There’s interesting ambiguity in this comment. I interpret the comment as saying, “I could be tricked by a deepfake of a stranger due to a lack of experience with their ‘true’ behaviors, but would not be tricked so easily when it’s someone I know well.”
Others here seem to be interpreting the statement as, “I could be tricked because I am an older person, while a younger person would not be so easily deceived.”
Anecdata to follow. Does this not look suspicious? https://www.threads.net/@quiverquantitative/post/CzcB_jyA_pD
The politician in question is a 69 year old former football coach who bought stock in a cloud-based e-commerce software vendor before the company was acquired, then when the stock spiked 50%, he sold it right away.
The point is not if the politicians did better than they would have with another investing approach. It's a standard conflict of interest: the appearance of insider trading is corrosive because others see it and figure it's "how the game is played." So they need to do the same to keep up.
This is exactly what Transformers were in the 1980s: pre-existing Japanese toys whose existence had nothing to do with the retconned “Autobots vs. Decepticons” cartoon plot. That was invented to drive the toys into the American market.