USUALLY, THOUGHTS about presidential stature don't bring height to mind. But height is a distinct advantage where the American presidency is concerned. Virtually everyone looked up to George Washington, partly because he commanded respect and partly because he was 6-foot-2.
Of course John Adams, who succeeded him, was only 5-foot-7. Indeed, when, as vice president, Adams sought the respect Washington was accorded automatically, a lot of people just laughed and named him "His Rotundity."The third president, the eminent Thomas Jefferson, was as tall as Washington, though less imposing and more slender. In fact, one of his nicknames was "Long Tom."
After Jefferson, the country went short again with James Madison, who stood a meager 5-foot-4 and weighed less than 100 pounds. But James Monroe, the last of the Virginia dynasty, was an imposing 6-footer reminiscent of Washington himself.
John Quincy Adams, roly-poly and 5-foot-7 like his father, continued the tall-short tradition - then came Andrew Jackson, who was tall and lean at 6-foot-1, then Martin Van Buren, who was 5-foot-6.
Only when Old Tippecanoe, William Henry Harrison, who stood a more moderate 5-foot-8, kept Van Buren from getting a second term did the country break the odd pattern of having a short president succeeded by a tall one.
When Harrison died 31 days after taking office, he was succeeded by Vice President John Tyler, an even 6 feet. With James K. Polk, we were back to 5-foot-8 again.
When 5-foot-8 Zachary Taylor, "Old Rough and Ready," moved into the White House in 1849, a steady ascension began. He was succeeded first by Millard Fillmore, then by Franklin Pierce, both of whom stood at 5-foot-9.
James Buchanan, at 6 feet, helped to usher in the Civil War, followed by the zenith of American presidents, in stature and reputation - Abraham Lincoln at 6-foot-4. His height would not be approached until Lyndon Johnson's lanky 6-foot-3 Texas frame moved into the Oval Office over a century later.
After Lincoln, the pattern disappeared. Andrew Johnson was 5-10, Grant and Hayes were both 5-8, Garfield was 6 feet, Arthur was 6-2, Cleveland was 5-11. Harrison was 5-foot-6, McKinley was 5-7 and Teddy Roosevelt 5-10.
But in the 20th century, taller candidates have held a statistical advantage - except Jimmy Carter, who won the 1976 election when he was only 5-9 and stood a full 3 inches shorter than his opponent, Gerald Ford, and Richard Nixon at 5-11 defeated the 6-foot George McGovern in the 1972 election.
In predictable form, Eisenhower defeated the shorter Stevenson, Kennedy defeated the shorter Nixon, Johnson defeated the shorter Goldwater, Reagan defeated the shorter Carter and Bush defeated the 5-8 Dukakis.
In the Clinton-Bush race of 1992, the height difference was extremely close, but Clinton at 6-foot-21/2 stood slightly taller than the 6-foot-2 Bush. This year, Clinton has a slightly larger height advantage over Bob Dole, who stands 6-1.
One study shows that voters are prone to cast their ballots for the candidate closest to their own height. Ironically, tall candidates even benefit by this scenario, because tall voters tended to choose tall candidates, while shorter voters split their ballots.
So there you are. In a free society, elections remain technically unpredictable - but history says the taller candidate still has the best shot.