This is not a vent board or any other kind of therapy. Before you hit the POST button, ask yourself if your contribution will add to the level of discussion going on.

Important notes on articles:

• Please do not copy entire articles into your post; rather, provide links to them.. We are now links-only for ALL Internet publications. If only a small portion of the article pertains to your post, Fair Use allows you to copy those one or two paragraphs, provided you cite the author's name and the publication for which he writes. Otherwise, put a link in the HTTP Link box.
• Even if you're copying a reference to an article, provide a link to the page from which the article came. We're trying to cut down on duplicate topics, and the posting process will check the link to your article to see if it's already being discussed on this board. At the very least, you'll save yourself some grief on the boards.
• If your first reaction after reading the article you're going to share is the author is uninformed / stupid / a jerk / all of the above, it's not worth sharing with anyone. Not every article needs to be discussed. The more the hair-pulling articles are discussed (e.g. ESPN Page 2), the more the authors will write hair-pulling articles.

Post being replied to

I avoided the board for three days after the report, having by sorin69

learned back when I still read the football board that after, e.g., Tulsa, it was good just to let the fallout clear. Ross Douthat's scenario actually had plausibility: Biden waits out the next few months to see how bad the reaction is. If sounder judgment prevails in his circle and his own conscience that his age, rightly or wrongly is an election killer, he can announce AFTER the primaries that he won't be running again, and throw the selection into the convention. Wouldn't that be a historic throwback? (He would also have to not endorse his VP as the alternate. A bridge too far, maybe, but we could hope.)