Folks, I may have a PhD in history-including US politics history-but the last several years I’ve been working in public health as a science writer. One of my areas of focus is Aging, including Alzheimer’s and related dementias (AD/RD).
I find the discourse around Biden really troubling.
Reason 1 *wearing my US political history hat*
Incumbency is a fundamental advantage for all political candidates, including presidents. Only a small handful of incumbents lost. The vast majority won. So right away, I see a signal of historical ignorance when I see people proposing Biden step down.
Reason 2 *wearing my science writer hat*
AD/RD is an absolutely heartbreaking diagnosis for families and caregivers. Millions of families suffer, mostly in silence. Throwing around cognitive decline for political reasons deeply disrespects patients and families.
Reason 3 *wearing both hats*
Ageism is rife in US culture. It causes real harm. One of my most recent publications was with experts in how ageism causes harm. For people to double down when I tell them this is both ignorant of scientific findings and unconscionable.
Please get a hold of yourselves.
Reason 4 *wearing my history hat*
This is not a new situation. The US has had many presidents who have been in real decline or been perceived as being in decline. Most of those incumbents were supported by the electorate.
Here's, I think, the most appropriate example:
In 1944, the US was in the middle of a life-and-death conflict with rising fascism in Europe and Japan. FDR already hid his disability from the US audience, but by this time, his health was seriously failing him. He had about a year of life left.
Is that publication available to the general public? If so can you tell me the name of it? I'm having some issues with ageism in my workplace and would like to be able to speak about it more intelligently
Thank you. The people who were critical of armchair psychological diagnoses of Trump (sociopathy, narcissism, etc.) are awfully quick to medically diagnose dementia in Biden.
My family has had generations of people live to their mid-90’s, and they were sharp until the end. I had one uncle (not a blood relation) with dementia, and the contrast could not be starker. He didn’t know me, what day it was, and often forgot to eat. He died at age 79.
I looked up the definition of ageism. It's not "my 81 year old president cannot function and needs to step down". Using "ageism" to defend a dead candidate is gaslighting.
My mom has advanced dementia and I agree fully.
However, I do feel like I see some pretty classic signs in Trump.
Do you think that's just my bias against him?
Genuinely, his command of language was competent 20ish years ago.
What he was saying was vile, but it was complete compound sentences that formed coherently disgusting thoughts.
The word salad is relatively new and clearly progressive.
Same here. Don't want to diagnose him but if anyone is showing signs it's Trump more so than Biden. In fact, I don't think Biden is showing any signs *at all*.
I've been thinking about how discussion that attaches stigma to even consulting with a neurologist might filter down to average people watching the news.
Lots of people need to see neurologists for lots of reasons! We don't want to make even a check taboo.
Biden's cognitive decline is indisputable. "Why" is a question of minimal relevance, I agree. He's in decline and none of the plausible reasons is reversible. He should announced his retirement 2 years ago.
Cognitive decline can be thrown 2 ways:
🇫🇷national scientic medical research discovered that 70% of the population WILL develop Alzheimer, but only 28% has been diagnosed, that SYMPTOMS APPEAR UP TO 35 years b4 diagnosis (when the person is lost in the street)
In the big picture that's true ... but almost half the incumbents in the last 60 years to run for reelection lost. Nixon, Reagan, Clinton, W, and Obama all won reelection; Ford, Carter, GHWB, and Trump were all defeated.
Before that it was rare, though.
Also it’s 2024 - the internet, social media, the 24hr news cycle as well as the rise of right wing propaganda networks will all mean that Biden’s age will be *the* defining issue of this election whether we like it or not.
And we need in response not to be defeatist.
If we know what they're going to try, we need to counter it.
(I say "we" - obviously I mean the campaign and all its surrogates, of which there should be thousands.)
Pound Trump. Relentlessly. From multiple directions. Over and over.
Trump lost as an incumbent. And as short as American time spans are, I think a media blitz reminding people what the daily headlines were like and why he ended up losing would be helpful, atm.
I plan on giving it ago - knowing that I'm new to bsky and have little reach anywhere else. I have a folder on my old laptop that has articles I 'never got round to reading'- I found it a few weeks ago and hope to take those headlines and find others to remind people.
Spouse and I've talked about making an automated script/bot that posts 'this day in the Trump admin' articles or summary. We've debated if now or closer to the election would be better.
Holy Toledo, this thread really took off. Please consider supporting me and my content. I don’t know if you noticed, but being a historian in America today means you take a big financial hit.
Seriously, thank you for your support.
patreon.com/user?u=15454...
1968: Johnson backed out in March. Nixon was elected.
1972: VP candidate Eagleton was replaced post-convention. Nixon was reelected.
1980: Carter faced a strong primary challenger, the party didn't unite behind him. Reagan was elected.
1984: Reagan was senile, and won reelection in a landslide.
Dems should dump Biden because he’s losing and hasn’t shown any indication of being able to recover. The two incumbent presidents you chose as examples were both winning basically their entire campaigns.
