226
Biden dismisses Trump inquiry into his cognitive decline as a ‘distraction’
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 05 Jun 2025
226 points (97.5% liked)
politics
23928 readers
2378 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
We should have extensive yearly testing through an impartial third party so this can’t be questioned again.
Let’s start with the current president tomorrow.
Or we can you know put a cap on the president's age. 35-65 should be a big enough window to become president.
No. For example, Bernie is healthier, sharper, and more in touch with what's important to his constituents than most federal level politicians from either party 30 years younger than him.
Conversely, Fetterman's brain doesn't work properly anymore at age 55 and he was probably never the everyman he pretended to be.
While age is of course a common factor in mental decline and other factors that should disqualify you from public office, it's not in itself determinative and should be considered a risk factor rather than a syndrome just like doctors do.
I’ve been a Bernie supporter for well over a decade but based on his age I would no longer vote for him to be president but I still support him as a political figure
That's ageism! Also, my great grand dad cant be president then, and I'd like him to be so....
ughh allright, 35-36, and whatever the current age of NocturnalMornings great grand dad is
Hes 37
is this some back to the future situation? o.O
Yes. NocturnalMorning is in fact his own great great granddad and would like for his son to be president.
I used to say 65, I'm thinking 61 would be better now. You should have to be mentally fit EVERY day of the job, so 4 years after you took the job, you still need to be at your best..
And to anyone who thinks a 61 year old is 100% cognitive, they are not. That's why air traffic controllers are forced to retire at 56. The government studied cognitive decline and said 56+ was not mentally capable. They think they still are, but they aren't.
I'm ok with ageism because age related problems are very real and science tells us they get bad at about 60 or so. This is not about a bias, its about a fact of our existence. But lots of people want to conflate ageism with other forms of bias like sexism or racism. They arent the same at all.
Let me ask you, do you think 110 year olds should be allowed to operate semi trucks or fly planes? Of course you dont. Why not?
I'm in my mid 50s and I and everyone I know will acknowledge that mid 50s individuals dont have the depth of stamina to draw on that we used to have. Sure we can still occasionally run circles around the better resourced youngins with some finesse and tricks, but only to a point-- we aren't likely to win as many large energy expenditure activities on average, physically or mentally. Thats just life. And what I am talking about here accelerates right about at 60. Its been well studied.
There’s already ageist restrictions.
It’s the simplest and cleanest way to do it at the moment.
Nah, that's stupid and ridiculous.
Age is just a number and with advances in science, is likely to become even more arbitrary.