Well, everything we do are popularity contests. Voting for President, Prime Minister, Supreme Chancellor, Ruler of the Universe, whatever. We don't really get the candidates we want because they're never considered 'viable', so then it becomes about personality. So, now we've got the biggest personality (not just ego) in a long time in the White House. Like him or not like him, he's the center of attention.
I often wonder if the Nobel Peace Prize isn't also a popularity contest. If not for the people themselves, at least the fields of study or for the conclusions being made. I used to think Nobel Prizes might be based on merit, until Barack Obama got one for doing absolutely nothing.
I never looked at it that way, but yes the US has just elected a big reality TV personality. Sign of the times I guess :)
Don't get me started on the Nobel Prize stuff. That Obama award really just killed the Nobel Peace Prize for me as a credible award based on merit. I am still dirty about that and it if it's indicative of all the Nobel Prizes then it really is a very sad demise if a highly respected institution historically.
Oh, I would say it happens more than either of us would like, but I would also say there's still some merit to it. But a peace prize is about as political as it gets, don't you think? One man's peacemaker is bound to be someone else's warmonger or sellout or something. My issue is that a lot of science, if not all of it now, is agenda driven in one way or another, so instead of being based on the scientific method, it's based on the policies being driven by whatever government is willing to foot the bills. Or, I suppose you could add in global corporations, since they do a lot of R & D and tend to get political about it, too.