Not necessarily dementia, but extreme megalomania.
this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2025
203 points (99.0% liked)
Political Weirdos
1200 readers
478 users here now
A community dedicated to the weirdest people involved in politics.
- Focus on weird behaviors and beliefs
- Follow Iemmy.world TOS
- Don’t be a jerk
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This isn't just the random babbling of a confused old man. He called the Finance Minister and tried to leverage his support in exchange for tariff relief. This was a calculated move, to try and get a Novel Prize for himself, by extorting a foreign official.
He's been known to previously call up and hound organizations to give him prizes. Constantly whined about the networth estimates that Forbes would make.
There's no doubt his brain is melting, but this isn't the proof.
Insanity and dementia are two different things.
It 100% is...
Trump 79, at 65 there's like a 5% chance someone is diagnosed with dementia, and it doubles every 5 years.
But because there's a delay in diagnosis, and the effects of dementia and how our brains works naturally "hides" it. The average age for the onset of dementia is also 65.
It's important to have a strong safety net, because those are the ones who need to point it out and start treatment.
For almost a decade now the US president has shown clear signs of dementia and regardless of who it is their administration has intentionally hid how bad it is.
All the shit that came out about Biden is going to be eclipsed by what we hear later about this admin. But the reason they're getting away with it so much now, is it's already been normalized by "both sides".
Dems need to replace everyone over 70 if they won't do the right thing and resign. Even Bernie, I love the guy but he should have stepped down a long time ago.
source on doubling? cause that means by the time he’s 90 there is a >100% chance.
and I know a bunch of 90yo folks without it..
I've already committed to not voting for any presidential candidate who will finish a hypothetical second term term in their 70's. So that means no older than 61 during the race..
Assuming we have elections again, of course.
AFAIK Bernie doesn't want to become a president anymore because of his age, and AOC is basically his replacement
I suspect Obama's Nobel still sticks in his craw.
Sticks in my craw too — it was silly and unwarranted — but I haven't called Oslo to demand a Nobel Peace Prize for myself.
Can't beat the drone king, you need to earn that 'peace' prize
In fairness I don't know how the fuck he got one either.
Dementia, probably. Demented, definitely.
However this is mainly because Obama got one. And the imbecilic bungling orange fools' rage, ego, and narcissism just can't handle it.
You need to have wars and warcrimes on the level of Obama, he's not there yet
easy: because he’s an evil person. a known fascist. blame his actions on evil before you go with a medical concern.
Evil is a label used to avoid reason and understanding.
Frequently used when people believe knowing why a terrible person is terrible, it excuses and absolves their bad behavior somehow. It doesn't.
It can inform creating effective solutions to prevent or stop them. So it's always worth understanding.
"Somehow" meaning "not at all..." Because why would it? Come on. You changed "evil" to "terrible" and act like there is ontological difference, and one is morraly better... Somehow.
There's no real difference. You're right. It's just bad form to a word in its definition, so I used a different one. That doesn't effect my point at all.
“evil” is a socially acceptable construct applied to people who are actively choosing to do evil things. that’s all it takes.
if I decide to do a genocide or off a cohort of people - feel free to call me evil.
It's socially acceptable and common to do so, for certain.
I was only explaining why. And pointing out that using evil as an excuse to look no further at what's going on with someone, isn't a virtue. You shouldn't do that. Understanding why is critical to fighting evil.
It’s not an excuse, it’s an explanation. They choose to be evil. I mean actively. Like they state it. They. Choose. Evil.
It's neither.
If I asked why you ate a candy bar, and you said "I wanted to", that doesn't explain anything. Obviously you wanted to. Implied in my question is asking for the reason you wanted the candy bar.
This is no different.
"Why does someone do the evil thing?"
"Because they're evil."
That doesn't actually say anything.
But using it in place of an actual explanation, is an excuse to not look for the real reasons that would explain the evil.
they choose to abide by the philosophy and ideology of evil; it’s a choice.
every decision these monsters make is filtered through that lens.
it’s a commitment to an ideology. that’s what I mean. It’s not a tautology like you seem to think?
What is the ideology of evil? I've never heard of that.
capitalism.
That's not a thing. You're making up your own language now, and I'm done.
And when the war comes back, yet again, he returns his peace prize?
Well if he is dead… he can’t have one.
I like this direction you're going.
Let's do this!
The Dementia was obvious to me but some people who were used to what a rambling dumbass he was at the best of times might have missed it.
That's Norwegian NATO's mouthpiece Stoltenberg