“OMG Obama is so cute.” “Ew why does Romney have that look on his face.” These are some of the common comments heard while watching the presidential debate among my fellow hall mates in the basement of Walsh Hall. I will admit, all of my hall mates are women, so these type of responses could be only from women. But as the debate continued I got a text from my father saying, “Obama almost arrogant in look.”

What does this say about the people I was in contact with during the debate? Possibly that they are shallow and only focused on appearances, but possibly that apparences, or how a candidate portrays themselves really does matter. An article I read prior to the debate tweeted by Ezra Klein called Do Presidential Debates usually Matter? Political Science says No. states good looking candidates usually benefit more from debates. Even though this fact may be true, I believe that how candidates portray through their appearance matters more. Noting and judging appearance is not a indication of un-intelligence, yet merely a characteristic of human nature. We are trained everyday to notice and recognize people by their physcial appearance and outward personality, so why wouldn’t we apply this common notion to the presidential debate? Nevertheless, policy still stands as the most important evaluation of a debate, but the fact that appearances matter is unavoidable, even for the most intelligent scholar. So whether you like an appearance of a pompous asshole or the appearance of a down to earth working man, the bottom line is that you like an appearance.

Overall, as much as we hate to admit it, appearances matter. They matter whether for judging for attractiveness or just plain likeability, and even at an institution such as Notre Dame, we cannot escape it.