magical thinking

let’s be real

As we begin the next-to-last week of May, I am tired of magical thinking, so I acknowledge frustration on two significant issues. I will discuss my first concern today, then my second later this week unless Mount Rainier erupts or some other cataclysmic event diverts us.

To clarify my assumptions, as I race through my late 60s, most of my fortunate and fascinating life is behind me, though I want to enjoy my remaining years as much as possible. The cohort of folks with whom I cavort are as seasoned as I am, so I can compare myself with others with some confidence. No two of us are identical, but I generalize with fair evidence. I feel obligated to pass the best world possible to those behind me in age, as they deserve opportunities as much as I did.

Ido not intend to sound callous today but genuinely am concerned we are kidding ourselves.

We are not living in 2025 in some mystical reenactment of a world where everyone had a perfect life. Yet too much messaging and too many assumptions appear linked to these fantasies when it comes to electing people of advanced age to public offices across the country.

We can no longer continue this way, as we are fraying in every way.we need concentrate on solutions for the whole of the country which is not currently occurring.

I regret that former President Biden could not answer Special Counsel questions as easily as officials claimed; I do not believe he or his advisors did the country any favor by covering up his declining condition. I am sorry he suffers from advanced, aggressive prostate cancer—a phenomenon so common as men accumulate years, which spreads to his bones to further diminish strength while sapping his attention in hopes of thwarting cancer. I wish he had gracefully recognized himself as too old for a second term, a fact he is still disputing.

Whatever his current condition, Biden continues to remind us he has been in the public policy arena for more than half a century, an occasionally discomforting indicator of his continuing policy role instead of younger voices. His debate performance in late June 2024 confirmed for millions his inability to govern as he might have forty years ago when he first began making noises about running for the White House. Europeans argued his diminished capacity for at least 18 months, while too many handlers tried to dismiss profoundly important evidence for a man who led the country amid some turbulent times. Had he successfully won the November election, he would have been 82 upon inauguration day, thus hoping to be 86 upon completing that second term. That perilous concept made many of us nervous, but it was magical thinking from the start.

I also regret that the incumbent President frequently utters incoherent and disjointed remarks, frequently in the form of non-sequiturs, roughly kindergarten-level in their sophistication. As with his predecessor, Mr. Trump occasionally falls asleep in public view during foreign travel (as did Biden) while conducting an ongoing campaign of retribution and cruelty designed to compensate for decades of perceived slights of the past. He rarely offers clearly-articulated, credible solutions for a country he views as in crisis. I am less surprised by his frequent answer “I don’t know but {fill in the blank} is responsible for that” when pressed by the media because that can be both a tactic and a recognition of age overwhelming capabilities but his obsessive actions far-too-often signal attention only to the past rather than the future.

According to a 2022 website for the Centers for Disease Control, an 80-year-old white male born in 1942 had an average life expectancy of 8 years remaining. Biden certainly is within that number today, but is the President of the United States average? Aren’t the stresses and responsibilities of this incredibly cumbersome position weighty for any individual in the office?

Trump, by extrapolation, was 76 three years ago because of his 1946 birth (curiously, the same year as Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Cher, and the already deceased Jimmy Buffett and Lesley Gore, among millions of others), so the 10.9 years’ average remaining life span is slightly inflated. Trump remains within that statistical average lifespan but faces precisely the same aging diseases that Biden confronts, although I have never read anything claiming he has prostate problems.

Genes are not destiny, of course, and the interactions between behavior and genetics are complex, but aging wears down the human body, particularly when it is stressful. None of us walks as quickly or has the same attention span or stamina. You may find counterexamples, but I stand by the statements about norms. Any president’s importance is not merely his longevity but also his ability to govern effectively, cope with multiple enduring crises, and represent us for the full term in office despite our differences.

If someone has a major disease, the odds of which increases with age, health maintenance is simply a far more time- and energy-consuming task.

I profoundly regret that we willingly ignore that politicians in any capacity in their 70s (or older) generally are slowing significantly as the needs of the positions we vote them to fulfill explode. I neither hate the politicians (although I may find their policy preferences distasteful) nor am I discriminating against older adults: I am now elderly, whether I like it or not (ask any company offering me a senior discount).

Being President of any country, especially this one, is grueling. Is someone the age of either Trump or Biden at his mental apex, able to make decisions such as who to hire, how to message home and abroad, and the panoply of other choices confronting the Chief Executive hourly? I am not being partisan: I am being an inquisitive, demanding citizen.

Ronald Reagan was two weeks shy of being 70 when he took the presidential oath 1981. Questions arose about his fitness for office at the time. A friend who served in Reagan’s administration now acknowledges that the staff knew perfectly well, if uncomfortably, that systemic memory problems were overtaking his abilities in his second term. Reagan finished his presidency at age 77, short of Trump’s current age (he will be 79 next month) or Biden’s. Reagan passed away at 93 with advanced Alzheimer’s, a disease frequently undiagnosed for decades before manifestation is unavoidably obvious.

I understand that presidents delegate much of their power, as they should, because their span of knowledge or time is not unlimited. But the President’s words and deeds matter a great deal in a participatory system, so the profound doubts resulting from someone with judgment and attention issues are consequential at home and abroad. I suspect, however, that we don’t consciously elect people to delegate, but because we respect their capacities to act on our behalf.

Being President is bloody hard work24/7/365 multiplied by four or eight years. Do we genuinely believe someone already worn down by decades of experience operates at the same capacity as someone twenty or thirty years younger? Foreign Service officers, law enforcement personnel, air traffic controllers, military officers, and other fields have mandatory retirements because we need individuals at the top of their game. We do not have a federal compulsory retirement age for the remainder of public servants.

Scaling back our expectations of presidents and elected officials would be sufficient. The public at large could compensate by taking a more active role in our political system, rather than thinking an election represents a “one and done” day we consider governance, but this is a possibility.

I am not asking for a presidential, judicial, or legislative mandatory retirement age. I suggest we stop pretending we are shocked that individuals in the White House are subject to the same forces as the rest of us. These individuals occupy consequential positions, so we must recognize that magical thinking about personality, rhetoric, and attacks on the opposition compensate for the inevitable slowing of the sands of time. Sure, some of us function exceptionally well as we age, but is it generally a good decision to put someone into the most challenging job in the world at that point without adverse consequences? This is a serious question rather than an attack on any individual. The country was equally wrong to vote FDR into a fourth term in November 1944 when photographs showed us a seriously diminished and unhealthy man, regardless of the burden he had shouldered through three prior terms.

My remarks apply to our elected officials at all levels of government. Ultimately, the voters decide to dismiss or seat those running for office. Still, I have a hard time believing the voters of California were well-served by 90-year-old Dianne Feinstein in her final years any more than those of South Carolina, as Strom Thurmond had to be moved like a potted plant around the Capitol when in his nineties. I welcome your thoughts, as some of you virulently disagreed with me on a similar question last year.

Not a single one of us will get out of this life alive, at least in the form we currently operate in, so we ought to suffer no surprise that aging occurs to everyone lucky enough to live that long. Additionally, no one is indispensable, even if we try convincing ourselves otherwise.

Please give us your thoughts on this question as perhaps you will see me overreacting. I welcome comments, rebuttals, or criticisms.

Thank you for taking time to consider my thoughts on consequences. I especially appreciate those who subscribe financially as you give me options I would not otherwise have.

Be well and be safe. FIN

Melissa Rayworth, “Can the Federal Government force an employee to retire?“, FederalTimes.com, 4 October 2022, retrieved at https://www.federaltimes.com/management/2022/10/04/can-the-federal-government-force-an-employee-to-retire/

Table A. Expectation of Life, by age, Hispanic origin, race, and sex: United States, 2022 “, CDC.gov, 2022, retrieved at https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr74/nvsr74-02.pdf

Jess Tompson, “Joe Biden diagnosed with ‘aggressive’ prostate cancer: what you need to know”, LiveScience.com, 19 May 2025, retrieved at https://www.livescience.com/health/cancer/joe-biden-diagnosed-with-aggressive-prostate-cancer-what-you-need-to-know