Forget the issues. There is only one thing that matters: height. Since the 20th century, taller candidates are 19 - 6. They almost always win.
Heightism? Maybe. But history has also shown that isn't a bad thing. Not only is Lincoln the tallest president, he is also always ranked number one. In fact, the tallest 8 presidents in US History are also all ranked in the top half of the latest historical aggregate rankings.
Want more evidence, voting public? How about this: the last four candidates to beat a taller candidate were Bush (twice), Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, and Calvin Coolidge. Each of those presidents is ranked in the bottom half of the aggregate. It's almost like America was thinking, "lets give the shorter guy a chance..." and every time they did, it was a mistake.
This is a bipartisan topic: taller presidents are better. If Wilt Chamberlain had been President, the economy would have been so good we'd still be benefiting from it and every American would now own a jet. There is no reason to debate issues; taller Presidents are winners. This is why America has never elected a woman -- they are at a natural disadvantage. Sorry feminists, but you are going to need to start wearing heels again.
Obama is 6' 1". This means the only candidates who could (and should) beat him in 2012 are Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty (6' 2" each). Huntsman, Cain, Paul, or Gingrich? Too short. Bachman? Tiny.
Do I watch the debates? Yes, but on mute. And once I get a wide-shot where I can see who is taller, I make a decision. You'd do well to do the same.