The Stature Gap

I'm not sure I buy the notion that McCain is too much of a rageoholic to be president. For one thing, I've had some anger management issues in my life and McCain doesn't seem that bad off to me. For another thing, coming from someone else I might worry that he'd inadvertently start a horribly destructive war with North Korea or something, but McCain's made it clear in the past that his considered view is that a horribly destructive war with North Korea could be a good idea. The anecdote that highlights McCain's real problem is here:

A platform that had been adequate for taller candidates had not taken into account the needs of the 5-foot-9 McCain, who left the suite and went looking for a man in his early 20s named Robert Wexler, the head of Arizona's Young Republicans, which had helped make arrangements for the evening's celebration. Confronting Wexler in a hotel ballroom, McCain exploded, according to witnesses who included Jon Hinz, then executive director of the Arizona Republican Party. McCain jabbed an index finger in Wexler's chest.

"I told you we needed a stage," he screamed, according to Hinz. "You incompetent little [expletive]. When I tell you to do something, you do it."

5'9" is probably too short to be elected president and, even worse for McCain, this is an anecdote from 1986. In the intervening 22 years he's almost certainly shrunk due to spinal compressional and he's actually below average. We used to elect short men to the White House before the invention of, you know, photography but there's no way this is going to fly in a modern context.

Comments

Yglesias: "For one thing, I've had some anger management issues in my life"

lol? I can just imagine...

Posted by Korha | April 21, 2008 1:56 PM

"I'm not sure I buy the notion that McCain is too much of a rageoholic to be president."

What is the 7-11 on Pennsylvania Avenue runs out of rageohole at 3 AM?

"5'9" is probably too short to be elected president and, even worse for McCain, this is an anecdote from 1986. In the intervening 22 years he's almost certainly shrunk due to spinal compressional and he's actually below average. We used to elect short men to the White House before the invention of, you know, photography but there's no way this is going to fly in a modern context."

Yeah, he's 5'7" now.

Posted by Reality Man | April 21, 2008 1:58 PM

IMDB says he's 5'7"... and it also says that Hillary Clinton is 5'8.5" and Obama is 6'1.5".

Why does IMDB have heights for presidential candidates and where do they get their information? I don't know, but there it is.

Posted by J.W. Hamner | April 21, 2008 2:02 PM

He may be short, but on the flip side he's old and balding.

Posted by ostap | April 21, 2008 2:02 PM

Obama could have the GE all but wrapped up if he could figure out a way to get Michelle on stage with McCain. In heels, she'd be six or seven inches taller; how could McCain's tough guy image survive if it becomes clear that the other guy's wife could easily take him?

Posted by BlyMlvy | April 21, 2008 2:04 PM

Obama is 6"1-6"2. That means he is quite possibly 6 inches taller than John McCain. Terrorist or no, there is no way Obama loses to a midget.

Posted by Abe | April 21, 2008 2:04 PM

but on the flip side he's old and balding.

And don't forget that his face is scarred from cancer surgery.

Obama has got all the advantges necessary for a successful presidential candidate: young, tall, good-looking. If Obama can't pull out a 10-12 point win with those advantages (never mind, you know, recession and war), he might as well just give up.

Posted by Al | April 21, 2008 2:06 PM

5'9" is probably too short to be elected president

And so the epitaph on my Presidential ambitions is written. Sure, the atheism was always going to be a problem for me but I'd thought to get around that by becoming a Pastafarian. But what can I do about my height? Platform shoes would help I suppose but you just KNOW that Karl Rove would come up with some way to use my height-enhancing footwear against me.

Posted by Curt M | April 21, 2008 2:06 PM

That wouldn't be the same Robert "I enjoy cocaine because it's a fun thing to do" Wexler, would it?

Posted by Chris | April 21, 2008 2:06 PM

I'd vote for McCain over Leonid Stadnyk.

Posted by Creamy Goodness | April 21, 2008 2:08 PM

What the hell kind of stage is too big for an average-sized person?

Posted by mark f | April 21, 2008 2:08 PM

McCain should pick Gary Bauer as his VP candidate. It would help GOTV of the fundies and it would make him look really tall.

Posted by blah | April 21, 2008 2:11 PM

I don't support McCain, but shouting at pinheads who can't follow instructions that an eight grader should easily comply with doesn't have anything to do with it. Look, the guy is steeped in naval tradition, where I don't think the norm is to remark, in a resonable tone of voice, "Say, my good man, did I not request that the wheel be turned to starboard?" If you're in the politics business, ya' oughta be bright enough to grasp that a short candidate's order for a platform is an important one, and expect to get reamed out very harshly if the order isn't complied with.

Posted by Will Allen | April 21, 2008 2:11 PM

I don't believe he's 5'9". He looks shorter. And as a short guy myself, I pay attention to these things, and it's my experience that it's rare for any man who can avoid it to admit to being under 5'10" - 5'10" is the magic "average" and below that you're "short." Anyone who is actually 5'9" will claim to be 5'10", and no one will admit to 5'9" unless they're really in the 5'7" range. On the other end, anyone who can claim to be six foot will do it. You don't get truth in height until you hit 6'1".

Posted by Bloix | April 21, 2008 2:14 PM

Also,

http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:OMAI0IooL5uUoM:http://www.softvote.com/blog/poll_2004/http:/www.softvote.com/blog_images/bush_kerry_debate.jpg/bush_kerry_debate.jpg

Posted by mark f | April 21, 2008 2:16 PM

Never, never discount the fact that the media will fellate him as far as possible, and that, sorry to say, Obama sucks in debates. Once the post-debate spins take place, CW will be that McCain destroyed the naive Muslim.

Posted by John McCain: More of the Same | April 21, 2008 2:16 PM

Hey, look there, upthread: Al is broadening his repertoire: he's known for his dedication to trolling, but concern trolling his own side is not usually his style.

Way to play the expectations game, though.

Posted by Warren Terra | April 21, 2008 2:20 PM

America hasn't elected a man more than about two inches or so less than the average height for men in about two centuries or so. But we've never elected a black man or a woman either, so who knows what the bigger liability will be. I'm guessing that being black might be more of a handicap than height, but I guess we'll see.

Posted by Steve | April 21, 2008 2:22 PM

It'd be interesting to be a fly on the wall for debate negotiations between the Obama and McCain camps as I'm guessing there will be some interesting negotiations about the format and podium arrangements.

Perhaps the McCain camp will really push for town-hall style arrangements that minimize the length of time where both men are standing, while the Obama camp would push for traditional settings with the podiums really close together to maximize the amount of time that both are in the same camera frame while standing.

Also, since neither one is going to particularly shine in debates, it wouldn't surprise me if you ended up with relatively few of them.

Posted by BFR | April 21, 2008 2:26 PM

True, Matt, but McCain's considered view that a destructive war with NK would be a good idea coupled with his fits of rage, well, that's far worse than just the considered view. I mean, if you've considered something and come to a decision about it, maybe you'll consider it some more and come to a decision about it.

But if you're a powerful man prone to anger, which of your underlings is going to risk his career to bring about that change of mind? What if Kim Jong Il says something you feel insults your personal honor? The rage part of the equation makes you much more dangerous in each situation.

Posted by Clark | April 21, 2008 2:33 PM

whoa--Hillary's taller than McCain (and that's before heels). I never realized she was that tall--is she? I guess she's often been seen with Bill, who is pretty tall. If she were my height, they'd look like some kind of freak couple, I guess--but I never really thought about that. Still, by 60, she's probably seen some shrinkage as well.

Posted by JMS | April 21, 2008 2:33 PM

Yglesias: "For one thing, I've had some anger management issues in my life"

What I find funny a is that Matt's tone is calm and congenial and considered and then the comment section is like One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest.

Posted by Peter K. | April 21, 2008 2:35 PM

It'd be interesting to be a fly on the wall for debate negotiations between the Obama and McCain camps as I'm guessing there will be some interesting negotiations about the format and podium arrangements.

This came up at the Kerry-Dubya debates, which also featured a marked height difference.

The television folks dealt with it, as I recall, mainly by showing the candidates in split screen rather than in wide shot. There may also have been a platform for Dubya to stand on, but the main effect was that, because the tops of the podia were level, you saw more of Kerry's body above the top of their podium than you did Bush's, and one's face filled more of their half of the screen than did the other's.

But it was handled fairly subtly, all things considered.

Posted by Warren Terra | April 21, 2008 2:38 PM

I was under the impression that the predictor for elections was relative height, not the absolute height of the candidate. But that simply predictor fell apart 4 years ago -- Kerry was visibly taller than Bush, as I recall.

So let's not get too optimistic here. At least, not on the height issue.

Posted by wj | April 21, 2008 2:39 PM

Not only is Obama taller than McCain, his wife is also taller than McCain. I think Kathleen Sebelius may well be taller than McCain. As soon as Obama puts Sebelius on the ticket, she neutralizes his liabilities and he wins in a landslide. Unless McCain is daring when he picks his VP, he's going to get his toichus kicked.

Posted by Abe | April 21, 2008 2:40 PM

"Still, by 60, she's probably seen some shrinkage as well."

I was in the pool!

Posted by Doug T | April 21, 2008 2:42 PM

Gordon Brown is 5ft 11in, for comparison's sake.

And the photos of Brown, the candidates and a hallway from last week -- it's The Sun, so the story is astonishingly facile -- suggested that McCain and Clinton are pretty much the same height.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | April 21, 2008 2:46 PM

Obama has got all the advantges necessary for a successful presidential candidate: young, tall, good-looking. If Obama can't pull out a 10-12 point win with those advantages...

Yep, add those to his brown skin and foreign-sounding name, and he should be in LBJ '64 territory!

Posted by Ryan | April 21, 2008 2:48 PM

I was under the impression that the predictor for elections was relative height, not the absolute height of the candidate. But that simply predictor fell apart 4 years ago -- Kerry was visibly taller than Bush, as I recall.

I've heard references given to height as a predictor of success in general (but I've never actually seen the research). My recollection is that there's a fairly substantial financial reward in life for being greater than 6'.

I don't know how this applies to elections, but GWB and John Kerry are both taller than 6', so the difference in height might matter less - ie GWB was 'tall enough' to neutralize the impact whereas McCain won't be.

Posted by BFR | April 21, 2008 2:50 PM

John McCain isn't a 'midget'- are you a f*(&ing idiot? He's _one_ standard deviation below the norm for white men, and would be right at the average for South Asian or Latino men.

And to say that Michelle Obama could 'take' him because she happens to be taller is really dumb. She's a woman, for one thing. McCain is, for all that I disagree with his values and politics, a tough officer for another. I wrestled long enough in high school to know that I could 'take' quite a few people taller than me.

What's up with height being the only acceptable prejudice? T.E. Lawrence was only 5'3'' after all, as was General Franco.

Posted by Hector | April 21, 2008 3:05 PM

The fact that no one seems to realize McCain is only 5'7" despite all of his time in the media spotlight is indicative of this not being an important/obvious issue in the fall, imho. Campaigns have also gotten more sophisticated about these kinds of optics.

Posted by mikem | April 21, 2008 3:10 PM

There seem to be a lot of McCain stories involving a finger in the chest. I'm thinking a stiff right in the chops would solve that problem. It's called negative reinforcement; it works on dogs and it works on grouchy old men that don't understand common decency.

Posted by Pat Hendrix | April 21, 2008 3:17 PM

Mikem speaks truth. McCain benefits from the Tom Cruise effect - height doesn't matter if the media collectively agrees to ignore it.

(This is different from the Michael J. Fox effect, where height doesn't matter because you're just that spectacular)

Posted by Dan | April 21, 2008 3:19 PM

What's up with height being the only acceptable prejudice? T.E. Lawrence was only 5'3'' after all, as was General Franco.

Hector is absolutely correct. I for one have moved beyond obsessing with height, and now feel it is vaguely acceptable to despise fascists and to feel uncomfortable about romantic idealists who use implausible and later unfulfilled (if, perhaps, sincere) promises to mislead whole peoples into joining a brutal war.

Posted by Warren Terra | April 21, 2008 3:22 PM

The key to the election isn't height. It's talking. We need to get McCain to start talking. A lot. He's become an invertebrate rambler. (That too.)

He may not be senile, but he's definitely lost quite a bit of the oversight adults exercise on what they say. I hear HAL launching into "Daisy Bell" when McCain starts to jabber. And don't think his handlers aren't concerned. In a way they're as guilty as Mrs. Wilson following Wilson's stroke.

Posted by Jeffrey Davis | April 21, 2008 3:22 PM

GWB is not above 6'. I believe he is 5'11".

Posted by Chuck | April 21, 2008 3:25 PM

What's up with height being the only acceptable prejudice? T.E. Lawrence was only 5'3'' after all, as was General Franco.

Hector is absolutely correct. I for one have moved beyond obsessing with height, and now feel it is vaguely acceptable to despise fascists and to feel uncomfortable about romantic idealists who use implausible and later unfulfilled (if, perhaps, sincere) promises to mislead whole peoples into joining a brutal war.

P.S. if this winds up as a double-post, I apologize; I got an internal server error on my first attempt.

Posted by Warren Terra | April 21, 2008 3:26 PM

What I find funny a is that Matt's tone is calm and congenial and considered and then the comment section is like One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest.

I don't know. The blegs for his books are getting sinister. I'm going to buy the book. But I would buy it RIGHT NOW if I could filter future book blegs. As it is now, I just think, 'Oh yeah, I've got to go buy that book soon. Thanks for the reminder.'

Posted by asl | April 21, 2008 3:29 PM

McCain should pick Gary Bauer as his VP [SNIP] it would make him look really tall.

Maybe he should pick Gary Coleman.

Posted by LFC | April 21, 2008 3:38 PM

And to say that Michelle Obama could 'take' him because she happens to be taller is really dumb. She's a woman, for one thing. McCain is, for all that I disagree with his values and politics, a tough officer for another. I wrestled long enough in high school to know that I could 'take' quite a few people taller than me.

McCain's image as a tough old SOB is about as accurate as the image of GWB as a "guy you'd like to have a beer with," which is to say: maybe in theory, but in practice (I'm being generous and trusting here) Bush doesn't drink anymore, and McCain can't lift his arms over his head, so I'm not convinced that he could take anyone.

Posted by Quarterican | April 21, 2008 3:53 PM

Speaking of height, Hitler, Stalin, and Mao were shorter then McCain and it didn't seem to affect their effectiveness in committing mass murder.

Posted by SLC | April 21, 2008 3:59 PM

The press photographers will crawl around on the floor taking pics of McCain that make him look 8' tall. All debates will take place with the candidates seated and on the opposite sides of the stage.

Posted by Jack H. | April 21, 2008 4:15 PM

SLC, what was Hitler and Mao's height? Didn't know they were short. What about Lenin? Churchill?

As someone who is yes indeed the magic "average" (5'10") (although a friend who claims he's 5'11'' is the exact same height. Ha!) we do look down with a little extra oomph at men who don't measure up. McCain does look like a 5'7" shrimp - a good enough reason as any to vote him down.

Posted by Trevor | April 21, 2008 4:21 PM

A few responses:

Hector, you need to lighten up a little and recognize a joke.

All of you bringing up short leaders from the past. Two things, you are talking about poeple from 50-100 years ago, you know people are taller now. And more importantly, those guys were all pre TV.

The guy who asked about Wexler, the cocaine joke guy was a Congressman from FL and McCain was blowing up at a republican operative in AZ, so highly doubt it is the saem guy:-)

Posted by Eric k | April 21, 2008 4:24 PM

Turns out Mao wasn't short. He's listed at 5'11". A sicker fuck never walked this Earth. What did he kill? 30 million?

Posted by Trevor | April 21, 2008 4:29 PM

Hitler, Stalin, and Mao were shorter then McCain and it didn't seem to affect their effectiveness in committing mass murder.

And of course, so was Napoleon. But is an effective mass murder really what we are looking for in a president?

Posted by rea | April 21, 2008 4:29 PM

But is an effective mass murder really what we are looking for in a president?

Depends on your party affiliation.

Posted by blah | April 21, 2008 4:34 PM

But is an effective mass murder really what we are looking for in a president?

Well, what we're looking for is someone with the ability to get stuff done, and the particular field of experience isn't as important.

I always nominate Pol Pot (who I assume was on the short side) because while his numbers don't appear as impressive at first glance, they're truly astounding when considered as a percentage of what he had to work with.

Posted by Quarterican | April 21, 2008 4:42 PM

Matt! Stop making predictions like that. (Don't jinx us, okay?) Jeez. Height doesn't matter--not at all. In fact it will probably make McCain win, right? People want a short candidate this time.

Posted by David | April 21, 2008 5:10 PM

"This came up at the Kerry-Dubya debates, which also featured a marked height difference. The television folks dealt with it, as I recall, mainly by showing the candidates in split screen rather than in wide shot."

Yep, where they get into trouble is the handshake. McCain's people are going to try and murder the producers to keep that handshake awkward, shot from a weird angle and quick. If Obama is smart, he'll find a reason to lean down and crack a joke with McCain, which will force the exchange to take longer.

And the difference in height here is different. It's not just that it's 6" vs. 4", but Obama is 6'2, which is tall but not in weird tall territory. Kerry was 6'4, which is kind of in weird tall territory, while Bush was around 6 foot, in "normal tall" territory. McCain is short. There are going to be more and more pictures of people towering over McCain, while Obama looks regular (and his wife is tall as well, which is different from Kerry where he was nearly a foot taller than she was, which made him look odd).

Posted by anonymiss | April 21, 2008 5:16 PM

Matt thinks he had "anger management issues" in his life.

Compared to me, it is to laugh.

Intending to take down the entire US Establishment by violence is an "anger management issue". Complaining that public transit in Washington isn't good enough to get him to his favorite pizza parlor - not so much.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | April 21, 2008 5:26 PM

How is it that the fact that he PHYSICALLY ASSAULTED ANOTHER REPUBLICAN isn't that well-known?

Posted by 55 | April 21, 2008 5:27 PM

The creepy thing is that McCain loves to watch "crush" videos starring Megan McArdle.

Posted by Straight Talk Express | April 21, 2008 5:42 PM

First off, what's a "crush" video? On second thought, nevermind, don't want to know.

McCain just looks angry. When he talks it looks like he's gritting his teeth and now his jaw looks messed up too.

I'd be angry too if I was captured by Charlie and stuck in the Hanoi Hilton while damn dirty hippies were back home protesting the war and smoking pot.

Posted by Peter K. | April 21, 2008 5:54 PM

McCain's so angry because he collaborated with the enemy in Vietnam. Dude is way worse than Jane Fonda.

http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn04192008.html

Posted by John | April 21, 2008 5:58 PM

McCain is on pins and needles mode too much. Compare him to the much more pacific Hurricane Carter who spent what? a decade and a half in prison for a crime he should've been acquitted of. McCain was dropping bombs on peasant Vietnamese, murdering thousands of innocent people and laughing it up at the canteen afterwards. And, yet the NVA didn't kill him. He makes a big show of being forgiving of 60's war protesters, his little ditty "bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" exposes him as unfit for the Presidency.

Posted by Trevor | April 21, 2008 6:05 PM

Hillary Clinton is not that tall. I am exactly 5' 8" and the couple of times I met her face to face we looked exactly eye to eye. I don't remember if she had heels on. But she is certainly no taller than 5' 8"

Posted by CalDem | April 21, 2008 6:06 PM

Hillary Clinton is not that tall. I am exactly 5' 8" and the couple of times I met her face to face we looked exactly eye to eye. I don't remember if she had heels on. But she is certainly no taller than 5' 8"

Posted by CalDem | April 21, 2008 6:08 PM

CalDem,

5'8" for a woman of her generation is definitely tall, the average is something like 5'2" or 3" IIRC.

Posted by Eric k | April 21, 2008 6:13 PM

I want to hear more about MY's anger issues; I'm guessing the Starbucks in Harvard Square was the scene of some serious pissed-off discussion about the Romney/O'Brien race!

Posted by Andruw | April 21, 2008 6:16 PM

That height is crucial was a myth that emerged due to small samples sizes. But, GWB was shorter than Gore and much shorter than Kerry.

Posted by Steve Sailer | April 21, 2008 6:18 PM

Carter was 5'9" -- and Bush is only two inches taller.

It's true that the taller candidate usually wins, but it's failed to be true four times in the televised debate era.

The think I took from that story was how MEAN he seemed.

Posted by Anthony Damiani | April 21, 2008 6:35 PM

If only the electorate consited solely of the commenters on a doughy angry man's web site, I would have a bright political future.

Posted by Lurch | April 21, 2008 6:36 PM

Re Steve Sailer

On the other hand, Bush 1 was taller then Dukakis, Reagen was taller then either Mondale or Carter, Johnson was taller then Goldwater, Kennedy was taller then Nixon, Eisenhower was taller then Stevenson, Truman and Roosevelt were taller then Dewey. Clinton and Bush 1 were the same height, Nixon and Humphrey were the same height. "Actually, the combination of a candidate being taller and also having a longer last name is a double whammy. The 2004 election was a rare departure and Kerry exceeded Bush by only 1 letter.

Re John

Counterpunch is a very unreliable source of information, about as accurate as the Swift Boaters.

Re Trevor

Does Mr. Trevor consider George McGovern to be a criminal for carrying out 25 bombing raids over Germany during WW 2 which I bet killed more civilians then did Senator McCain. McGovern was flying a 4 engine heavy bomber, McCain was flying a 1 engine fighter-bomber. The tonnage of bombs dropped by McGovern greatly exceeded the tonnage of bombs dropped by McCain.

Posted by SLC | April 21, 2008 6:36 PM

SLC,

The answer is no. McGovern was NOT a criminal. Nazi Germany was an evil, imperialistic, genocidal world power that had to be stopped by any means necessary. Wheraas, the U.S. War on the Vietnamese was an evil, mass-murdering War of Agression based on Hitlerian lies and deceit. Did innocent Germans die? Yes, they did. But, did many of them also bear some responsibility for putting The Third Reich into office? Yes, they did. Obviously, there's no way to calculate the cost/benefit ratio of so monstrous a thing as War. But, the difference between the morality of the U.S. in fighting Nazi Germany or in "bombing Vietnam back to the Stone Age" couldn't be more stark.

Posted by Trevor | April 21, 2008 9:01 PM

"But, GWB was shorter than Gore and much shorter than Kerry."

Thus do we have scientistic proof that both elections were rigged.

Posted by Justaguy | April 21, 2008 9:55 PM

"Speaking of height, Hitler, Stalin, and Mao were shorter then McCain and it didn't seem to affect their effectiveness in committing mass murder.

Posted by SLC | April 21, 2008 3:59 PM"

An idea for a new sign at the ICC: "You must be this tall to commit genocide."

Posted by Reality Man | April 21, 2008 9:59 PM

Anybody who bombs civilians is a war criminal - if he's employed by the state. Anybody who bombs civilians while not employed by the state is simply a criminal.

In fact, you could probably make a good case that anybody who starts a war or participates in one is a war criminal by definition - if any civilians are getting killed by his actions, anyway.

If you justify killing civilians - whose voting record you don't know - because SOME of them voted for Hitler, then basically thirty percent of the US population deserves to be bombed by bin Laden for Bush's actions in Iraq or executed as war criminals - including Matt who supported the war.

Better not to justify killing civilians for any reason by military operations. While "accidents" do happen, what the US has done in Iraq is NOT an "accident". Dropping heavy ordinance on a civilian neighborhood is not an "accident".

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | April 21, 2008 11:00 PM

I'm astonished that people are accepting the claim that W stands 5'11".

It doesn't look likely, not from his photos. 5'9" maybe. The 5'11" stat probably comes from the same source as his "active duty Air Force" service ... that famous stretcher Karen Hughes. She's taller than he is too, "almost six feet tall in flats." Never seen a photo of the two of them where she isn't visibly taller. Or sitting down. Or both.

Posted by Ghost of Joe Liebling's Dog | April 22, 2008 12:10 AM

Hector's (over)reaction to the perceived slight makes Matt's point nicely. Like Napolean, Hitler, Stalin and, apparently, McCain and Hector, little guys see everything through the little guy lens, and apparently don't like the view from down there.

Posted by ched | April 22, 2008 6:01 AM

"[John Kerry] was nearly a foot taller than she was, which made him look odd).
Posted by anonymiss | April 21, 2008 5:16 PM "

That's what did it, huh?

Posted by aleks | April 22, 2008 6:09 AM

I just wish I could get through one day without coming across someone comparing a presidential candidate to General Franco.

It's soo monotonous.

Posted by howie | April 22, 2008 6:58 AM

I thought everyone knew by now that Napoleon wasn't a short guy.

Posted by Jeffrey Davis | April 22, 2008 8:32 AM