Imagine if the New York Times and company had covered Joe Biden’s mental acuity with as much scrutiny as the media gave former Dallas Cowboys coach Tom Landry in his declining years?
The Chicago Tribune published Nov. 6, 1988:
The legendary football coach, known for his fedora and his impassive expression on the sidelines, offered no excuses and few plausible explanations for the Dallas Cowboys` fifth straight loss, which dropped the club`s record to 2-7, the team`s worst start in 25 seasons.
In Dallas, however, many fans and critics thought they knew the reason:
Tom Landry.
He`s ”senile,” sportswriters and fans cried after the 64-year-old coach became confused about the ball`s position in the final seconds of a recent game. The confusion led to a disastrous Dallas error and a 24-23 loss to the Philadelphia Eagles in the final four seconds.
”Petrified cells beneath the funny hat,” one columnist diagnosed, decrying Landry`s quirky play-calling and his refusal to delegate authority to his assistants.
The Chicago Tribune published July 29, 1990:
Dallas sports columnist Skip Bayless labeled Landry ”senile” during the 1988 season when a 3-13 record and a change in ownership ended one of the most remarkable success stories in sports history.
…Calling him ”a prisoner of his myth,” Bayless also writes Landry ”was just a small-town guy with a mild speech impediment who sometimes couldn`t remember the names of his players. . . . The real Landry at times seemed to blank out under pressure on the sideline, forgetting plays or calling ones that didn`t exist or made no sense. . . . Yes, beneath the stoneface facade, the coat and tie, Landry sometimes came unraveled, at the expense of his quarterback. Yet the real Landry was too insecure to ever accept any blame.”
…”God`s Coach” is not on Landry`s shelf.
”No, I don`t read Skip Bayless. I think he`s probably spoken to me about twice in the last four years, so I don`t think he has my feelings or my thoughts,” Landry said.
The one time I was next to Tom Landry was in the locker room after the Dec. 22, 1985 game when the 49ers defeated the Cowboys 31-16 at Candlestick Park. I was a news reporter for KAHI/KHYL radio. I was walking out of the 49ers press conference and towards the visitors locker room. Tom Landry was standing in the hallway talking to several journalists. I stuck my microphone into the mix and heard Tom say, “I haven’t talked to Skip Bayless in four years.”
Ditka remembers Landry botching plays and worse. As the team`s offensive and defensive coordinator refusing to delegate authority, Landry changed a game plan and cost the Cowboys their first Super Bowl in 1970.
”He tried to do it again the next year, and we wouldn`t let him,” Ditka said.
…Pete Gent didn`t understand Landry either. A former Cowboy and author who has made a living writing about the Cowboys, Gent told Bayless: ”What many guys wanted was for Tom to be their father figure. The two guys he had the most trouble with, Duane Thomas and Thomas Henderson, had lost their fathers, and they looked to Tom. But there was this erratic split in Tom`s personality, the business and the religion. Here`s a man dealing in human flesh and crippling injuries, betraying men, possibly lying to them about their physical conditions, deceiving them about why they`ve been released, keeping them ignorant and scared. I just don`t believe a man can preach moral ethics and do what he did.”
Ron Fimrite writes in the Sep. 3, 1990 edition of Sports Illustrated:
Bayless sees Landry, Cowboy president Tex Schramm and personnel director Gil Brandt—all of whom left the organization last year when the team was sold to Arkansas businessman Jerry Jones—as an “unholy trinity.” Schramm, who built the franchise from scratch, is dismissed as a bibulous blowhard whose steadfast promotion of the Cowboys as America’s Team served primarily as a motivational tool for opponents enraged by such presumption.
Brandt, widely credited with introducing computer technology to scouting, is, in Bayless’s hard-eyed view, a phony who knows virtually nothing about either football or technology. Bayless suggests that Brandt lasted 29 years in the game only by calling in markers from college coaches he had treated to favors. And team owner Clint Murchison was, for Bayless, an incorrigible philanderer who sank so low as to steal the wife of one of his employees-Brandt’s, as it turned out…
In one of his newspaper columns cited in this book, Bayless even suggested that the once-revered stone face had grown senile. At his best, says Bayless, Landry wouldn’t have won the “big ones” without quarterback Roger Staubach countermanding his orders and calling his own plays.
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.