Shifting from topic to topic, with few connections, is one of several disjointed and occasionally incoherent verbal habits that seem to have increased in Trump’s speech.
    • DogPeePoo@lemm.ee
      0·
      10 months ago

      No way. I heard Dr. Ronny Jackson said Trump has never been sharper, that he definitely doesn’t poop himself everyday, that there’s no way he has Syphilis brain; and that Trump’s penis still seems normal when he tastes it.

        • Bahnd Rollard@lemmy.world
          0·
          10 months ago

          We conducted a similar expiriment and found that even after being hit in the head by an ACME mallet most people and some rodents were able to still conclude that everything 45 says is complete crazy pants.

          • Matt@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
            0·
            10 months ago

            And it says here after a thorough peer review “Trump is a weirdo.” Huh, seems like a waste of time but that’s what it says so it must be true.

    • ChocoboRocket@lemmy.world
      0·
      10 months ago

      Trump saw how much traction JFK got with admitting he had brain worms, so Trump switched out his Ivermectin bleach formula and started a diet of parasite filled meats that are now taking hold

      Seems like a weird thing to do.

  • saigot@lemmy.ca
    0·
    10 months ago

    Look I definitely think Trump is suffering some sort of cognitive decline, but diagnosing someone based only on their public persona is irresponsible and not very accurate.

    • Nougat@fedia.io
      0·
      10 months ago

      … irresponsible and not very accurate.

      Not necessarily. For someone who has a lengthy public record of behavior, that behavior can absolutely be studied to come to certain conclusions about their mental state, and can be more accurate than a picture which is only gained through direct healthcare office interviews.

      • SteveFromMySpace@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        0·
        10 months ago

        You and I are not qualified to diagnose him and clinicians know better than to diagnose someone from afar without any real authority or permission to do so.

        We can reasonably say he looks off or like he’s confused/lost sometimes. Beyond that to say a specific diagnosis isn’t responsible.

        • Nougat@fedia.io
          0·
          10 months ago

          You may have replied before my edit:

          Edit: Several times in the article, the conclusions explained are specifically described as not being diagnoses.

          And I wasn’t diagnosing anyone.

      • quixotic120@lemmy.world
        0·
        10 months ago

        Technically this is necessarily true, for any licensed psychiatrist or psychologist in the USA at least practicing under the scope of the APA ethical framework

        The interesting piece is why

        In 1964 when Barry Goldwater was running for president a piece was run on him that polled a number of psychiatrists regarding whether he was fit to be president. He was compared to dictators by many of the respondents and described with very unflattering language. He successfully sued the magazine that ran the article, Fact, for the modern equivalent of about $630,000.

        In response the APA created the guideline (section 7) which states the need to contribute to improvement of community and betterment of public health. Specifically section 7.3 considers commentary on public figures:

        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.

        Thus, commentary by psychologists and psychiatrists on political candidates and such is generally not okay. Debate on this specific issue was widely renewed over the past 8 years, for obvious reasons

        The interesting part is the debate is changed, quite a bit, in the modern era. In goldwaters day there was a more valid argument that his public persona and personal self were very distinct. But now you have trump, who lived on twitter for years and shit out every thought he had relatively unfiltered. Is that the same? Not at all, but at the same time from a clinical perspective it’s still a public persona trump puts forward and not necessarily indicative of who the man actually is

        but the other side of the debate is the freedom of speech issue. this becomes interesting in the trump era because new issues become relevant. In the goldwater era the issues were primarily about if the guy was a fucking monster, basically. But now we also have concerns about cognitive capacity. Barry goldwater was 55 when he that article came out. Trump is 78. There are cognitive decline issues that can be observed from video that while not definitive are at least huge red flags for further screening and warning that this man shouldn’t be put in charge of the United States for the next four fucking years as he continues to decline, because unfortunately age and time do not reverse.

        Essentially one can argue it is my opinion that trump is a sociopathic narcissist, for example, because I have not met him and cannot actually say for certain that these views are truly his or if this is just pomp that he is using to curry political favor. As such I should not use my licensure and standing to harm his because I cannot be sure that it’s not just an act. But on the other hand I can be pretty sure that I am seeing an increase in repetition in phrases, decreased vocabulary, flight of ideas, tangential speech, and most worrying is a few instances of word salad. I cannot publicly comment on this, ethically.

        Biden had similar issues to be fair but he stepped down, thankfully. Biden is also harder to evaluate because he had a known history of speech issues.

        The Goldwater rule is not inherently bad though. It’s actually a good rule. It’s a good reminder that we don’t know the person behind the tv. But on the other hand one could argue evaluating the presented persona is still somewhat valid. If John q president comes in to run in 2028 and puts forth a persona of being a total jackass Warhawk narcissist but it turns out they’re a total soft hearted lovable guy in their personal life, does that matter if they run shit like a total jackass Warhawk narcissist? Does it even stop being true if they actually act that way? Etc.

    • Hegar@fedia.io
      0·
      10 months ago

      We can all tell that he’s in cognitive decline. If experts speculating on the cause based on limited evidence hurts trump’s electoral chances and helps to protect our democracy for another few years I’d call it responsible.

    • OhStopYellingAtMe@lemmy.world
      0·
      10 months ago

      Not diagnosing him at all, but when he is applying for a job where one of the primary roles is to be the public persona of the country to the rest of the world, it’s important that his public persona not be that of a blithering idiot.

  • NineMileTower@lemmy.world
    0·
    10 months ago

    That’s because the meth fucked his brain harder than JD would an Ashley Furniture Belvoir Performance Fabric Sofa.

  • Optional@lemmy.world
    0·
    10 months ago

    I swear photo editors have abandoned all fucks.

    Jesus Fred Christ, photo editors, think about the children that have to look at that

  • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
    0·
    10 months ago

    He never had one.

    Like seriously. It’s part of how he speaks and thinks. He just nibbles at the edges of concepts and allows the listener to fill in the gaps. That way he’s never accountable.

  • OccamsTeapot@lemmy.world
    0·
    10 months ago

    A linguistic metric of analytic thinking shows that Trump’s levels of complexity have always been unmistakably low, said Pennebaker. Whereas most presidential candidates are in the 60 to 70 range, Trump’s speeches range from 10 to 24. “I can’t tell you how staggering this is,” said Pennebaker. “He does not think in a complex way at all.”

    This is just science for “he’s dumb as fuck”