If it is true that he actually was in the early stages of Alzheimers,
It appears that he has a manifestation of Alz. that grows up slowly. Typically, this happens over a very long term... with initial symptoms being barely noticeable and sporadic. Assuming this was true, then it is likely that Pres. Reagan was at least somewhat compromised during his term of office.
does that mean he was not capable of carrying out the duties of his office?
No, it means that his ability may have been progressively reduced
If so, perhaps it demonstrated that the president is superfluous to the running of the state (not to be conflated with the government). Just musing.
Yours,
Issodhos
As I am sure you are aware, the "state" is a massive apparatus.... in which lots of people do things, hopefully based upon direction from above... and direction from above also depends upon the leader's ability to comprehend inputs form alls sorts of people... including his subordinates.
For the purpose of discussion, let us assume that a president was at some point significantly compromised by Alzheimers... the most likely result would be that his subordinates would continue running the apparatus.... and, most likely , that they would report to the leader in a way that would lead the leader to giving the direction they thought was appropriate.
None of this has anything to do with the degree to which an an uncomporomised leader may or may not impact the governance of the state.
Come what may. I think we can be well assured that the Iran Contra affair did happen under Pres. Reagan, and would not have happened under Pres. Carter. So, yes, it does seem that the president is not superfluous.
On the other hand, the president is also not able to exercise extreme power in all things. A president cannot wave his hands, issue a decree, and create a million more private sector jobs. Nor can the president arbitrarily decide how the Chinese, or north Koreans, or Iranians will behave.
So, the president is neither superfluous, nor massively powerful.
