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 VP's late entry into the 2024 presidential race has raised the prospect of America having its shortest ever leader.

At 5ft 2, Harris would be the shortest president since the 6ft 1.5in George Washington took up the role in 1789 (although Harris strongly insists she's around 5ft 4).

Statistics suggest that candidates' stature plays a crucial role in whether they're picked for the next president. 

Two-thirds of US presidential candidates who have won the popular vote were taller than their rival and the average height of US presidents is around 6ft.

Experts have explained that our animal instincts come into play when selecting a leader, much like in the animal kingdom where the largest males typically lead the pack because they're more adept at overcoming their rivals. 

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

Dr Murray conducted a study in 2011 that asked 467 American and foreign students to draw a figure of a typical citizen and a national leader side-by-side.

The study found that more than half of the participants drew the leader to be taller than the citizen.

This is reflected in most US presidential elections. In total nearly six in 10 (58 percent) of the successful candidates who won the electoral college were taller than their opponents.

But when you look at who won the most votes overall, known as the 'popular vote, two-thirds of winning candidates (67 percent) were taller than their opponents.

For example, in the 1828 election John Quincy Adams who stood at 5ft 7 1/2in won the presidency, even though Andrew Jackson (6ft 1in) won the popular vote.

Past presidents like Abraham Lincoln (6ft 4in) who loomed over his opponent Stephen Douglas (5ft 4in) won both the popular and electoral vote in 1960.

Franklin D. Roosevelt (6ft 2in) was the only president to hold office for more than two terms and beat out four other candidates, only one of whom (Wendell Willkie) was taller than him by half an inch.

James Madison, who served as the fourth president of the United States, was the shortest person to win the position - standing at 5ft 4in, but is not remembered for his height, but rather for being the 'Father of the Constitution' and writing the Federalist Papers. 

Meanwhile, atatistics show that American presidents are getting taller on average. Murray said this could be because taller individuals are more likely to run for office and people generally are getting taller.

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

'Given that a favorable childhood environment leads to favorable outcomes in later life - such as physical health and cognitive ability - and because favorable environments lead to taller heights, there exists a (small!) correlation between height and these favorable traits. 

'Most political candidates probably have had very favorable childhood environments, so I am not sure this explanation will be very useful. 

'Two - taller individuals, perhaps of reason 1 [favorable upbrining] or because they have been treated differently in their lives, may behave differently - for example, more confidently. 

'Three - people's perceptions are associated with size; for example, taller individuals are perceived as better leaders, more dominant, more intelligent. 

'I think this may be a better explanation for more favorable outcomes of taller politicians; this is too bad, because this is independent of the quality of the individuals and is some form of discrimination.'

Murray further explained that 'taller males are more likely to think of themselves as qualified to be a leader and, via this increased sense of qualification, they are more likely to demonstrate an interest in running for a leadership position.'

Candidates seem to take their height into serious concern, even as Harris vehemently denied being 5ft 2in and demanded to be acknowledged for the extra two inches.

In an interview with Katie Couric who asked Harris if she's only 5ft 2in tall, the presidential candidate fired back: 'That is absolutely incorrect. I am 5ft 4 1/4in and a quarter - sometimes 5ft 4 1/2in. 

'And with heels, which I always wear, I'm 5ft 7 1/2in thank you very much.'

Although her Wikipedia pages does not mention her height, a page for her on Encyclopedia Britannica lists her as 5ft 2in tall.

Some politicians have made a point of putting lifts in their shoes or wearing heels to overcome the height gap including Florida Governor Ron DeSantis who dropped out of the presidential race in January.

DeSantis was called out for wearing lifts and heeled boots and although the governor adamantly denied the accusations, a bespoke bootmaker said there was no doubt.

Zephan Parker, who owns Parker Boot Company told Politico that DeSantis was likely wearing lifts and explained that when you stick an insert into cowboy boots, it could 'turn them into [the equivalent of] five-inch stilettos.'

While politicians fret about their height, Dr Murray said whether they're chosen for president could also come down to the economic climate during an election year, saying that times of great turmoil or war could lead Americans to rely on taller politicians to lead the country.

'In particular, there seems to be a preference for male leaders when there is an external threat - [when] physical formidability is needed - and for female leaders when there is a need for greater group cohesion and effort  - [when] physical formidability doesn't matter,' he said.

'Regarding Trump v. Harris, the role of physical formidability could depend on how the campaign is framed. 

'Does international threat (wars and other international conflict prevail as the frame, advantaging Trump by this theory) or do we all need to pull together, advantaging Harris?'