I’ve been holding on to this post for a while now, waiting for Presidents Day. An old “Psychology Today” article has been dredged up lately by various pundits desperately seeking a way to deny what is now undeniable. President Biden is in the throes of serious mental decline, and allowing him to run again, at an advanced age and when his memory, stamina, and cognitive health are rapidly receding into the fog, is irresponsible—which doesn’t mean that the Axis won’t do it anyway. The argument being mounted to justify such a desperate and stupid course is a version of the #1 rationalization on the list, “Everybody does it!” Joe’s problems are no big deal, you see, because, as Dr. Guy Winch wrote in 2016: “a study by Jonathan Davidson of the Duke University Medical Center and colleagues, who reviewed biographical sources for the first 37 presidents (1776-1974), half of those men had been afflicted by mental illness—and 27% met those criteria while in office, something that could have clearly affected their ability to perform their jobs.”
Whew! Well, that’s a relief!
I hadn’t seen the study, but it was heartwarming, since its findings echoed those of my American Government honors thesis, now deep in the stacks of Widener Library. I hypothesized that being outside the norm emotionally, mentally and physically was among the factors that selected out the extraordinary individuals who become Presidents of the United States. Leaders, to give an even shorter version, are not normal by definition.
Winch, quoting the study, pointed out,
The authors of the study concluded that 24% percent of presidents met the diagnostic criteria for depression, including James Madison, John Quincy Adams, Franklin Pierce, Abraham Lincoln, and Calvin Coolidge. (Depression seemed to ease for the group about a century ago, coincidently, around the time electricity and indoor plumbing swept the nation. I’m not saying the two are connected but I have my suspicions.)
Davidson and his team also found evidence of anxiety disorders, ranging from social phobia to generalized anxiety disorder, among 8% of the presidents, including Thomas Jefferson, Ulysses S. Grant, Coolidge, and Woodrow Wilson.
More seriously, the team concluded that 8% of presidents had signs of bipolar disorder, Lyndon Johnson and Theodore Roosevelt among them. Indeed, Theodore Roosevelt’s decision to go on a two-year expedition of unexplored areas of the Amazon smacks of manic thinking. (Only 16 of the 19 expedition members survived the ordeal.)
Finally, 8% of the presidents studied exhibited evidence of alcohol abuse or dependence. Pierce died of cirrhosis of the liver; Grant was once allegedly so drunk he fell off his horse during a military parade in New Orleans, and Nixon was once unable to take a rather important phone call from the British Prime Minister because he was “loaded.”
Numerous other presidents had physical conditions that can have a severe impact on psychological functioning. Taft, for example, had sleep apnea, which is associated with declines in cognitive functioning across the board, and most famously, some scholars now believe that Ronald Reagan showed early signs of Alzheimer’s while still in office.
That summary doesn’t adequately encompass the facts, even allowing for the obvious problem that a diagnosis of mental or emotional illness without first hand observations of the subject is inherently unreliable, and from a medical point of view, unethical. A large percentage of the Presidents have been extreme narcissists. In 2016, the academic world had not yet become Trump Deranged, so despite supposedly limiting the discussion to Presidents who served up to and including Nixon, Dr. Winch uses the Donaldson study to allay fears about a President Trump because the candidate appeared to be a narcissist. “First, let’s acknowledge that believing one is qualified to be the leader of the free world requires a certain dollop of narcissism to begin with,” he writes. (The President in office when he wrote that, Barack Obama, clearly had more than a “dollop.” )That was a major point in my thesis. “Second, the issue is not just whether these traits cross into pathological territory but whether a person’s mental health and potentially pathological personality characteristics necessarily mean they are unfit for office.”
Let me fill in some of the blanks the “Psychology Today”article left in its effort to be accessible to the publication’s typical reader. From my thesis (which like the Donaldson study examined the available Presidential biographies):
- John Adams and Jefferson were both extreme narcissists, and I would rule Jefferson a sociopath.
- How Winch could get into the physical ailments of Presidents without mentioning Andrew Jackson is puzzling. “Old Hickory” suffered from festering wounds from his many duels, including at least two bullets that were never removed. One lodged in his chest, near his lung and his heart, and periodically caused internal bleeding that went on for days. The other bullet, in his arm, caused him almost constant pain. Jackson had long-standing stomach and digestive system problems, making it difficult for him to eat. (Jackson usually weighed about 150 pounds despite a height of almost 6′ 3″.) Andy had chronic and recurring malaria, typhoid, typhus and dysentery, the effects of mercury and lead poisoning, and excruciating dental problems. The fact that he managed to almost make it to 80 is considered a miracle.
- Also inexplicably omitted from mention in the article was the closest analogy to Biden’s situation, FDR‘s decision to run for re-election in 1944 despite being so sick with congestive heart failure that he often could not work. FDR (who was also a narcissist and sociopathic), had his party and doctors actively deceiving the public. All of Roosevelt’s inner circle knew he was unlikely to live another four years, and he didn’t.
- President Kennedy used the cooperation of the press to project youth and “vigah” when he was in frequent pain. His back was permanently injured in his famous PT 109 exploits; he suffered from autoimmune polyglandular syndrome type 2 with Addison’s disease and hypothyroidism. JFK also had chronic gastrointestinal symptoms that are now believed to be symptoms of coeliac disease. Much of the time he was working under the influence of massive, indeed excessive, doses of pain-killers.
- Grover Cleveland had to have a cancerous tumor and part of his upper jaw removed. His hard palate was replaced with a rubber prosthetic. After the operation, done in secret obn board the Presidential yacht, Cleveland had difficulty talking for the rest of his Presidency.
- Abraham Lincoln‘s problem was more complicated than typical clinical depression. He had a likely brain lesion from being kicked in the head by a horse as a teen, an accident that had Abe in a coma for several days. His survival was considered miraculous, but if Lincoln was not being constantly stimulated by work and cogitation, he would stop functioning for minutes or hours, staring into space.
- It is weird that the study discusses Richard Nixon‘s handling of alcohol. I view this as typical anti-Nixon bias: in the depths of the Watergate scandal, Nixon drank more heavily than at any other time in his life. but he was not an alcoholic. Andrew Johnson probably was; George W. Bush definitely was.
I should stop: this topic fascinates me and I could go on and on, but it’s time to get to the point. None of the examples in the study nor from my own research are relevant to Biden’s situation, with the possible exception of Ronald Reagan’s cognitive health following the trauma of his near assassination. As Andy Jackson, Dwight Eisenhower and many other Presidents proved, one doesn’t have to be in good health to be an effective and trustworthy President. Declining cognitive abilities exacerbated by old age is a something no one can overcome.
Ethics Alarms 
“More seriously, the team concluded that 8% of presidents had signs of bipolar disorder, Lyndon Johnson and Theodore Roosevelt among them. “
Teddy’s brother, Elliott – Eleanor’s father – almost certainly was mentally ill and self-medicated with alcohol. In fact, all of TR’s siblings had some disorder or another. It would be surprising if he came away unscathed.
In Ken Burns’ excellent documentary “The Roosevelts,” one historian states that Teddy was “quite mad” …but he managed it. That was my impression as well. Who goes on with a speech after he has been shot in the chest?
According to one biography of Andrew Johnson, he was drunk when he took the oath after Lincoln’s assassination, though I have yet to read a second bio to corroborate that.
So what the old Psychology Today piece is saying is that 30+ Presidents did not suffer from depression, 40+ did not have anxiety issues, 40+ were not bipolar, and 40+ were not drunks. Most of the conditions cited are only conjecture and completely impossible to prove except through anecdotal evidence and supposition.
The article enumerates what constitutes a significant minority of the Presidents who served, but it is being used by a bunch of liars – aka politicians and journalists – to make it appear relatively normal to have a mostly incapacitated Commander-in-Chief. It’s another way to do an after-the-fact hit job on numerous Presidents, running them down and getting people to somehow associate their conditions with those of President Biden, most of whom had conditions that were NOTHING like President Biden’s. That’s despicable.
It would make more sense to compare President Biden to President Wilson – who made the list for anxiety but interestingly, not for the stroke that completely debilitated him. President Biden fares better than the post-stroke Wilson and FDR’s final year, but he is FAR worse than any of the other examples.
I’ve read more than one about Johnson. Some claim he was under the weather or had an attack of the nerves and overdid it, but, regardless, there appears to be some merit to the claim that he had too much to drink.
Nevertheless, it does not seem to have been the biggest impediment to his his Presidency, though.
“George W. Bush definitely was.”
Though, critically, a sober one for decades prior to and including his presidency.
“First, let’s acknowledge that believing one is qualified to be the leader of the free world requires a certain dollop of narcissism to begin with,” he writes. (The President when he wrote that, Barack Obama, clearly had more than a “dollop.” )That was a major point in my thesis.
Would that make Ford the least narcissistic of Presidents, as he never ran for office in the Executive Branch?
Or Chester A. Arthur?
-Jut
I dealt with that in my thesis. The VPs who inherited the Presidency don’t fit the template. With the notable exceptions of TR and LBJ none of them had any chance of becoming POTUS by being nominated and elected. Tyler, Fillmore, A. Johnson, Arthur, Coolidge, Truman, and Ford aren’t Presidential “types” in background or personal characteristics. TR and Lyndon Johnson were natural and lifetime leaders whose obstacles to the Presidency were external.
that would be interesting to analyze how well those non-Presidential types handled the office compared to the Presidential ones.
Let me guess: you wrote a thesis.
so, Better than average? Average? Or less than average?
what would that tell you about the process for electing Presidency?
-Jut
They did OK, I’d say better than average, except for Andrew Johnson, who was doomed by circumstances. There’s no reason a psychologically healthy individual can’t be an effective leader, it’s just that the American system tends to weed them out for the very top job. Our society favors the dominant, super-ambitious, ruthless standouts with an unnatural drive to dominate and an irrational belief in their own destiny and superiority.
Oh…did I mention that I wrote a thesis about this?
Do tell.
And was it successful? You got a diploma that you display with pride?
Hehe, sorry, but I couldn’t resist. I know that’s a sore point, but I can relate. My alma mater has done more than a few things I’m aghast about.
For a variety of reasons, I have never associated the thesis with my degree. It was just another stage in a life-long fascination with and study of the Presidents and the Presidency, which began in the 5th grade.
It is a fascination that we definitely appreciate and many of us share, to a greater or lesser degree.
Obviously we don’t agree on everything, but I am eternally grateful to have this island of sanity in a sea of treacherous waters that is the internet.
I can’t shake off the feeling you’re being hypocritical and biased, and while I don’t like how disrespecting I may seem like writing this, I think I have a valid critique. Let’s come back to one of the posts from your rule book.
Now, considering that Trump has his certain streak of senility and assumed as President already having lived 70 years, it is weird to see you criticize accusations to him as a “Soviet theory” (which I think might be a rhetorical trick to link the Democratic Party with communism and authoritarianism), but take accusations to Biden so seriously. For one, it’s just woo, but for the other, he’s actually unfit for the charge.
Honestly, I regret finding your blog. I think that more of an ethicist, you are a right-wing political blogger, and ironically, a biased person.
Normally insulting first comments don’t get out of moderation (I bet you didn’t read the Comment policies before posting) but as insulting first comments go, yours was relatively civil, so I’m approving it. Now I’ll explain why it is polite but incompetent.
1. The Soviets infamously declared political dissidents insane, and often confined them in institutions. The totalitarian view that “WrongThink” is the equivalent of insanity is well explained in “1984” and a documented feature of Communism, both in Russia and China. It also is covered in the Broadway play “Nuts,” and displayed periodically by both sides of the political spectrum, as when far right talk show host Michael Savage declares that “liberalism is a mental illness.” So it’s no rhetorical trick on my part. It is a sinister trait of closed minds.
2. If you can’t tell the difference between Biden’s problems and Trump, you’re crippled by bias. Trump has been around a long time, and he has always behaved and spoken exactly as he did while President. There is no obvious sign of decline: he’s always been flamboyant, careless rhetorically, uncivil, impulsive and obnoxious. No, Presidents shouldn’t act that way, but it doesn’t make him mentally unfit under the terms of the 25th Amendment. That was a contrived excuse to try to eliminate a politician whose views progressives don’t like. Biden, in contrast, is obviously sliding into dementia. This was clear in 2019. Dementia is a crippling disease, and would be a legitimate reason to invoke the 25th. The observations about Biden are serious. Trump’s character make him, in my view, the kind of leader that should not be in the White House, but that’s a voter’s call.
3. Relying on the authority of a single British publication to make the ridiculous statement that “Trump has a certain streak of senility”—an idiotic statement—is a tell. There’s no such thing as a “senility streak.” Trump’s problem is and always was narcissism and poor impulse control. Senility is a term of art.
There are thousands of posts on many topics here, and if you read more than a few, you would know I am not “a right-wing political blogger, and ironically, a biased person.” That was a really poor, unfair, and poorly reasoned comment. Do better, or your next one will never see the light of day. And read the Comment Policies.
I have long appreciated a comment from 2016 regarding Trump — I think it was from a column featured on Real Clear Politics, but I no longer recall the publication.
Essentially Trump’s critics take him literally but not seriously. Trump’s supporters take him seriously but not literally. I.e. his critics parse his statements word by word and assume the worst meanings. His supporters are able to grasp what he’s talking about and aren’t bothered so much by his exact phrasing.
That said, it was jarring to hear him say ‘Haley’ instead of ‘Pelosi’, but it wasn’t an indicator of dementia. That said, I personally and I believe Jack as well, would certainly prefer to see someone else represent the Republicans for the presidency this year — but Republican voters do not agree, and that is where the choice lies. Of course, the Democratic party has also done its best to see that Trump is nominated, and that he has a real shot at beating Biden this year.
No one will imprison you here, though. You are free to stay or leave. The commentariat here is definitely not a nest of ‘ultra MAGA’ zealots. We do, however, reserve the rights to our own opinions.