Nothing to see here, move alongBecause he writes stuff like this:
See, Sarah Palin is graded on the hot chick curve. Men wanna f%$# her and women with low self-esteem wanna be her, so whatever she does just affirms that she is hot and f%$#able and gets to travel. If she looked like Kay Bailey Hutchison, we wouldn’t even be talking about her. Palin knows it. And she wields her sexuality like a distraction while she magically steals attention from those smarter than her.
It ain’t just Palin. Let’s face it: if Hillary Clinton had looked like Sarah Palin, she’d be president. And if Barack Obama had looked like Dennis Kucinich, he would not. But, Jesus, you could argue there was substance there. It’s a sad fact of America in the 21st-century that shallowness is a quality and depth makes you an out-of-touch elitist.
(%%# mine)
He cuts to the core of the issue here: that there are an awful lot of people in the United States who think that the manner of selecting our leaders should involve no more intellectual rigor than selecting Miss Alaska (and by the way, she lost that one too).
The proposition that Kucinich's looks work against him and that Obama's and Palin's work for them is reasonable, but I think "hot chick" is probably an exaggeration. Is there any evidence that men find her sexually attractive?
As for "an awful lot of people in the United States who think that the manner of selecting our leaders should involve no more intellectual rigor than selecting Miss Alaska" – I think that's clearly false. People are instinctively, uncontrollably biased in favor of good looking people. That does not mean that they believe that looks should be the criterion for public office.
As to evidence to the fact that men, at least some men, find her sexually attractive, as evidenced by the Rich Lowrey comment that implied that he was nearly masturbating to her winking at the debates.
Me, not so much. Rachael Maddow is more my type, though I am not her type. :'(
I think that I have repeatedly seen the "hot chick curve," in my social interactions, particularly in college, and I think much of her political viability is tied into her looks.
I remember in 1999-2000 when Republican women were swooning over George W. Bush.
I've seen (yes, just anecdotally) a lot of more this among Republicans than Democrats.
My guess is that the whole "for the manor born" outlook feels more comfortable with talking about physical attractiveness as a criteria for a candidate.