I think what I've landed on is basically: there's a worthwhile internal conversation to be had about whether Biden is capable of campaigning effectively, it would be bad to *lie* about his age or performance, but it's disgraceful that "old man is old" is wall-to-wall news over stuff like this.
In case you're curious where the Heritage Foundation's warning that we were in the midst of a "second American revolution" that would only remain "bloodless" if the left allowed it to be ran... page 20
I don't even mind dedicated politics talk shops running more on the Biden/replacement stuff, because it's mostly consumed by politics nerds anyway.
Papers of record need to act like it, which means you run an honest story after the debate and maybe another one on the replacement question...
...and then you move on to talk about, you know, actual news. There's lots of stuff going on in the world! Heritage just threatened people with bloodshed! SCOTUS evaporated the idea that the President can't use his powers to do crimes! That's the stuff that's actually new and should be everywhere.
Despite my theory about the impact of a June debate on undecided voters by November, I'm agnostic on whether replacing Biden might not be the better idea. I just don't know enough to say. Maybe it's worth a shot. But for the love of God spare a thought to covering stuff that's way more important!
