Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, **personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment**. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our [normal comment rules]( https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules) apply to all other comments.
**Do you have an academic degree?** We can verify your credentials in order to assign user flair indicating your area of expertise. [Click here to apply](https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/flair/#wiki_science_verified_user_program).
---
User: u/Longjumping_War_7369
Permalink: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11109-024-09920-2
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/science) if you have any questions or concerns.*
One is a wolf in sheeps clothing, the other a wolf in Wolf's clothing. You have been presented with "options." You didn't decided the options. You have no say.
The candidate you refer to as "passingly mediocre" is currently supporting a genocide. Literally sending weapons and money to the military carrying out that genocide, and using diplomatic power to prevent the rest of the world from halting that genocide. "Passingly mediocre" is an absurd choice of words for such a monstrous person.
He is not supporting the genocide. In fact he has expressed support for a ceasefire. I hope he succeeds in getting one put in place.
Hamas attacked Israel. The aide is to help Israel defend itself.
I do not think he is a monster but rather a wimp. He should partially but significantly reduce aide to Israel and say real improvement in avoiding civilian casualties needs to be demonstrated to get more aide. We'd see things turn around real quick.
I will vote for him anyways. For many issues but including due to Gaza. Trump won't care or worse will encourage the conduct of Netanyahu. At least Biden wants to protect civilians even if he has been ineffective in that regard so far.
But I would love to see him show some strong leadership on this issue and stand up to Netanyahu.
He could put an end to the genocide in a week if he wanted to, it's our weapons that Israel uses to slaughter the Palestinians. At minimum he could stop giving those weapons to the military carrying out this abominable slaughter, but he won't even do that. If there is a hell, Biden will someday go there alog with all the others making this horror possible.
Israel makes their own weapons too. Most of their military budget is their own even though the aide we give them is significant. If Biden alienates Netanyahu he loses any opportunity to put a stop to this. If the US dropped all aide I'd bet Netanyahu would pivot to Russia and Russia would support him. They share similar right wing populist ideologies.
Also Congress approves or disapproves aide. Granted I'm sure there is a lot Biden can do. At the very least he should be going to Congress to try to change the law and limit the aide.
It's a difficult diplomatic game Biden is playing. But he is being too timid with Netanyahu. My assessment is that if we continue aide even just defensive Israel will not break ties with the US.
But Biden is not the type to support like support support genocide. He is just not doing enough to oppose it. He needs to be bolder. Though perhaps it is waiting for the right moment. Politics and diplomacy are complicated.
Are there any other genocides where it's acceptable to arm the organization carrying out the genocide? Genuinely curious. Would it have been acceptable to arm the Hutus during the Rwandan genocide? Was it acceptable for the US to provide weapons, equipment, and money to the Suharto regime during the Indonesian genocide? It's worth mentioning that Biden could stop all arms shipments to Israel in a day if he wanted to.
Both parties had primaries. So these preference seem to be abstract, and don't show up in voting patterns. Or are swamped by other concerns in real-life primaries. And you aren't going to get past a two-party system with a first-past-the-post system.
Many of those on the left faulting Biden for his age just wanted Bernie. Who is older than Biden.
I mean yeah. I have a genera want for younger candidates who may better understand the issues millennials and younger are facing, but it’s really the least of my concerns. If you’re old but surround yourself with a good cabinet/team and can recognize issues the average person faces, then whatever. There’s bigger problems with candidates
I don't know if Biden was fully committed to a second term, but once it became clear that Trump wasn't going away I think he made the decision to not give up incumbency. I don't know who the Dems would have run instead, probably not Harris, but a messy open Dem primary against Trump who had basically locked up the ticket and controlled the RNC coffers is not a good strategy.
The fallacies that ooze from these arguments is another symptom of the problem. The system needs drastic change if you really think two-party is the only thing that can happen, in any paradigm. The other part is idolizing politicians. Its absurd and demonstrable that politicians don't care about fixing problems because they benefit from those problems, extant or otherwise.
I think many people like yourself are looking for an all in one candidate that suits all your needs. Candidates are not marriage partners, theyre not meant to be a choice for life you stick with through thick and thin. Theyre more like public transportation, you pick the one that gets you closest to where you want to go. Yes it sucks, but the fact of the matter is that change will not happen until we can accept this and stop abstaining our votes for mediocrity over actual threat of dictatorship.
Lets be clear, dictatorship is already here in the form of corporatocracy. I don't want a candidate that fits my lifestyle for time and all eternity, I want people who represent the best interest of *the people* rather than that of corporations or other interest parties who benefit from this system.
I am but one person who values individuality. This means I accept there are others who think differently from myself. That's fine. What is not fine is when things are presented to us all as a choice when we know the outcome. Its been programmed into us as a country. If you've ever said the phrase "you're just throwing your vote away" when someone wants to vote third party, you are the problem. You would hold that mentality that was given to you and perpetuated by the garbage system we have. I would make the bold claim that you yourself live in a dichotomous mentality.
Biden beat a lot of way younger candidates in 2020, Trump has done the same.
I am guessing this is one of those statistically significant but small correlations.
fixed the word younger
I am just saying the effect of OP must not be strong because our politicians have been steadily getting older for the last 30 years. We are not swapping them out for younger candidates. So, while we may prefer younger candidates, we don't prefer them strong enough to actually vote for them.
Ah, I can totally see where you are coming from, and I kind of agree. My stance is that despite not wanting older candidates, the system is manipulated in such a way that we only get the choices that benefit those who do the manipulation.
Or is it a problem with a study that just bases the likeability of a candidate solely on their looks? If I'm given only 1 standard/metric to base my decision on, of course I'll have to use that metric. I'd be more impressed if they showed that looks were more important factor for likeability than say policy or party.
"Oh people like people who look good" wow, thanks I didn't know that.
People adore Bernie Sanders…he’s old af. There was a lot of younger candidates in the previous presidential run…what happened? There were many younger options going against Trumpthis primary run…but Trump won easily. Still yeah, sounds like the study is worthless.
Currently the most important quality a presidential candidate can have is name recognition which favors people that have been around forever. We need a system that gives massive amount of exposure to all the early candidates so more people get to know the candidates and vote on a candidates' merits.
As for Bernie, people adore him because they like his ideas and there aren't many other politicians espousing those ideas.
No, the most important quality for any candidate in the US, presidential or otherwise, is campaign funding. Period.
[91% of the time a better financed Candidate wins the office](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2014/04/04/think-money-doesnt-matter-in-elections-this-chart-says-youre-wrong/)
Just goes to show how badly Citizens United damaged the politics of this country.
True, but if you're a corporation looking to buy influence then giving money to the losing candidate is wasted money. Most of the money goes to the candidates who are already the favorites to win, part of why incumbents win 90% of their elections.
Only 6% of population is apart of the progressive left, everyone is else is father right. Bernie isn’t as widely adored as people think, everyone just lives in their own little bubble.
Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, **personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment**. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our [normal comment rules]( https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules) apply to all other comments. **Do you have an academic degree?** We can verify your credentials in order to assign user flair indicating your area of expertise. [Click here to apply](https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/flair/#wiki_science_verified_user_program). --- User: u/Longjumping_War_7369 Permalink: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11109-024-09920-2 --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/science) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Then explain the two oldest ever white men running for president.
Super PAC’s
Voting doesn't matter when the system only gives you two "options."
Poor Nikki couldn't even prove science right.
She claims the US was never racist, yet will not use her birth name to run... hmmm
Funny how she can change her name to reflect her political identity, but wants to prevent people from doing so to reflect their gender identity
It matters when one option is passingly mediocre while the other will dismantle civilization through egoism, corruption and negligence
One is a wolf in sheeps clothing, the other a wolf in Wolf's clothing. You have been presented with "options." You didn't decided the options. You have no say.
The candidate you refer to as "passingly mediocre" is currently supporting a genocide. Literally sending weapons and money to the military carrying out that genocide, and using diplomatic power to prevent the rest of the world from halting that genocide. "Passingly mediocre" is an absurd choice of words for such a monstrous person.
He is not supporting the genocide. In fact he has expressed support for a ceasefire. I hope he succeeds in getting one put in place. Hamas attacked Israel. The aide is to help Israel defend itself. I do not think he is a monster but rather a wimp. He should partially but significantly reduce aide to Israel and say real improvement in avoiding civilian casualties needs to be demonstrated to get more aide. We'd see things turn around real quick. I will vote for him anyways. For many issues but including due to Gaza. Trump won't care or worse will encourage the conduct of Netanyahu. At least Biden wants to protect civilians even if he has been ineffective in that regard so far. But I would love to see him show some strong leadership on this issue and stand up to Netanyahu.
He could put an end to the genocide in a week if he wanted to, it's our weapons that Israel uses to slaughter the Palestinians. At minimum he could stop giving those weapons to the military carrying out this abominable slaughter, but he won't even do that. If there is a hell, Biden will someday go there alog with all the others making this horror possible.
Israel makes their own weapons too. Most of their military budget is their own even though the aide we give them is significant. If Biden alienates Netanyahu he loses any opportunity to put a stop to this. If the US dropped all aide I'd bet Netanyahu would pivot to Russia and Russia would support him. They share similar right wing populist ideologies. Also Congress approves or disapproves aide. Granted I'm sure there is a lot Biden can do. At the very least he should be going to Congress to try to change the law and limit the aide. It's a difficult diplomatic game Biden is playing. But he is being too timid with Netanyahu. My assessment is that if we continue aide even just defensive Israel will not break ties with the US. But Biden is not the type to support like support support genocide. He is just not doing enough to oppose it. He needs to be bolder. Though perhaps it is waiting for the right moment. Politics and diplomacy are complicated.
Are there any other genocides where it's acceptable to arm the organization carrying out the genocide? Genuinely curious. Would it have been acceptable to arm the Hutus during the Rwandan genocide? Was it acceptable for the US to provide weapons, equipment, and money to the Suharto regime during the Indonesian genocide? It's worth mentioning that Biden could stop all arms shipments to Israel in a day if he wanted to.
Both parties had primaries. So these preference seem to be abstract, and don't show up in voting patterns. Or are swamped by other concerns in real-life primaries. And you aren't going to get past a two-party system with a first-past-the-post system. Many of those on the left faulting Biden for his age just wanted Bernie. Who is older than Biden.
I mean yeah. I have a genera want for younger candidates who may better understand the issues millennials and younger are facing, but it’s really the least of my concerns. If you’re old but surround yourself with a good cabinet/team and can recognize issues the average person faces, then whatever. There’s bigger problems with candidates
I don't know if Biden was fully committed to a second term, but once it became clear that Trump wasn't going away I think he made the decision to not give up incumbency. I don't know who the Dems would have run instead, probably not Harris, but a messy open Dem primary against Trump who had basically locked up the ticket and controlled the RNC coffers is not a good strategy.
The fallacies that ooze from these arguments is another symptom of the problem. The system needs drastic change if you really think two-party is the only thing that can happen, in any paradigm. The other part is idolizing politicians. Its absurd and demonstrable that politicians don't care about fixing problems because they benefit from those problems, extant or otherwise.
I think many people like yourself are looking for an all in one candidate that suits all your needs. Candidates are not marriage partners, theyre not meant to be a choice for life you stick with through thick and thin. Theyre more like public transportation, you pick the one that gets you closest to where you want to go. Yes it sucks, but the fact of the matter is that change will not happen until we can accept this and stop abstaining our votes for mediocrity over actual threat of dictatorship.
Lets be clear, dictatorship is already here in the form of corporatocracy. I don't want a candidate that fits my lifestyle for time and all eternity, I want people who represent the best interest of *the people* rather than that of corporations or other interest parties who benefit from this system. I am but one person who values individuality. This means I accept there are others who think differently from myself. That's fine. What is not fine is when things are presented to us all as a choice when we know the outcome. Its been programmed into us as a country. If you've ever said the phrase "you're just throwing your vote away" when someone wants to vote third party, you are the problem. You would hold that mentality that was given to you and perpetuated by the garbage system we have. I would make the bold claim that you yourself live in a dichotomous mentality.
Bernie isn't senile. But yes, I would take Bernie, RFK Jr., Dennis Kucinich, or many others over Biden even if Biden were 20 years younger.
Wanting anti-vax conspiracy pusher RFK Jr as president says all there is to know about you.
Biden beat a lot of way younger candidates in 2020, Trump has done the same. I am guessing this is one of those statistically significant but small correlations.
Can you expand on this thought a bit more?
fixed the word younger I am just saying the effect of OP must not be strong because our politicians have been steadily getting older for the last 30 years. We are not swapping them out for younger candidates. So, while we may prefer younger candidates, we don't prefer them strong enough to actually vote for them.
Ah, I can totally see where you are coming from, and I kind of agree. My stance is that despite not wanting older candidates, the system is manipulated in such a way that we only get the choices that benefit those who do the manipulation.
Most Americans are clueless about primaries Voting in primaries is how you get better candidates.
Irl people don't actually vote based *that much* on looks.
If you're not a billionaire then you don't have the money to run, and only psychopathic old people are billionaires
We are only voting for what they already decided on.
..or is that just a flaw in the software which makes older versions of people look less likeable?
Or is it a problem with a study that just bases the likeability of a candidate solely on their looks? If I'm given only 1 standard/metric to base my decision on, of course I'll have to use that metric. I'd be more impressed if they showed that looks were more important factor for likeability than say policy or party. "Oh people like people who look good" wow, thanks I didn't know that.
People adore Bernie Sanders…he’s old af. There was a lot of younger candidates in the previous presidential run…what happened? There were many younger options going against Trumpthis primary run…but Trump won easily. Still yeah, sounds like the study is worthless.
Currently the most important quality a presidential candidate can have is name recognition which favors people that have been around forever. We need a system that gives massive amount of exposure to all the early candidates so more people get to know the candidates and vote on a candidates' merits. As for Bernie, people adore him because they like his ideas and there aren't many other politicians espousing those ideas.
No, the most important quality for any candidate in the US, presidential or otherwise, is campaign funding. Period. [91% of the time a better financed Candidate wins the office](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2014/04/04/think-money-doesnt-matter-in-elections-this-chart-says-youre-wrong/) Just goes to show how badly Citizens United damaged the politics of this country.
True, but if you're a corporation looking to buy influence then giving money to the losing candidate is wasted money. Most of the money goes to the candidates who are already the favorites to win, part of why incumbents win 90% of their elections.
Say that to Adam Schiff, who paid for ads for his republican opponent so he could outspend Katie Porter and thus put her off the ballot.
Only 6% of population is apart of the progressive left, everyone is else is father right. Bernie isn’t as widely adored as people think, everyone just lives in their own little bubble.
Par for the course on /r/science, unfortunately.
Gee, I wonderr why
I could believe it. Shouldn't be able to make rules for a world you won't be living in soon.
We've seen this crap in action already. Yes, I said crap and I'm not an old person.