Addressing Incoherence: Evaluating Public Figures and Their Handlers

There's an old saying: if you disparage somebody else, look in the mirror. Such mirror-books often pop up when discussing the perceived incoherence of political figures like Joe Biden and Donald Trump. But as we explore these chants, it becomes clearer that the issue might not be unique to one figure. Let's delve into the context and evaluate the authenticity of these claims.

A Closer Look at Incoherence

In the past, we've seen numerous instances of former President Donald Trump's incoherence during his public speeches, include in his rallies. He's been known to misidentify names, like calling Barack Obama 'George something' and conflating Nancy Pelosi with Nikki Haley. These missteps are hardly unique to one figure but are a recurring theme in political discourse.

The Role of Handlers and Public Presentation

One of the main implications behind these claims often centers around handlers. Handlers are tasked with maintaining the public image and ensuring that figures like Joe Biden appear coherent and composed. The presence of handlers can act as a shield, protecting a candidate from potentially embarrassing moments. So, it's not unusual for critics of certain figures to dismiss these as handlers' efforts to maintain coherence.

Senility versus Incoherence

It's often claimed that figures like Joe Biden are senile, highlighting instances like the time he couldn't remember who he was running against, thinking it was George something. These examples are used to paint a picture of incoherence and dementia. However, it's important to consider the context. Joe Biden, despite his age, has been a long-term public figure and has navigated the complexities of politics without a reliance on teleprompters. He has demonstrated nuanced policy discussions and a long-held track record that doesn't align with someone suffering from severe cognitive decline.

Comparative Analysis: Grammar and Coherence

The issue of incoherence can also be contextual. Some critics might argue that Trump's statements are more incoherent, given his reliance on off-the-cuff remarks and the need for editing. For instance, Trump's claims about never being indicted, Obama being president, and winning all 50 states in the 2020 election are indeed psychologically unsound. However, it's not just about coherence in public speaking but also about consistency in factual representation.

Debunking Claims with Evidence

When we delve into evidence, the argument that turns the tables is often the public record. Former President Trump, in various legal and public settings, has demonstrated a pattern of incoherence and inconsistency. In depositions for his Trump University fraud trial, he answered "I don’t recall" or "I don’t remember" fifty-nine times. In sexual assault trials, he misidentified photos and couldn’t remember key meetings. These instances highlight a broader pattern of incoherence.

Conclusion: Transparency and Accountability

The debate around incoherence in politics is complex. While it's important to evaluate the claims of incoherence, it's equally important to view these claims through the lens of evidence and consistency. Public figures, regardless of their age or reliance on handlers, are accountable for their statements and actions. Efforts to ensure transparency and accountability in public discourse should be a shared responsibility. Whether it is Joe Biden or Donald Trump, the focus should be on facts, coherence, and consistency rather than personal attacks.