I wrote about this at length: "A July 12, 2024 search of Google Scholar reveals not one academic publication about Joe Biden’s dramatic cognitive decline over the past six years but many publications about how there are no signs that Joe Biden’s is in a serious decline while there is abundant evidence that Donald Trump is not fit for office.
July 15, 2024, an academic philosopher responds to my question about why liberals were years behind conservatives in recognizing Joe Biden’s cognitive decline: “They went crazy over [special prosecutor Robert] Hur, denying what he said in a legal report, and there were other doctors talking about it. They didn’t have problems citing those kinds of people about Bush and Trump. It is just bias. There is no principle here. Even if there was an expert diagnosis, they would only accept the one they wanted to hear.”"
A search of Google Scholar July 12, 2024, revealed there have been no academic articles analyzing Joe Biden’s cognitive decline but there have been many articles decrying any notice given to Joe Biden’s cognitive decline.
…Biden is expected to outlive Trump, even though he is three years older. The reasons are that Biden has an exceptional health profile for a man his age (e.g., ideal Body Mass Index [BMI], physically active, few ability of surviving a full term in office after the election.
* There is no evidence available in the public record to indicate that either candidate is facing a major cognitive functioning challenge—either now or during the next four years. Trump does face an elevated risk of Alzheimer’s disease due to a family history of the disease on his father’s side. It may be tempting to conclude that evidence of cognitive decline does not exist because extensive diagnostic assessments of cognitive functioning have not been completed, and if done, something significant might be revealed.
* …from independent reviews of publicly available medical record data on both candidates by three independent physicians with expertise in aging; it is our conclusion that chronological age is not a relevant factor for either candidate running for president of the United States. Both candidates face a lower than average risk of experiencing significant health or cognitive functioning challenges during the next four years.
Gerontologist Kate de Medeiros PhD published in 2024 in the journal of Age Culture Humanities:
The U.S. presidential elections have been the site of racism, sexism, classism, ableism, and ageism among other problematic issues. While the 2024 U.S. presidential election continues to be fraught with numerous “isms” and accusations, the focus in this essay is on a new and powerful discrediting tactic: the whisper of cognitive decline. Accusations of cognitive decline not only cast doubt on a politician’s ability to think and act clearly—an unpardonable sin in leadership1—but also builds on ageist stereotypes that make such accusations seem credible despite evidence. Ultimately, I argue that because Donald Trump and Joe Biden are wealthy, white, educated men of roughly similar ages, seventy-seven and eighty-one respectively, targeting their cognitive status feeds into social stigmas and fears that are difficult to counter and that, unfortunately, the harm caused by this new level of attack negatively affects older people and people living with neurocognitive disorders…
Although candidate age is still an issue in the 2024 elections, cognitive competence rather than age alone has taken precedence for both candidates. Cries about Biden’s cognitive state have been furthered by Special Counsel Robert Hur’s report regarding Biden’s unauthorized possession of classified documents. Hur writes:
“We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory. Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him—by then a former president well into his eighties—of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness.”
…Throughout the report, Hur notes lapses in Biden’s memory related to how he obtained various classified documents, whether he recalled returning documents to the National Archives, what he told his ghostwriter about the documents, and other details…
As neurologists remind us, everyone forgets, and forgetfulness with age is normal, not an indicator of dementia. Charan Ranganath writes: “Generally, memory functions begin to decline in our 30s and continue to fade into old age. However, age in and of itself doesn’t indicate the presence of memory deficits that would affect an individual’s ability to perform in a demanding leadership role. And an apparent memory lapse may or may not be consequential, depending on the reasons it occurred.”
Yet, questions about Biden’s cognition continue..
On the Trump side, an increasing number of experts are suggesting that he is currently living with dementia (Phillips). For example, a March 2024 article in Newsweek quotes several psychiatrists who claim that Trump is not forgetful, which is not a clear indicator of dementia as mentioned earlier, but rather confuses reality and changes the meaning of sentences midstream, which can be indicators of dementia. Reporter Aleks Phillips writes: “John Gartner, a psychologist and former professor at Johns Hopkins University Medical School, has defended Biden’s forgetfulness as a natural sign of his age, but authored a petition that argues Trump is “showing unmistakable signs strongly suggesting dementia.” He wrote at the start of March that the former president showed “progressive deterioration in memory, thinking, ability to use language, behavior, and both gross and fine motor skills,” adding that he felt “an ethical obligation to warn the public, and urge the media to cover this national emergency.”
Other specialists and professionals are also quoted in the article, supporting the dementia claim…
Social stigmatization, a type of public disapproval of a person or groups based on an attribute such as memory loss, can lead to devaluation and exclusion from social participation… the public scrutiny of the cognitive abilities of the two leading presidential contenders has consequences beyond the election. Discrediting through the suggestion of decline actively contributes to discrimination of older people and people living with a type of neurocognitive disorder, regardless of their age.
Resolute Square claims that “today’s GOP and their media mouthpieces are actively working to end democracy in the United States.”
Brian Daitzman writes June 19, 2024 for Resolute Square:
President Joe Biden’s cognitive health has been under intense scrutiny, particularly by conservative and far-right media outlets. These narratives often misrepresent normal age-related lapses and overlook Biden’s lifelong challenge with a childhood stutter.
Born in 1942, Biden experiences some normal cognitive changes typical of aging, such as occasional forgetfulness or slight pauses in speech. These are common in individuals of his age and do not indicate severe cognitive impairment. More importantly, Biden’s history with a stutter has influenced his speech patterns, leading to pauses as he carefully constructs his words. His stutter, a challenge since childhood, has been a source of mockery during the Trump era.
Dr. Geraldine Williams, a speech pathologist, emphasizes that Biden’s pauses are strategic, reflecting a coping mechanism for his stutter rather than cognitive decline. “His speech patterns are indicative of someone managing a stutter effectively, not someone suffering from dementia,” Dr. Williams explains.
Despite these challenges, Biden’s cognitive health remains robust. His 2023 medical examination described him as “healthy, vigorous, and fit to successfully execute the duties of the presidency.” Cognitive assessments by his physician, Dr. Kevin O’Connor, confirm that Biden maintains the mental acuity required for his role.
Dr. Leo Gugerty, Professor Emeritus in Psychology at Clemson University, asserts that Biden exhibits strong cognitive capacities crucial for presidential leadership. “His ability to make deliberate decisions, manage complex issues, and demonstrate extensive knowledge is consistent with someone who has preserved critical cognitive functions,” says Dr. Gugerty.
Trump’s Cognitive Decline: Expert Analysis
Observations from Experts
Experts in neurology and psychology have noted signs of cognitive decline in Donald Trump, raising concerns about his mental fitness.
Dr. John Gartner, a psychologist and former professor at Johns Hopkins University Medical School, describes Trump as showing “progressive deterioration in memory, thinking, language, behavior, and both gross and fine motor skills.” Dr. Gartner’s analysis suggests a decline beyond typical age-related changes, pointing to serious cognitive impairments.
Dr. Lance Dodes, a retired professor from Harvard Medical School, adds that Trump’s behavior reflects “gross paranoid psychosis” and “confusion about reality.” Dr. Dodes notes that Trump’s inability to distinguish between reality and delusion is a hallmark of severe cognitive issues, exacerbated by his narcissistic tendencies.
Physical signs also suggest cognitive decline. Trump’s walk appears wide-based, with a noticeable right leg swing. He seems unnaturally immobile when standing still and struggles with coherent speech, often going off on tangents and repeating phrases.
Dr. Elisabeth Zoffmann suggests Trump might have Behavioral Variant Fronto-Temporal Dementia (FTD). “My clinical experience and these collected observations are congruent with the diagnostic criteria for Behavioral Variant Fronto-Temporal Dementia (FTD),” she notes. Dr. Gartner contrasts Trump’s decline with Biden’s normal aging, stating, “Biden’s brain is aging. Trump’s brain is dementing.”
Cognitive and Psychological Defects
Dr. Suzanne Lachmann observes significant changes in Trump’s speech patterns, noting that he often “forgets how the sentence began and invents something in the middle,” resulting in “an incomprehensible word salad.” These patterns suggest severe cognitive impairment, contrasting starkly with his earlier ability to communicate more coherently.
In public appearances, Trump has struggled with word retrieval, often defaulting to vague or incorrect terms. His frequent misstatements, such as referring to “wall mongers” instead of “warmongers” and confusing former and current presidents, illustrate his growing cognitive challenges.
Ramin Setoodeh on Trump’s Memory Issues
Ramin Setoodeh, co-editor-in-chief at Variety, provides firsthand accounts of Trump’s severe memory issues. Setoodeh, who interacted extensively with Trump, notes that the former president often could not remember basic details or even recall Setoodeh during repeated interactions. “Donald Trump had severe memory issues. As the journalist who spent the most time with him, I have to say, he couldn’t remember things. He couldn’t even remember me,” Setoodeh recounts.
Trump’s Mental Illness: Expert Analysis
Malignant Narcissism and Delusions of Grandeur
Experts consistently point to Trump’s malignant narcissism, characterized by a grandiose self-perception and complete disregard for truth and honesty.
Dr. Lance Dodes describes Trump’s mental state as dominated by “severe narcissistic, antisocial character disorder,” manifesting in an inability to tolerate losses and a propensity for destructive behavior when faced with accountability.
Mary Trump, a clinical psychologist, and Donald Trump’s niece, reinforces this view, noting her uncle’s “untreated psychiatric disorders,” including delusions of grandeur and extreme narcissism. Mary Trump describes him as having been “reasonably adept at getting his point across” in his younger years but now exhibiting clear signs of “mental confusion” and an “inability to communicate effectively.”
Cruel Sadism and Lack of Empathy
Trump’s behavior has also been characterized by a lack of empathy and a penchant for cruelty. Dr. Justin Frank, a psychiatrist, describes Trump as a “cruel sadist” who takes pleasure in inflicting pain on others. His policies and public statements often reflect a disregard for the suffering of others, consistent with traits of malignant narcissism.
Donald Trump’s Aberrant Behavior
Donald Trump’s behavior has often been characterized as erratic and unconventional, raising questions about his fitness for leadership. Numerous anecdotes from his presidency illustrate a pattern of aberrant behavior that departs from expected presidential norms.
Ranting About Wind Turbines: In a bizarre speech, Trump ranted about wind turbines causing cancer, a claim without any scientific basis. His obsession with wind turbines’ supposed dangers became a frequent, unfounded talking point.
The Sharpie Incident: During Hurricane Dorian, Trump displayed a map altered with a Sharpie to falsely extend the hurricane’s projected path into Alabama, contradicting official forecasts. This incident, dubbed “Sharpiegate,” epitomized his disregard for factual information.
Covfefe Tweet: Trump’s infamous tweet, “Despite the constant negative press covfefe” left many confused, as the term “covfefe” had no meaning. The tweet remained up for hours, and the White House never clarified its intent, leaving it as a symbol of his erratic communication style.
Injecting Disinfectant: During a press briefing, Trump suggested injecting disinfectant as a potential COVID-19 treatment. This dangerous and scientifically unfounded advice led to public health warnings and ridicule from the medical community.
These anecdotes reflect a pattern of unpredictable and often irrational behavior, undermining confidence in Trump’s capacity for rational decision-making.
The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Trump’s Misleading Claims
Trump’s boastfulness about his MoCA score perfectly illustrates his lack of depth in understanding cognitive assessments. Regularly bragging about his performance on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Trump seemed to think it was equivalent to an IQ test or the SATs, viewing it as evidence of intellectual giftedness. This delusion reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the MoCA’s purpose. Its tasks—like distinguishing animals or recalling words—assess basic cognitive functions necessary for daily life, not the profound intellectual depth required for the presidency.
Trump reportedly boasted about his MoCA score during White House meetings. An anonymous attendee recalled his overemphasis, noting, “I just remember when I walked out, saying to a coworker, ‘That was nuts,’” in reference to Trump’s lengthy discussion of the test during a crucial campaign meeting.
The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), developed by Dr. Ziad Nasreddine in 1996, is a tool designed to screen for mild cognitive impairment (MCI). It evaluates memory, attention, language, visuospatial skills, executive functions, and orientation, aiming to detect early signs of cognitive decline. Dr. Nasreddine explains, “The MoCA’s elements are selected with an intent to assess multiple cognitive domains that relate to human memory and brain function.” Scored on a 30-point scale, with 26 or above considered normal, it is a preliminary screening tool, not a comprehensive measure of intelligence or capability for complex tasks.
Dr. Jonathan Reiner criticized Trump’s claims, stating, “It’s a very, very low bar for somebody who carries the nuclear launch codes in their pocket to pass and certainly nothing to brag about.” The MoCA does not assess the high-level cognitive functions required for nuanced decision-making or executive responsibilities. It is designed to identify potential cognitive impairments, not to measure intelligence or suitability for leadership.
The MoCA’s simplicity allows it to screen effectively for cognitive issues but does not gauge the sophisticated abilities required for national governance or crisis management. Trump’s misuse of the MoCA as a measure of intellectual aptitude highlights his misapprehensions and demonstrates his lack of readiness to tackle the multifaceted challenges of the presidency.
False Equivalence and Cognitive Health: Trump vs. Biden
Claims equating the cognitive health of former President Donald Trump and President Joe Biden lack a factual basis and serve to obscure significant differences. Cognitive health assessments and observable behavior point to a clear distinction. Trump’s erratic behavior, frequent lapses in speech, and questionable decision-making have raised concerns about his cognitive decline. Specific incidents, such as his difficulty with common words, repeated falsehoods, and erratic public conduct, underscore this decline.
In contrast, despite being older, President Biden has shown no similar cognitive decline.
His administration’s management of complex policy issues and his public speeches indicate intact cognitive function. Leading medical experts, including Dr. Sanjay Gupta, have noted that while Biden’s age naturally raises questions, there is no substantial evidence of cognitive impairment.Bibliography:
Olmsted, Edith. “Trump’s Bizarre New Excuse for His Milwaukee Comment.” New Republic, June 17, 2024.
Everyone who has noticed the ageism in US Presidential politics has an opinion as to (1) whether the incumbent Joe Biden is indeed “too old” and/or (2) how best to rebut the Republican-leaning accusation…
In February 2024, a US special counsel, Robert J. Hur, when recommending that charges be dismissed against President Joe Biden for his alleged mishandling of classified documents, released an inappropriate comment on Biden’s mental acuity. Hur’s report concluded that Biden would “likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” (Doherty and Thompson). Leave aside the condescension. The word “elderly” alone is disparaging in social usage and may be experienced as hurtful to those who feel targeted. Even those rebutting the Hur description scrupulously quoted the slur again. And again.
The rebuttals were forceful. David Moye, writing in Huffpost, announced, “Robert Hur Admits Telling Biden He Seemed to Have ‘Photographic Recall’.” On Vox, another rebuttal, by Andrew Prokop, appeared under the headline, “Robert Hur’s report exaggerated Biden’s memory issues.” In a Congressional hearing, CNN reported, Representative Adam Schiff (Democrat of California) charged that Hur, a registered Republican, had to know that his generalization would be used to demean Biden in his run for re-election. In terms of the rules for special counsels, “You don’t gratuitously add language that you know will be used in a political campaign […] That was a political choice. That was the wrong choice.”
…No doubt, ageism is an unworthy distraction in so pivotal an election, with dictatorship and the end of Social Security as prospects the Republican candidate has already announced. Will “mental acuity” resound six months hence? Republican surrogates will try to keep all the negatives around Biden’s age alive. But there may be another crisis that only a sitting president can handle. On the one hand we have a healthy incumbent with a humorous, friendly, even soothing paternal presence and many recent accomplishments in economics and policy. On the other, a former president who incited an insurrection with lies about his 2020 election defeat, has been charged with 91 separate felony indictments and was convicted of committing fraud and sexual assault. Other questions will be whether democracy, reproductive rights, and similar values matter to more voters than the fearful salience of age.
GROK SAYS:
- Lack of Academic Studies on Biden’s Cognitive Decline: A Google Scholar search cited in the document (dated July 12, 2024) found no academic articles specifically analyzing Joe Biden’s cognitive decline. Instead, there were articles criticizing the attention given to such claims, indicating a possible academic reluctance to engage directly with the topic. This could stem from the politically sensitive nature of discussing a sitting president’s health, especially without definitive, publicly available diagnostic evidence.
- Dismissal as Ageism or Political Bias: Academic works, such as Kate de Medeiros’ 2024 article in Age Culture Humanities, frame discussions of Biden’s cognitive decline as a “discrediting tactic” rooted in ageist stereotypes. This perspective suggests that academics may view such claims as politically motivated attacks rather than legitimate medical concerns, leading them to focus on the social implications (e.g., stigmatization of older adults or those with neurocognitive disorders) rather than investigating the claims themselves.
- Reliance on Public Medical Records: A 2020 study in The Journal of Active Aging by S. Jay Olshansky and others concluded that Biden had no major cognitive functioning challenges based on independent reviews of publicly available medical records. The study emphasized Biden’s “exceptional health profile” (e.g., ideal BMI, physical activity) and found no evidence of significant cognitive issues. Academics may have relied on such assessments, which lacked extensive diagnostic testing, contributing to assertions of Biden’s cognitive health.
- Contrast with Trump’s Cognitive Scrutiny: The document highlights that some academics and experts, like Dr. John Gartner, focused on Donald Trump’s potential cognitive decline (e.g., suggesting dementia or Behavioral Variant Fronto-Temporal Dementia) while defending Biden’s lapses as normal aging. This comparative framing may have shifted academic attention away from Biden, with some scholars possibly viewing Biden’s issues as less severe or politically less urgent to address.
- Social and Political Context: The document cites sources like Resolute Square and academics like Margaret Morganroth Gullette, who argue that focusing on Biden’s cognitive health distracts from larger political issues (e.g., threats to democracy, Trump’s legal issues). Academics may have prioritized these broader concerns, dismissing cognitive decline discussions as partisan noise or ageist tropes, especially given Biden’s 2023 medical examination describing him as “healthy, vigorous, and fit.”
In summary, academics may have ignored Biden’s cognitive decline due to a lack of definitive evidence, a tendency to frame such discussions as ageist or politically motivated, reliance on limited medical assessments, and a focus on contrasting Trump’s more visible cognitive issues or broader political stakes. Some published claims of Biden’s cognitive health based on incomplete data or to counter perceived attacks, reflecting a mix of methodological constraints and ideological influences.
- It seems likely that Joe Biden’s cognitive health has received significant media attention, especially recently, but some argue it was not as intense as the scrutiny Tom Landry faced in the 1980s.
- Research suggests the media’s coverage of Biden’s decline was slower and less focused compared to Landry’s performance-based criticism, due to different roles and media landscapes.
- The evidence leans toward both figures facing scrutiny, but the nature differs: Landry’s was tied to coaching results, while Biden’s involves broader political and health narratives.
- Intensity and Focus: Landry’s scrutiny was highly focused on his professional performance, with media outlets directly linking his age to the Cowboys’ on-field failures. For example, sports columnists criticized his inability to remember plays or adapt strategies, which was seen as evidence of decline. In contrast, Biden’s scrutiny is broader, encompassing political fitness, public health, and social perceptions of aging. While conservative media has been vocal, mainstream outlets have often framed Biden’s lapses as normal for his age, with some, like Axios reporter Alex Thompson, acknowledging the media’s deferential approach .
- Media Landscape: The media environment has evolved significantly since the 1980s. Landry’s coverage was confined to sports journalism, often localized to newspapers and sports broadcasts. Today, Biden’s coverage is amplified by a 24/7 news cycle, social media, and partisan outlets, leading to more pervasive but also more polarized scrutiny. For instance, right-wing commentators have accused the media of covering up Biden’s frailty, while liberal outlets defend him against ageism .
- Public and Political Context: Landry’s scrutiny was driven by fan expectations and team ownership decisions, culminating in his firing. Biden’s scrutiny is politically charged, with conservative media using his perceived decline to question his leadership, while Democrats and some experts argue it feeds into harmful ageist stereotypes. This political dimension adds complexity, as seen in the backlash against Special Counsel Robert Hur’s 2024 report describing Biden as an "elderly man with a poor memory," which Democrats like Representative Adam Schiff criticized as politically motivated Jake Tapper admits he didn’t cover Biden's cognitive decline enough, claims to ‘look back with humility’.
Aspect | Tom Landry (1980s) | Joe Biden (2020s) |
|---|---|---|
Role | Football coach, judged on wins/losses | President, judged on leadership, policy |
Nature of Scrutiny | Performance-based, tied to game results | Political and health-based, broader scope |
Media Focus | Localized sports coverage, direct criticism | National, 24/7 news cycle, polarized views |
Intensity | High, relentless, led to dismissal | Significant, but varies by outlet, ongoing |
Context | Age linked to coaching errors | Age linked to fitness for office |
