Why You May Not Like Ted Cruz's Face, According To Science (qz.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Ted Cruz pitches himself as an overcomer, an underdog, an outsider who beats the odds. While the Republic candidate has won four states in this nomination race so far, a neurologist says he still faces a big obstacle with voters: his own face. In an interview with Quartz, George Washington University's Richard E. Cytowic said the unusual movements of Cruz's face may make him seem less sincere to the human brain than other candidates. "The normal way a face moves is what's called the Duchenne smile, named after the 19th century French neurologist. So the mouth goes up, the eyes narrow and the eyes crinkle at the outside, forming crows feet," said Cytowic, a professor of neurology. "Cruz doesn't give a Duchenne smile. His mouth goes in a tight line across or else it curves down in an anti-Duchenne smile. So he doesn't come across as sincere at all." Visceral reactions probably drive a lot more of politics than anyone likes to admit; seeming trustworthy isn't the same as being trustworthy, but it sure helps win people over.

Comments

Less sincere than a politician?

[penguinoid]

may make him seem less sincere than other candidates.

I'm not sure that's possible.

Never mind his face, I don't like him.

[Anonymous Coward]

Affordable health care has been an issue for most of my adult, working life. Republicans and Democrats alike have proposed solutions, but until six years ago no one delivered.

We had a vote. The majority, the fricken majority chose the winner, and the winner delivered on a campaign promise to deliver affordable health care to everyone.

The fricken majority.

And he and his ilk have spent six years since then trying to over turn what the fricken majority voted for.

Is it any wonder nobody likes him?

Re:Never mind his face, I don't like him.

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean the majority that after that abomination was passed has been trying for the past six years to get rid of it? The majority that's currently supporting candidates who will get rid of it?

People wanted health care reform, sure. They didn't want to be forced to be overly expensive health plans.

All we needed was tort reform and a little loosening of the ridiculous FDA restrictions, but no, Obama dumped even more regulations into the system.

There's a reason Trump is winning and winning big.

Re:Never mind his face, I don't like him.

[Anonymous Coward]

Just reversing the rule prohibiting buying prescription drugs from Canada would dramatically lower the costs for millions of Americans who, despite being forced to buy "affordable health care", are stuck with ridiculously high deductible policies that don't even provide co-pays for drugs until they meet their deductible, which they can't do because their premiums are ridiculously high.

Re:Never mind his face, I don't like him.

[Anonymous Coward]

Affordable health care has been an issue for most of my adult, working life. Republicans and Democrats alike have proposed solutions, but until six years ago no one delivered.

We had a vote. The majority, the fricken majority chose the winner, and the winner delivered on a campaign promise to deliver affordable health care to everyone.

The fricken majority.

And he and his ilk have spent six years since then trying to over turn what the fricken majority voted for.

Is it any wonder nobody likes him?

If Obamacare does get repealed, it will have been repealed by the fricken majority.

The will have been a vote. And Obamacare will have been overturned by the majority, the fricken majority.

And if the winner this November is Trump, he will have delivered on a campaign promise to overturn Obamacare.

I just hope the Republicans ram the overturning through using every shady legislative trick possible just to teach the Democrats a lesson.

And then the Republicans keep going and use every damn legislative dirty trick to ram through laws that prevent government employee unions of any sort from making any campaign contributions to any politician.

Because there's NOTHING more corrupt than forcibly using union dues that come from taxpayer-funded salaries to make hundreds of millions of dollars of campaign contributions - that's GOVERNMENT BY THE GOVERNMENT FOR THE GOVERNMENT. Also known as "tyranny". And it's the modus operendi of the Democratic Party in the US.

Re:Never mind his face, I don't like him.

[Waffle Iron]

So essentially, you advocate the standard Republican health plan: "Don't get sick. And if you do get sick, die quickly."

Re:Never mind his face, I don't like him.

[dmr001]

Or it means you had diabetes (and there are plenty of thin, otherwise people with diabetes) and didn't work for a company that offered health insurance;

Or it means you had a (now illegal) plan that "covered" well child visits, just not more than 2 in the first two years of life (out of the 9 that are the standard of care);

Or it means you fell off a ladder painting your house and broke your back;

Or it means you have congenital heart disease —

SORRY SUCKERS! You shouldn't have had Pacific Islander grandparents/been a kid/painted your house/been born — not my problem! I'm not saying "Your problem, not mine" isn't a valid viewpoint, but I do think that letting people who have treatable medical problems through no fault of their own drop dead in the streets is a bit more individualistic than all but the most libertarian viewpoints in the US. Not to mention every single other developed nation on the planet, that somehow manage to have popular support for their universal health care systems yet still spend about half of what we do.

It's not the face itself that turns me off

[Opportunist]

It's what comes out of it when he opens his mouth.

Re:Where are such analysis of Hillary!, anyway?

[hey!]

Well it doesn't take much of a study to show Hillary Clinton is not good at projecting warmth and sincerity on the stump. She's at her best in debates, where she she seems a lot more real. On the stump she seems really phony, and the big smile that doesn't reach to the eyes is a big part of that.

Now does that actually mean anything? Imagine you're a politician giving a campagin speech before a group. This may be the twentieth time you've given this exact speech before a similar group in the last week, but you've got to make it fresh for them, make your response to them seem spontaneous and authentic. It's well nigh impossible, but some people can do it. Bill Clinton can do it.

You know who else can do it? Donald Trump. If you think about what he's saying even a little bit he's clearly en epic bullshitter, but he makes a genuine-seeming emotional connection with crowds. And I think it seems genuine because on a certain level it is genuine. He's morbidly narcissistic and craves the admiration they're giving him.

It's not his face I care about

[kimvette]

I don't care about politicians' faces. Really.

I don't dislike Cruz because of his smile; I dislike Cruz because he's an asshole.

Re: "Appears" Insincere?

[Darinbob]

You can be white of pure European ancestry and be Cuban, Mexican, Columbian, etc. It's actually pretty common from some hispanic countries. That's why "hispanic" is not an ethnicity more than it is a social grouping.

I don't like his face because

[Gojira Shipi-Taro]

He's a Theocratist Shit-Sack. Anyone that even HINTS that the Bible should win out over the Constitution can go get fucked sideways with a bandsaw. Keep your church out of my life you christian taliban motherfucker.