Russell Pangborn
In 2020 I wrote an article on a historic decision by Scientific American to endorse a Presidential candidate. It took a lot for an organization that wanted to stay above politics to make this leap. But they judged it was too dangerous not to. So they endorsed Donald Trump’s rival.
In 2024 Scientific American has doubled down because the situation has become even more dangerous. If a wannabe dictator fails the first time, the worst thing that can happen is to give them another opportunity. The candidate learned something from the Jan 6 failed attempt to foil the peaceful transfer of power and not having yes men installed in various levels of government.
Apparently the supreme court, the Republican party, some billionaires, racists, and those who yearn for authoritarian rule want to support another kick at the can. Kudos to Scientific American’s historic second Presidential endorsement in 176 years.
So they endorse a genocidal maniac. FFS!
As a retired scientist I believe that science and politics don’t mix, just as religion and politics don’t mix.
-science deals with matters of fact
-politics deals with people’s subjective choices
-Religion deals with arbitrary concepts of an afterlife
While science is ojective, the other two are not.
A person’s preference for a particular candidate over another one is a purely subjective matter and science can never provide a guide to the correct choice.