches tall, but he is not known for his height, but as the “Father of the Constitution” and as the author of the Federalist Papers.

Meanwhile, statistics show that U.S. presidents are growing taller on average. Murray said this could be because taller people are more likely to run for office and people are growing taller in general.

But Gert Stulp, a researcher at the University of Groningen, told DailyMail.com that he has three other theories about why tall candidates do well in America.

‘Because a favorable childhood environment leads to favorable outcomes in later life – such as physical health and cognitive abilities – and because favorable environments lead to greater height, there is a (small!) correlation between height and these favorable traits.

‘Most political candidates probably had very fortunate childhoods, so I’m not sure this explanation will be very helpful.

‘Two – taller individuals, maybe for reason 1 [favorable upbrining] or because they have been treated differently in their lives, they may behave differently, for example more self-confident.

Three – people’s perceptions are associated with size. For example, taller people are seen as better leaders, more dominant and more intelligent.

‘I think this might be a better explanation for the more favourable outcomes of taller politicians. That’s a shame, because this is independent of the quality of the individuals and is a form of discrimination.’

Murray further explained that “taller men are more likely to perceive themselves as qualified to be a leader. This greater sense of qualification makes them more likely to express interest in running for a leadership position.”

Contestants appear to be deeply concerned about their height, although Harris has adamantly denied that he is 5’1″ and demanded credit for the extra 2 inches.

In a interview with Katie Couric asking Harris if she is only 5’10”, the presidential candidate replied: “That is absolutely incorrect. I am 5’4″ and a quarter – sometimes 5’4”.

‘And with heels, which I always wear, I am 1.70 meters tall, thank you.’

Although her height is not listed on her Wikipedia pages, a page on Encyclopedia Britannica lists her as 1.57 m (5 ft 1 in) tall.

Some politicians have worn shoes with lifts or heels to bridge the height difference. One example is Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, who withdrew from the presidential race in January.

DeSantis was reprimanded for wearing high-top shoes and heeled boots. Although the governor vehemently denied the allegations, a shoemaker said there was no doubt about it.

Zephan Parker, owner of Parker Boot Company, said Politics that DeSantis was probably wearing lifts and explained that when you put an insole in cowboy boots, you’re “putting them in [the equivalent of] ‘Choppy stilettos of 13 cm.

While politicians worry about their height, Dr. Murray said their choice for president can also depend on the economic climate during an election year. He said that in times of great unrest or war, Americans can trust taller politicians to lead the country.

‘Especially when there is an external threat, there seems to be a preference for male leaders – [when] physical formidability is necessary – and for women leaders when there is a need for greater group cohesion and effort – [when] “Physical strength doesn’t matter,” he said.

‘As for Trump versus Harris, the role of physical formidability may depend on how the campaign is framed.

‘Is the international threat (wars and other international conflicts the starting point, which according to this theory speaks in Trump’s favor) or should we all work together and speak in Harris’ favor?’