Mary Anna (28 Nov 2011)
"Smile Factor¹ Could Sink Obama in 2012..."

 
Newsmax.com
4152 West Blue Heron Blvd., Ste. 1114
Riviera Beach, FL 33404 USA

When candidates square off in presidential elections, history shows that the winners are those whose smiles convey a positive message that inspires rather than irritates voters, communications consultant Jon Kraushar maintains.
He cites research by UCLA Professor Albert Mehrabian indicating that non-verbal communication ‹ including a speaker¹s smile ‹ can be even more important than what is actually said.
And that could bode ill for President Barack Obama¹s re-election chances in 2012, according to Kraushar.
In an article for Fox News, Kraushar examined the ³smile factor² in several recent elections:
In 2008, Obama¹s grin and his ³hope and change² message trumped John McCain¹s grimacing warnings about the economy.
In 2004 and 2000, George W. Bush¹s smirk and cocky smile overshadowed the ³terminally serious and insufferably pompous² John Kerry and Al Gore, Kraushar observed.
Bill Clinton¹s ³jaunty smile² and confidence defeated the ³scowling² Bob Dole in 1996 and the ³strained² smile of George H.W. Bush four years earlier.
But Bush¹s ³frenetic grin² was positively endearing in 1988 against the ³mechanical smile and robotic messaging² of Michael Dukakis.
Ronald Reagan¹s smile and sparkling eyes were unbeatable in 1980 and 1984 against the ³dourness² of Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale.
³In a presidential contest, whoever appears more upbeat is victorious over whoever seems more uptight,² according to Kraushar.
As for the 2012 election, he writes: ³Today, President Obama looks and sounds uptight. An air of desperation has crept into his face, eyes and body language.
³To beat Obama in the general election, Republicans must select a candidate with both a verbal and non-verbal message that by comparison with Obama¹s, packs the power of a smile ‹ and puts a smile on the faces of a majority of voters.²
Editor's Note: