'Electoral headhunter' claims we vote based on intuition, not on reason
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 18, 2024, 09:38:11 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Process (Moderator: muon2)
  'Electoral headhunter' claims we vote based on intuition, not on reason
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: 'Electoral headhunter' claims we vote based on intuition, not on reason  (Read 4587 times)
zeegerd
Newbie
*
Posts: 1
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: March 14, 2012, 03:36:27 AM »

All the years I followed the news and compared tables with political viewpoints of parties, weighing them, then finding the best party to vote for. That seems a pretty good thing to do, right?

I just stumbled upon a site (called Electoral Headhunter -> with a - in the middle and dot com at the end) which claims it doesn't work like that.

At all. On the contrary. Time is spent in vain comparing. Stop watching the debates. Etc.

It states that we make a decision very quickly, intuitively, based on what we perceive, even (or mostly, or only?) by seeing the faces of the candidates. At least, the best choices are made that way.

To prove (or check) their point, they will give you a voting advice based on how much you like a couple of faces. This firstly seems to be meant in a fun way, but they cite some scientific findings (I copy/paste):

---

    *  Children (even from age 5) asked to predict whom will win presidential elections in (even) a different country, predict correctly in majority. By the way, don't worry: also adults will do this correctly.
    * However, when asked to 'think carefully' about the probable winner before picking one, your predictive power diminishes.
    * These 'predictive powers' are mainly unlinked to candidate characteristics such as gender, age, fame, beauty, etc.

---

I could also cite the links they use to more info about these findings, but that's yet impossible (too few posts), at least they come from articles in The Scientific American.

What do you guys reckon?  Are we tricked by reality into believing that it's good to rationally weigh viewpoints -- or on the contrary, by the claims of this site?

BTW the voting advice for me was the right party, although the complete advice was really not 100% correct (seems impossible: quite some viewpoints are listed too).
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,890
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: March 14, 2012, 05:56:57 PM »

Proving most people are idiots =/= proving idiocy is good.
Logged
Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario)
Vazdul
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,295
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: April 20, 2012, 10:52:17 PM »

LMAO. It told me I should vote Libertarian. I'm not buying it.
Logged
Hatman 🍁
EarlAW
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,968
Canada


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: April 20, 2012, 11:33:55 PM »

Seemed to describe me very well; told me to vote Green. Of course I tended to choose women, Ralph Nader and men with facial hair. If there were more minorities, I would've chosen them. I am less trustful of traditional political looks (ie clean cut middle aged white males)
Logged
HagridOfTheDeep
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,717
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -4.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: May 01, 2012, 11:46:38 PM »

I'd often get a mix between Constitutionalist and Republican. Fair enough.
Logged
Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon
htmldon
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,983
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.03, S: -2.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: May 01, 2012, 11:54:34 PM »

This has to be one of the dumbest sites I have ever seen.
Logged
Yelnoc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,127
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: May 02, 2012, 03:06:18 PM »

Both times I tried my clicks were completely "undeterminable".  Sounds about right.
Logged
SUSAN CRUSHBONE
a Person
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,735
Antarctica


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: May 02, 2012, 03:17:33 PM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
No, not really.
Logged
Adam Griffin
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,085
Greece


Political Matrix
E: -7.35, S: -6.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: May 16, 2012, 04:09:08 PM »

I think it's a fluke, but it got me spot on:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

All strong issues for me.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yep.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm not exactly sure what it meant by 'thinking once more', but these are issues on which I have weak concerns or no heavily-entrenched opinion.
Logged
TJ in Oregon
TJ in Cleve
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,952
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: 6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: May 16, 2012, 11:47:55 PM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Oh my, this was wrong on almost every issue.
Logged
Smid
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,151
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: May 17, 2012, 01:04:09 AM »

I love how someone "just stumbled" upon a website that impressed him so much that he just had to sign up for the Forum to tell us all about it as his very first post, and then doesn't make another post in the next two months.

Anyway, I took the test and I think it put me on the opposite side of every issue, it was quite funny really. In the end it told me I should vote Libertarian.
Logged
Chaddyr23
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 479
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.19, S: -5.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: May 20, 2012, 03:53:06 PM »

The results.

To start with, you would start a war in favour of legal same-sex marriage. Even looking at your eyes would reveal that you would put up a fight against abortion restrictions. And we would think you would start a war in favour of drug liberalization. Even looking at your eyes would reveal that you start smiling when it comes to civilian gun control, more progressive taxation, public campaign finance and universal health care. Something else, you are neutral about foreign interventionism, ending capital punishment and strengthening immigration laws.

The advice: Undeterminable.

Not completely clear! The advice is a tie between Democrats and Greens

lol, wow. This is too funny
Logged
Chaddyr23
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 479
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.19, S: -5.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: May 20, 2012, 03:54:22 PM »

Seemed to describe me very well; told me to vote Green. Of course I tended to choose women, Ralph Nader and men with facial hair. If there were more minorities, I would've chosen them. I am less trustful of traditional political looks (ie clean cut middle aged white males)

LMAO! Yeah that was my thought process too!!!
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.035 seconds with 12 queries.