Your favorite clinical psychologists, John Gartner and Harry Segal, observe how the media is turning again, however slowly, to Trump’s mental decline. They are also joined by James Fishkin, professor at Stanford, whose work on “deliberative democracy” offers an exciting, practical opportunity to address the toxic polarity of our political environment.

Be sure to subscribe wherever you get your podcasts:

Even Republicans can’t miss Trump’s walk on the roof!

This week on Shrinking Trump, clinical psychologists John Gartner and Harry Segal break down what seemed like a headline‐grabbing stunt—and why it feels more like a symptom of real mental decline. They’re joined by Stanford’s James Fishkin, whose “deliberative democracy” experiments show a path out of our hyper-polarized mess.

Let’s be honest: watching a former president wander atop the White House roof felt unsettling. Gartner and Segal point out that Trump’s public behavior—impromptu speeches that twist facts on the fly, sudden mood swings, zero awareness of decorum—tracks with textbook signs of cognitive confusion. The roof episode isn’t just theater; it’s a window into someone losing touch with reality.

For years, major news outlets tip-toed around this possibility. Calling out a sitting or former president’s mental health felt taboo—until now. In this episode, our hosts talk through the media’s “reluctant pivot,” exploring why reporters and anchors finally started asking whether Trump’s strange stunts hint at something deeper than politics.

That’s where James Fishkin’s work comes in. Instead of debating on cable news, Fishkin gathers small, diverse groups of regular Americans to dig deep into issues like health care or climate change. They listen, ask questions, weigh evidence—and emerge with thoughtful, shared recommendations. It’s not a silver bullet, but it shows how we can move past tribal shouting matches and actually learn from each other.

Gartner and Segal argue that if we acknowledge Trump’s erratic public displays as possible signs of cognitive decline, we also owe it to ourselves to rethink how we talk politics. Simply calling someone “crazy” or “evil” keeps us stuck in zero-sum battles. Deliberative democracy, by contrast, invites us to step back, pause the outrage, and rebuild trust in our collective judgment.

Throughout the episode, you’ll hear concrete examples: a midwestern deliberative poll that shifted participants’ views on immigration, a rural community that used these methods to bridge deep cultural divides, and the surprising way citizens’ recommendations often outshine party-line talking points.

By the end, Gartner, Segal, and Fishkin land on a hopeful message: diagnosing cognitive red flags in our leaders is more than a media spectacle—it’s a civic duty. And once we see how easily even big egos can lose track of facts, we’re better positioned to demand standards for everyone in power.

Tune in to Shrinking Trump on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your shows. It’s short, it’s sharp, and it might just change how you think about our political future. Because in a world gone mad, understanding minds—and learning how to talk through our differences—could be our best shot at saving democracy.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices