political ads very well. And that wasn't even the point of the research.

The article basically said that human beings are generally happier with the decisions they make when choosing between two or more bad alternatives than they are between two or more good alternatives.

Obviously, you would be happier with the OUTCOME when choosing between good alternatives. But when evaluating the process of making a decision and feeling you made the best decision you could, there is more fulfillment in choosing between bad alternatives.

As a simple example, a kid may angst over a choice between chocolate sauce and sprinkles for their ice cream, and whichever one they did choose, they are more likely to regret the choice. But ask them if they want broccoli or brussel sprouts with dinner, they will pick one and never really second guess themselves.

With that psychology of human decision making in mind, poo-throwing campaigns make perfect sense. Voters can get more energetic about voting against a candidate they dislike more than for a candidate they like more.