Seeker_UK
Feelin' nearly faded as my jeans
As there was with Goldwater.
He may "look" so a to a lay person but whether that is due to any underlying medical condition is pure speculation to anyone without access to any test data.
Post-Trump: III (decline, further tantrums, legal proceedings, book deals etc)
- Thread starter Yank
- Start date
As there was with Goldwater.
He may "look" so a to a lay person but whether that is due to any underlying medical condition is pure speculation to anyone without access to any test data.
matthewr
spɹɐʍʞɔɐq spɹoɔǝɹ ɹnoʎ sʎɐld
I think you are ignoring all that has changed since 1973 or even 2016 and all the debate that has happened since. Lots of papers and discussions within Psychology over those years. Here for example : https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8886301/
My own view has changed over that time so I went from being openly critical of people here diagnosing Trump for various ailments to a view more in step with modern psychiatry and just the practicalities of the world we live in now compared to 1973.
You may of course hold a different view, but I don't think it's correct to persent this as any sort of medical consensus now.
Seeker_UK
Feelin' nearly faded as my jeans
I am very uneasy about the whole approach. IANAP, but it seems to me that bandying around this sort of diagnosis, based on an appeal of authority sets a dangerous precedent for future presidential campaigning.
Of course not, just my opinion.
To be clear, I don't like Trump and anything he stands for but to descend into the same tactics as him is not a good look.
DonQuixote99
pfm Member
I seriously think Trump has forfeited the right to any such consideration due to his continuous and outrageous attacks on President Biden's mental fitness. Moreover, such attacks are among many reasons to say Trump is prima facie a mental and moral ruin. Since the re-election of a man in such state would be catastrophic, the most authoritative assessments available are needed, and justified by circumstances.Clearly Dr Gartner feels he is above any need to adhere to the "Goldwater Rule".
"On occasion psychiatrists are asked for an opinion about an individual who is in the light of public attention or who has disclosed information about himself/herself through public media. In such circumstances, a psychiatrist may share with the public his or her expertise about psychiatric issues in general. However, it is unethical for a psychiatrist to offer a professional opinion unless he or she has conducted an examination and has been granted proper authorization for such a statement."
Goldwater rule - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
And from The Alzheimer's Society, why diagnosing from afar is unhelpful.
Donald Trump, Joe Biden and dementia: Why not to diagnose from a distance
In recent years, there has been a lot of speculation that Donald Trump and Joe Biden may have dementia or some form of mental health condition. However, this kind of speculation is usually wrong, is unethical and stigmatises people living with dementia and mental health conditions.www.alzheimers.org.uk
matthewr
spɹɐʍʞɔɐq spɹoɔǝɹ ɹnoʎ sʎɐld
And to be clear back, it's not Trumpian tactics or a simple appeal to authority but a considered view based on an understanding of the evolving views of people in the profession. I just don't think the 1973 view is tenable any more.
Tony L
Administrator
Given the severity of the situation, i.e. the position of POTUS with all the power and potential for violence that can bring, I feel every professional has a duty to speak out. We are talking about handing nuclear launch codes to a person who would almost certainly not be passed as mentally competent to drive a school bus.
This is also nothing new, e.g. Mary L Trump, a clinical psychologist, has been speaking out for years. As have many others. The stakes are so high anyone with a credible skillset and position needs to do similar.
PS FWIW one of my friends is an internationally regarded forensic psychologist. A person that gets to deal with some of the most dangerous people on the planet and has been involved in many publicly infamous murder cases etc. I don’t want to name names/give clues, but this person’s opinion backs it up. Trump is a total mess on many levels.
droodzilla
pfm Member
If Trump is so manifestly unfit for office, the voters should be more than capable of seeing it.
les24preludes
pfm Member
What is worrying is that Trump is a habitual and serial liar. He lies and lies and lies continually. And not just politician-speak kind of lies, outright and outrageous lies. Voters don't seem to be able to distinguish lies from truth, or they don't care, or they don't think it's relevant to an election.
This just blows my mind completely. I was brought up in a scientific household to revere the truth as one of the cornerstones of our existence.
DonQuixote99
pfm Member
But a very great many demonstrably are not, whether they should be or not. What is counts for more than what should be.
Nick_G
pfm Member
It depends on how many of them have been brainwashed by lies, conspiracy theories and the siren call that says he will fix all their grievances, as well as how many Democrat voters go to the polls.
I still have a bad feeling about November...
Seeker_UK
Feelin' nearly faded as my jeans
Trouble is, it's slippery slope territory. Yes, we know Trump is dangerous but what other criteria might make it appropriate to speculate on a presidential candidates mental faculties in the public arena? Who gets to decide that? What would stop someone unscrupulous from making such claims to get an advantage at the ballot box?
There is a very strong case for mandatory cognitive testing for candidates.
Tony L
Administrator
I don’t see the problem. Censoring people’s experience and opinion is far more dangerous. As an example we will shortly see a peak of YouTube videos on bridge vs container ship physics. Many will be based on nothing more than speculation and end up being plain wrong, but some will be from highly qualified professional physicists, structural engineers, maritime specialists and deserve to be taken seriously.
I’ve been arguing Trump is a narcissistic nutter and a racist piece of shit for decades. My opinion doesn’t carry any weight at all as I have zero qualification or experience. When we hear psychologists, dementia specialists and others with appropriate PHDs and professional medical experience saying he has serious dementia and that will only amplify his malignant narcissism it really is time for the world to take notice. They have a duty to whistle-blow IMHO. America is on the verge of a potential democracy-ending event and everyone needs to be part of the resistance.
Seeker_UK
Feelin' nearly faded as my jeans
So it's legitimate for Biden to receive the same?
Sue Pertwee-Tyr
Accuphase all the way down
The problem is, ISTM, that the presidency is more about popularity than it is about capability. People vote for the man - he is their man - rather than for what the man will do in office and how well he will handle the office. It’s a development of the party loyalty thing, where people vote tribally rather than considering the issues and suitability of each party’s offer.
DonQuixote99
pfm Member
Honesty and accuracy are crucial. Inaccurate and dishonest claims are never legitimate. The qualities of claims must be assessed, like all matters of fact and opinion in politics. The idea that opinions about certain sorts of key qualifications of candidates for high office should be taboo for discussion is not legitimate, in my view.
Tony L
Administrator
Absolutely. FWIW I think neither are mentally fit for high office. Biden is not criminally insane/deranged, so has a huge advantage in this comparison, but he’s nowhere near as sharp as he was, and IMHO not sharp enough. There is a strong argument for an upper age-limit on roles such as POTUS, PM etc. The US has ended up owned and run by senile boomer billionaires. Not good.
DonQuixote99
pfm Member
IMHO Biden is performing extremely well in office. I know that opinion is not popular with many because Gaza, but discuss that in the other topic. I will continue to suggest that if, for sake of argument, Biden is half the man he used to be, that 1/2 is manifestly the best US President at least since Clinton. Better than Obama, though Obama sounded better.
Biden also respects science and has a decent grip on reality.
Age limits don't recognise that people age differently. They are also discriminatory.
Tony L
Administrator
I kind of agree, but that means we need mandatory cognitive testing for high office with the results open for scrutiny. POTUS should be a role tested to the level of an airline pilot, surgeon or whatever. There is simply no room for dementia or other cognitive damage in this role.