Would Michael Moore win a photo-vote?
A bunch of taxpayer money (Yankee bucks, so what the hey!) doubtlessly went into a big and most important study into the, well, now scientifically proven fact that political beauty is apparently skin deep. (Hat tip: Hedplug)
But the wizards at the Globe and Mail nailed down the Canadian content for us.
Researchers in the United States have determined that voters are a shallow lot; that the winners of electoral races can be predicted about 70 per cent of the time based on whether their facial features make them appear more or less competent than their opponents.
Not that the phenomenon has helped Conservative Leader Stephen Harper.
[…] Someone with a mature face, she said, is deemed more competent than someone who is equally attractive but who possesses a baby face. It’s a conclusion that puts women, whose facial anatomy tends to be more baby-like than that of men, at a disadvantage politically.
“Mature-faced people look more dominant, more strong and more shrewd,” Dr. Zebrowitz said.
Which brings us to Mr. Harper and Mr. Martin. When asked to look at pictures of the two leaders, Dr. Zebrowitz said Mr. Harper had the more mature face.
“I think it was the chin,” she said of Mr. Martin. He has “a smaller chin and I think his eyes were bigger.”
[…] Stephen Harper
The strong jaw, long cheekbones and nose of substance should spell competence to voters, according to the findings of researchers. But Canadians turned down a Harper-led government the last time they went to the polls.
Paul Martin
The high forehead, round eyes and, most important, that soft chin melting into his softer neck should have had voters thinking twice about his ability to lead the country. But it wasn’t enough to convince them that he didn’t deserve the job.
- Say something. - Friday October 25, 2024 at 6:03 pm
- Keep going, or veer right - Monday August 26, 2024 at 4:30 pm
- Hey Joel, what is “progressive?” - Friday August 2, 2024 at 11:32 am