“Since good-looking politicians win more votes, a beauty advantage for politicians on the left or on the right is bound to have political consequences. We show that politicians on the right look more beautiful in Europe, the United States and Australia. Our explanation is that beautiful people earn more, which makes them less inclined to support redistribution. Our model of within-party competition predicts that voters use beauty as a cue for conservatism when they do not know much about candidates and that politicians on the right benefit more from beauty in low-information elections. Evidence from real and experimental elections confirms both predictions.”
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272716302201
The thesis that conservative politicians are better looking also means that progressives and the Left are not as good-looking. Is it illegal yet to advance the thesis that they are downright ugly? Could it be that the doctrines one holds are also a mirror to the soul? The philosopher Wittgenstein said “the human body is the best picture of the human soul”:
https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/ludwig_wittgenstein_139240
There is debate about what he meant, but for me, it is not implausible to suppose that metaphysical ugliness, through the acceptance of dehumanising philosophical positions, carves physical ugliness into the body. Thus, I have yet to see a good-looking and healthy radical Leftoid:
www.returnofkings.com/118536/why-liberals-are-so-physically-monstrous-and-repulsive