It has been pointed out to me that I didn’t specifically call out the fact that Trump and many of his surrogates have repeatedly questioned Hillary Clinton’s mental fitness, describing her as “unhinged,” “unstable,” and the like. While these aren’t psychiatric diagnoses, per se, they clearly play into very similar tropes, dog-whistles, and stereotypes, and they foster the same kind of stigma. I could have also written an entire series of posts about the many, many times that politicians have chosen to discuss mental health solely within the framework of mass shootings. Equally, the allegations that Hillary suffers from a smörgåsbord of secret physical health concerns (epilepsy! strokes! Parkinson’s!) that have no apparent basis whatsoever in reality are evidence of trashy political journalism that detracts from real medical science (to say nothing of substantive discourse). Clearly there’s a lot to unpack in this election. At the end of the day, I chose to write this article because while I do my damnedest to ignore the Breitbart crowd, I was seeing fellow liberals and friends of mine including these kinds of speculative faux-diagnoses in their haste to bash Trump, and felt compelled to respond.
On the 2016 Election, the Goldwater Rule, and “Diagnoses from Afar”
Benjamin Swerdlow
1