Markos' web site really, really, really hates Tulsi Gabbard.

This isn't the first time that the GOS endorsed a primary challenge to Gabbard.

I was thinking of using Kim Iversen’s recent video on political positions as a comment for Not Henry Kissinger’s essay on "The Democratic TriParty (Part 1: The Players)." But since his essay is the first of several parts on a more specific topic, this might be too far OT, so I’ve decided to present it on its own. Kim’s video offers some necessary definitions with which we may or may not agree, along with a rational defense of Tulsi’s inherent progressivism.

I don't know how I missed this gem (skip to the last minute).

Will Tulsi qualify for the next debate? That depends on how it's measured.

Since then, Gabbard has shot past the 130,000 donor threshold, and as of Aug. 11, she was sitting at 159,514 individual donors. That took care of one-half of the qualification criteria for the next two debates.

Where Gabbard is seeing some struggles is in the polling numbers. Well, sort of.

Tulsi wasn't supposed to do that.
Not only was she not supposed to attack Kamala Harris, but she most certainly wasn't supposed to have landed such an effective blow and lived to tell about it.

Snoopydawg has got the takedown covered, so I won't duplicate it.
Instead I'd like to show you how TOP has gone into a full-throated whine party over it.

Finally, an election meddling konspiracy theory that is believable.