Trump's cognitive decline finally in media spotlight

Just in time for tonight's big debate.

Donald Trump comes into tonight’s debate as a often tired and exasperated older man in cognitive decline, up against Vice President Harris, a younger, mentally sharp opponent who is a prosecutor

That should put someone like him at a significant disadvantage, in addition to the impact of his incessant and clear lies as well as his inability to articulate policy because he knows nothing about policy.

Still, we’ve seen Trump able to finesse his mental decline and lack of policy knowledge by yelling and overplaying so as to appear energetic and—much more importantly—getting a great assist from the media (and, in a debate, from moderators who don’t fact-check).

The corporate media have covered for him, ignoring his mental decline and almost glorifying his bizarro rants as his “style” (recently they even allowed him to call it “the weave”), while interpreting his answers in their reporting to make him sound like he’s making sense.

But that may no longer be the case. I say “may” because we’ve seen the media often revert back to bad habits, so I don’t want to get hopes up too much, particularly based on just one news cycle.

The Signorile Report is reader-supported. If you’ve valued reading The Signorile Report, consider becoming a paid subscriber and supporting independent, ad-free opinion journalism. Thanks!

But last night, The New York Times—one of the worst offenders in regard to “sanewashing” Trump—finally ran a story at the top of its website, headlined, “As Debate Looms, Trump Is Now the One Facing Questions About Age and Capacity, which is also on the front page of the print edition of the paper at the top of the page.

Written by Peter Baker of all people, one of the most problematic of the Times political reporters, it zeroes in on Trump’s cognitive decline and even points to polls showing that Americans view Trump as too old and as mentally unfit.

Curiously, the New York Times’ own Sienna poll—which we’re told is an “A-rated” poll—isn't used as evidence because it doesn’t actually ask voters if Trump is too old to serve.

It’s quite a glaring omission from the pollster of the paper that spent months reporting that age was a defining issue in the race. That was while President Biden was in the race, and the paper and its editors and publisher were criticizing Biden for not giving the Times an interview and were reportedly ramping up more and more stories about his age and mental capability as retribution until he gave that interview.

So Baker relies on other polls showing the issue is a flashpoint:

Voters have long harbored concerns about Mr. Trump’s age, but more of them were worried about Mr. Biden’s, according to polls. Without the president to focus on, more Americans have expressed doubts about Mr. Trump’s capacity. Fifty-one percent of registered voters in a survey released last month by Morning Consult said that Mr. Trump is too old to run for president, up from 44 percent when he was running against Mr. Biden. Fifty-seven percent had that view in a poll by Marquette Law School.

Moreover, fewer voters now consider Mr. Trump mentally fit for the presidency. Just 48 percent in the Morning Consult poll said the former president was capable of handling the office, down from 53 percent. Nearly four in five said they were not sure he could serve another full four-year term, and roughly the same proportion were concerned about his ability to make decisions.

But it is the impetus for this story that is most interesting.

It’s coming after consistent pressure on the corporate media for weeks and months by many of us. But in the past week or two things reached a crescendo, as Trump’s statements at rallies and answers to questions went viral on social media, and as there is no longer an 81-year-old in the race making any verbal flubs.

In particular, it was Trump’s incoherent, completely nonsensical answer to a question about “a specific piece of legislation” he might push to make child care affordable, asked at the New York Economic Club last week, that made the issue finally explode.

It’s best to watch it—and I’ve played it a few times on my SiriusXM program—because it’s also about the visuals and Trump’s often bewildered expression, but I’ll reprint it here in full, as it makes no sense on paper either.

It’s a very important issue. But I think when you talk about the kind of numbers that I’m talking about, that – because, look, child care is child care. It’s – couldn’t – you know, it’s something – you have to have it. In this country, you have to have it. But when you talk about those numbers compared to the kind of numbers that I’m talking about by taxing foreign nations at levels that they’re not used to, but they’ll get used to it very quickly – and it’s not going to stop them from doing business with us but they’ll have a very substantial tax when they send product into our country. Those numbers are so much bigger than any numbers that we’re talking about, including child care. That – it’s going to take care – we’re going to have – I – I look forward to having no deficits within a fairly short period of time, coupled with the reductions that I told you about on waste and fraud and all of the other things that are going on in our country.

At first, the Times and other news outlets engaged in the usual sanewashing. The Times reported that it was a “jumbled” answer and helped to interpret what he may have been saying, reporting that he claimed his plan to put tariffs on all imports—15 to 20%, he’s said in the past—would pay for child care, and offering a brief quote from his answer to make it appear more logical. But Trump never used the word “tariffs” in his reply, and if you didn’t know much about his plans, you’d have no ability to interpret his answer.

And, of course, it’s not a reporter’s job to interpret subjects and to make candidates sound sane.

Moreover, tariffs are a tax on Americans—not on foreign governments, as Trump claims—because the prices of foreign goods are raised and the cost is put on the American consumer. This is why most presidents engage in targeted tariffs to protect certain American industries but wouldn’t think of instituting across-the-board tariffs. That’s the Trump plan, which 16 Nobel economists recently called an “inflation bomb” that would tank the economy.

After criticism blew up on social media, which the Harris campaign helped to generate in its own X feed, posting the video of Trump’s answer, the Times—as they’ve done in the past—altered the story without noting it in a correction, calling Trump’s answer “meandering” and putting in his full answer rather than quoting a snippet. Baker, in his story published last night, even explained how some reports used only a snippet while interpreting Trump’s answer—without admitting his own paper did it:

Mr. Trump’s response to the child care question in New York on Thursday underscored the concerns. Often his mangled statements are summarized in news accounts in ways that do not give the full picture of how baffling they can be. Quoting them at length, though, can provide additional context.

Baker then went on to quote Trump’s answer in full. Baker’s story only happened because of the pressure of progressive journalists, pundits, and media critics, as well as the uproar on social media—including from the Harris campaign—which was seized upon by opinion writers in other corporate media publications. On Monday, earlier in the day, USA Today ran a hard-hitting op-ed by columnist Rex Huppke which took The New York Times to task for its reporting.

“Trump is 78 and barely coherent. Where's everyone who questioned Biden's age and fitness?”, the headline blared, while the subhead stated, “Where are the headlines screaming, 'Deranged old man peddles nonsense while threatening violent deportation of immigrants'?”

Huppke explained—and reprinted in full—Trump’s answer on the child care question. Then he wrote:

If Biden, as the Democratic nominee, had gone on a rambling verbal tear like that, GOP lawmakers would be calling for him to be institutionalized and cable news panels would be discussing how the 25th Amendment works.

But The New York Times' initial report on Trump’s babble said this: “In a jumbled answer, he said he would prioritize legislation on the issue but offered no specifics and insisted that his other economic policies, including tariffs, would ‘take care’ of child care.”

Oh, c’mon. A 78-year-old convicted felon running for president rants nonsensically, demonstrating an inability to hold a thought or understand an important issue, and it’s deemed “a jumbled answer”?

Perhaps Baker was already working on the story the Times published about six hours later, but the USA Today piece certainly added to the pressure that had been exerted for days regarding the Times reporting on this question—and put the rest of the corporate media on notice—and for much longer regarding the media’s overall ignorance of Trump’s mental decline.

Whether or not the corporate media reverts back remains to be seen. But one thing we do know is that Trump, even if he gets through this debate—a structured event with the mics muted while the other person is speaking—without it popping out in a glaring way, will be displaying his cognitive decline during his next speech or interview, and during every one after that.

He’ll be confusing names and topics, going off on crazy tangents, and not making sense. And it will now be harder for the media not to focus on it, since it’s finally broken wide open.