Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 20, 2014, 05:51:29 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Atlas Hardware Upgrade complete October 13, 2013.

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 415
1  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Incoming Nevada Speaker is a real piece of work on: Today at 04:04:32 pm
Easy dump, 2016. Democrats take over the State House, Hillary Clinton wins Nevada by a landslide, Harry Reid or his chosen successor successor gets elected to the Senate.

2  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Wisconsin voters and Walker's presidential prospects on: Today at 09:30:24 am
(post deleted due to repetition)
3  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Wisconsin voters and Walker's presidential prospects on: Today at 09:07:58 am
The question is whether Walker would do things to deliver the electoral votes of Wisconsin through some legislative chicanery. Here is his optimum:

Base the electoral vote on a winner-take-all basis on Congressional districts, so that if the Republican wins five districts by 51-49 margins and loses three by  70-30 margins, Wisconsin could go nearly 55-45 for the Democrat and still give ten electoral votes to the Republican.

It's not fair. It's just what the Governor's string-pullers want. Whether the US Supreme Court would stand for something that so distorts the popular vote is in doubt.

Now that you mention this, let's do it in Michigan! Wink


(Sorry. I missed the joke. Did I lose my sense of humor on November 5?
4  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Which state is more likely to vote for Hillary? Kentucky or Indiana? on: Today at 09:04:32 am
Indiana. The state voted for Obama in 2008 and voted in a Democratic Senator in 2012. Democrats of course have more and bigger areas in which they can amass votes -- the northern tier of counties from St. Joseph westward, Indianapolis, Bloomington, Lafayette, and maybe Fort Wayne. Indiana is culturally more like Ohio; Kentucky is ... insult excised to protect the innocent.

Kentucky has Louisville, Lexington, and forget it.   
5  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Wisconsin voters and Walker's presidential prospects on: Today at 08:55:22 am
The question is whether Walker would do things to deliver the electoral votes of Wisconsin through some legislative chicanery. Here is his optimum:

Base the electoral vote on a winner-take-all basis on Congressional districts, so that if the Republican wins five districts by 51-49 margins and loses three by  70-30 margins, Wisconsin could go nearly 55-45 for the Democrat and still give ten electoral votes to the Republican.

It's not fair. It's just what the Governor's string-pullers want. Whether the US Supreme Court would stand for something that so distorts the popular vote is in doubt.
6  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Montana voters voted to keep same-day registration on: Today at 08:48:16 am
Didn't see a thread on this ballot measure, but it's important.

This is now the 2nd time voters rejected Republican efforts to limit voting.

MT voters rejected the measure by a huge 57-43 margin in a heavily GOP climate & state.

Previously, Maine-voters rejected ending same-day registration after Republicans wanted to restrict voting.

Thoughts ?

People are unwilling to have their voting rights curtailed for partisan reasons.
7  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Polls on Same-Sex Marriage State Laws on: Today at 08:46:58 am
Quote
CHARLESTON, S.C. (AP) — A judge has issued the first same-sex marriage licenses in South Carolina, ahead of a planned move by the state's attorney general to block such unions. Early Wednesday, the office of Probate Judge Irvin Condon in Charleston said that he had issued six licenses to same-sex couples.

The judge's attorney, John Nichols, says the way was cleared for issuing the licenses by a decision in a case in Columbia. On Tuesday, the judge in that case ruled that South Carolina must recognize the marriage of a same-sex couple performed in Washington, D.C.

Last month, the South Carolina Supreme Court told probate judges not to issue any marriage licenses until there was a decision in that case. Nichols says Tuesday's ruling was that decision, so Condon is issuing licenses.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/19/same-sex-marriage-south-carolina_n_6185180.html?utm_hp_ref=gay-voices&ir=Gay%20Voices

The stay expires anyway.

Recent YouGov map with appropriate modifications as of 9AM EST, 20 November 2014:



White -- SSM equality by law.
Yellow -- toss-up

 

States in white (and DC) already have legalized same-sex marriages. Other states are coded by district in those in which SSM was not permanently legalized as of 2 PM EST on 12 November 2014:







Status of SSM in Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Guam, or the Northern Marianas not shown.

5th circuit
6th circuit*
8th circuit
11th circuit

*Next appeal, US Supreme court.

Colors for districts have no other political significance.

DC and all states within the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 7th, 9th, and 10th appellate districts have legalized SSM.


Here are the numbers:

Compiled results are listed below. The headers for each column are: State/ Support Legalising Gay Marriage/ Oppose Legalising Gay Marriage/ Net Support.

MA    71    19    +52
VT    71    20    +51
RI    68    20    +48
NH    63    24    +39
CT    61    26    +35
NY    61    27    +34
HI    59    26    +33
CA    58    31    +27
ME    63    37    +26
NM    57    32    +25
WA    57    32    +25
NV    55    31    +24
DE    54    31    +23
NJ    54    32    +22
OR    56    35    +21
IA    53    33    +20
IL    53    33    +20
CO    54    35    +19
MN    52    34    +18
AK    50    36    +14
WI    51    37    +14
MD    48    36    +12
PA    49    38    +11

ND    48    39    +9
MI    47    39    +8
AZ    47    40    +7
VA    47    40    +7

FL    46    40    +6
OH    45    40    +5
MT    45    41    +4
KS    44    41    +3

SD    43    43    0
IN    43    45    -2
NC    42    46    -4
MO    41    47    -6

NE    40    46    -6
LA    39    46    -7
WV    39    48    -9
GA    37    47    -10
SC    37    47    -10
KY    38    50    -12
TX    37    50    -13
OK    37    51    -14
WY    33    50    -17
ID    33    51    -18

AR    32    54    -22
UT    34    56    -22
MS    29    56    -27
TN    29    58    -29
AL    28    60    -32

US    48    39    +9









8  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Polls on Same-Sex Marriage State Laws on: November 19, 2014, 10:09:31 pm
What is it with Montana?

OVER. Billings Gazette:

http://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/montana/federal-judge-rules-montana-s-anti-gay-marriage-amendment-unconstitutional/article_585e4df1-6c99-57ee-a72b-1d975a245975.html

Quote
HELENA — A federal judge in Montana on Wednesday overturned the state's gay marriage ban.

U.S. District Judge Brian Morris ruled that Montana's constitutional amendment limiting marriage to between a man and a woman violates the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.

"This Court recognizes that not everyone will celebrate this outcome," Morris wrote. "This decision overturns a Montana Constitutional amendment approved by the voters of Montana. Yet the United States Constitution exists to protect disfavored minorities from the will of the majority."

Montana Attorney General Tim Fox said Thursday afternoon that he will appeal the ruling. Fox, a Republican, said he has the duty to defend the ban until "no appeal can made in a court of law."

Morris also noted Montana no longer can deprive plaintiffs and other same-sex couples of the chance to marry their loves. He said his ruling was effective immediately.

Recent YouGov map with appropriate modifications as of 11PM EST, 19 November 2014:



White -- SSM equality by law.
Yellow -- toss-up

 

States in white (and DC) already have legalized same-sex marriages. Other states are coded by district in those in which SSM was not permanently legalized as of 2 PM EST on 12 November 2014:







Status of SSM in Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Guam, or the Northern Marianas not shown.

4th circuit*
5th circuit
6th circuit*
8th circuit
11th circuit

*Next appeal, US Supreme court.

Colors have no political significance.

DC and all states within the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 7th, and 10th appellate districts have legalized SSM.


Here are the numbers:

Compiled results are listed below. The headers for each column are: State/ Support Legalising Gay Marriage/ Oppose Legalising Gay Marriage/ Net Support.

MA    71    19    +52
VT    71    20    +51
RI    68    20    +48
NH    63    24    +39
CT    61    26    +35
NY    61    27    +34
HI    59    26    +33
CA    58    31    +27
ME    63    37    +26
NM    57    32    +25
WA    57    32    +25
NV    55    31    +24
DE    54    31    +23
NJ    54    32    +22
OR    56    35    +21
IA    53    33    +20
IL    53    33    +20
CO    54    35    +19
MN    52    34    +18
AK    50    36    +14
WI    51    37    +14
MD    48    36    +12
PA    49    38    +11

ND    48    39    +9
MI    47    39    +8
AZ    47    40    +7
VA    47    40    +7

FL    46    40    +6
OH    45    40    +5
MT    45    41    +4
KS    44    41    +3

SD    43    43    0
IN    43    45    -2
NC    42    46    -4
MO    41    47    -6

NE    40    46    -6
LA    39    46    -7
WV    39    48    -9
GA    37    47    -10
SC    37    47    -10
KY    38    50    -12
TX    37    50    -13
OK    37    51    -14
WY    33    50    -17
ID    33    51    -18

AR    32    54    -22
UT    34    56    -22
MS    29    56    -27
TN    29    58    -29
AL    28    60    -32

US    48    39    +9








9  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: History shows Hillary unlikely to win on: November 19, 2014, 08:45:05 pm

(Modified to fit 2016):

Never-Wrong Pundit Pick(ed) Obama to Win in 2012

fromhttp://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2011/08/30/never-wrong-pundit-picks-obama-to-win-in-2012



“Even if I am being conservative, I don’t see how Obama can lose,” says Lichtman, the brains behind The Keys to the White House.

Lichtman’s prediction helps to explain a quirk in some polling that finds that while Americans disapprove of the president, they still think he will win re-election. ...


Lichtman developed his 13 Keys in 1981. They test the performance of the party that holds the presidency. If six or more of the 13 keys go against the party in power, then the opposing party wins.“The keys have figured into popular politics a bit,” Lichtman says. “They’ve never missed. They’ve been right seven elections in a row. A number that goes way beyond statistical significance in a record no other system even comes close to.”

Lichtman’s earned quite the reputation. In 1992, it seemed likely former President George H.W. Bush would be re-elected, having reached historic highs in popularity after he launched a war that pushed Iraqi troops out of Kuwait. But Lichtman thought otherwise and that factored into former Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton’s decision to challenge Bush.“I got a call from this woman with a thick southern drawl. It was Clinton’s special assistant. She wanted to know if it was true that a Democrat could win. I assured her it was and I sent Clinton a copy of my book and a memo and the rest is history.” [See photos of the Obamas behind the scenes.]

In 2005, Lichtman also hit a home run when he said that the political stage was looking so bad for Republicans that Democrats could pick a name out of the phone book and win in 2008, the year a little known first-term senator became the first African-American to win the presidency.

Below are each of the keys and how it falls for Obama Hillary Clinton.

Party mandate:
After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives than it did after the previous midterm elections.

Definite failure for any Democrat.


Contest: There is no serious contest for the incumbent party nomination. Says Lichtman on Obama’s unchallenged status, “I never thought there would be any serious contest against Barack Obama in the Democratic primary.” Obama (Clinton probably) wins this key.


Incumbency: The incumbent party candidate is the sitting president.

Definitely not.

Third Party: There is no significant third party challenge. Obama wins this point. If there will be a significant Third Party it will be a challenge to the GOP.


Short term economy: The economy is not in recession during the election campaign. Here Lichtman declares an “undecided.”

So would I.


Long-term economy: Real per capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms.

Too early to tell.

Policy change: The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy. “There have been major policy changes in this administration. We’ve seen the biggest stimulus in history and an complete overhaul of the healthcare system so I gave him policy change,” says the scholar.

Not likely.

Social unrest: There is no sustained social unrest during the term. Says Lichtman, “There wasn’t any social unrest when I made my predictions for 2012 and there still isn’t.”

Not happening, so a plus.

Scandal: The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal. “This administration has been squeaky clean. There’s nothing on scandal,” says Lichtman. Another Obama win.
Foreign/military failure: The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs. Says Lichtman, “We haven’t seen any major failure that resembles something like the Bay of Pigs and don’t foresee anything.” Obama (Clinton likely) wins again.

Foreign/military success: The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs. “Since Osama bin Laden was found and killed, I think Obama has achieved military success.” Obama wins his eighth key.

Obama has time to make this happen this time. If he must cut a deal with Iran to smash ISIS, then he will. Just not yet.

Incumbent charisma: The incumbent party candidate is charismatic or a national hero. Explains Lichtman, “I did not give President Obama the incumbent charisma key. I counted it against him. He’s really led from behind. He didn’t really take the lead in the healthcare debate, he didn’t use his speaking ability to move the American people during the recession. He’s lost his ability to connect since the 2008 election.” Obama loses this key. [See political cartoons about President Obama.]

Hillary Clinton seems to have charisma.

Challenger charisma: The challenging party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero. Says Lichtman, “We haven’t seen any candidate in the GOP who meets this criteria and probably won’t.” Obama wins, bringing his total to nine keys, three more than needed to win reelection.

No Republican offers charisma, and no Republican is a national hero.

Six positives; seven wins.
10  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: History shows Hillary unlikely to win on: November 19, 2014, 08:28:02 pm
The White House is a metronome in one very important way.

Since the 1928 election, the following trend has been consistent.

Parties peak, and slowly lose power until the other party takes over, and peaks and slowly loses power.

Even when one party won many elections in a row, it followed this pattern.

So Truman in 1948 won less votes then FDR in 1944, who won less votes than he did in 1940, who won less votes in 1936. Papa Bush got less votes in 1988 than Reagan did in 1984.

There can always be an exception, but it seems to be a mistake to assume that an exception is the likeliest outcome.

One pattern was that incumbents either add to their popular and electoral vote totals or lose altogether. President Obama did neither in 2012.

I got caught by one of the 'rules' that I discovered: I found a hole in the electoral results of elections from 1900 to 2008 in which the winner of the Presidential election got either more than 65% (McKinley)  of the electoral vote or less than 57% even if the mean was almost in the middle. I figured that the nominees projecting to win 40% of the electoral vote would either take desperate efforts to win and likely fail even to hold onto some of what he had (think of McCain in 2008) or make the vote much closer (the Ford charge in 1976).  Someone projecting to win 30% or so of the electoral vote was going to have a lackluster campaign; someone close was not going to gamble big on high-risk plays.

The 2012 Presidential election fit very well into the 'void' that proved non-existent. Had Romney won Florida, ny theory would have held.    
11  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: 2016: Democrats start with at least 207 EV's, Republicans with 164 on: November 19, 2014, 12:47:48 am
By figuring that Republicans really have no chance of winning either Michigan or Pennsylvania in a close election but have a chance in Nevada, and calling NE-02 a toss-up )it voted for a Democrat for the US Congress) I get this result:

 Democrats    237    33    --    99 Winning Combinations »
Republicans    163    107    --    56 Winning Combinations »
Ties         23 Tie Combinations »

That's advantage Democrats and a big one. It shows that the Electoral College is skewed in Democratic favor.

Here's my take. Michigan isn't going R, and neither is Pennsylvania. But Scott Walker is catapulted to a front-runner for President, which makes a huge difference in Wisconsin. Joni Ernst, who may be one of the most reactionary Senators, got elected in Iowa, so if she can win so can a Republican nominee for President. Minnesota of course was the 49th or worst state for a Republican nominee in the two 49-state blowouts, which are long ago but was about the 20th best state for Obama twice, which suggests more its inelasticity than anything else.   




Maine is much more homogeneous in its voting than is Nebraska, so it is far more likely that Nebraska gives up an electoral vote to the Democrat than does Maine give one to the Republican.

Here's a reasonable scenario in which NE-02 decides who is the next President:



I have Colorado and Nevada voting in opposite directions, which is unlikely, and I see New Hampshire voting as it has not voted since 2000... but the Walker Machine has not delivered Wisconsin. Iowa going for the Republican but not Greater Omaha?



12  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Florida on: November 18, 2014, 11:10:24 pm
Democrats lose if the race going into September 2016 is close because of the sure barrage of right-wing agitprop from the Koch fronts. But if Republicans expose the right-wing agenda at its rawest, they lose big.

Who well can the Koch family keep the Republicans from outrageous statements that offend moderate sensibilities?
13  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper. on: November 18, 2014, 11:06:29 pm
Nobody runs for VP.
14  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Wisconsin Megathread: 2014 Aftermath and 2016 Senate Speculation on: November 18, 2014, 11:04:44 pm
He shoots up to the top tier of potential GOP nominees. The people who most matter in GOP politics, the Koch family, have likely found him 'their finest pupil'.
15  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Will Democrats ever regain a majority of governorships again? on: November 18, 2014, 10:47:34 pm
If the Koch syndicate gets its way, American elections will be as meaningless as elections in China.
16  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Boehner kills internet sales tax bill on: November 18, 2014, 05:21:13 pm
Facilitating evasion of taxes that brick and mortar shops have to pay isn't a good thing.

Don't I incur extra costs via shipping and waiting time when I buy online vs. brick and mortar? 

Not by much. Brick-and-mortar stores depend heavily upon impulse purchases.
17  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Obama's Exec Order a landmine in waiting for GOP in 2016 on: November 18, 2014, 05:19:34 pm
In all of the plausibly competitive 2016 states, this is what I predict will be the net effect of the executive order.  Green means ambiguous or little net impact:



Basically, it makes sense only if they are confident it will help push Florida left of the tipping point.  There will also be Democratic risks/GOP opportunities in the rural North that should be taken seriously.
I don't see how the executive order impacts Michigan, Ohio, etc.
 
The economy is going to be the #1 issue in 2016.  Most people Michigan and Ohio aren't going to make immigration their main priority, especially since it doesn't directly impact their states.  While there are people who are going to hate this executive order, they are A). Already probably supporting the Republican and B). Don't need to be further motivated in order to get them out to the polls.

There are also people who will be directly benefited from this executive order.  While these people were already very likely to support the Democrat, they have very low voting rates so this motivation could be useful to Democrats.

I could see the Republican trying to tie Clinton to Obama using this issue.  This would hurt her most in states where Obama lost but Clinton could have more appeal with working class whites, like Missouri and Georgia.
Blue collar states don't like immigrants.

Have a Hispanic in-law and your opinion of Hispanics goes way up. But just as significantly, many 'illegal' Hispanic immigrants have 'legal' relatives.  Barack Obama just might have secured Colorado and Nevada for Hillary and put Arizona in play.

Voting behavior of working-class whites in recent elections suggest that they are almost as reactionary as Corporate America. They are superstitious, gullible, and angry -- and their anger will become favorable to Democrats only when a huge swing toward populism happens to a Democratic Party that looks more like Eisenhower-era Republicans than to Bryan-era Democrats. 

(It's now hard to distinguish the Republican Party from the John Birch Society).
18  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: 2016: Democrats start with at least 207 EV's, Republicans with 164 on: November 18, 2014, 04:41:05 pm
I think all reasonable minds can agree that Democrats have a serious advantage in Presidential elections in this time period...

http://www.270towin.com/2016_election_predictions.php?mapid=bIBS

Not to mention the fact that the way "swing" states are trending favors democrats as well:

Trending Democrat: Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Virginia

Trending Republican: Pennsylvania, Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio

No trend (?): New Hampshire
Uncolor NV/MN, they're more competitive than MI, which you already have uncolored.

Minnesota is not competitive. Stop the meme.
It's more competitive than Michigan (in a presidential race), and you know it.

Minnesota just does not swing much. It hasn't been more R than the national average in a Presidential election since 1952 (and that is probably because Stevenson did so well in the South and only in the South).
19  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Christie: end political contribution limits on: November 18, 2014, 04:35:24 pm
Sounds reasonable to me.

Only if you want Scott Walker or Ted Cruz to act as basically a regent for the Koch family.
20  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper. on: November 18, 2014, 04:34:09 pm
Good VP candidate.  Governor of a critical state, will likely be popular again after the Koch fronts quit sniping at him -- basically, his stock as a pol goes way up in December of this year.
21  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: MI GOP to advance EC reallocation plan on: November 18, 2014, 04:31:33 pm
This could be a big deal.

In the current electoral map, a Republican who flips Florida, Ohio and Virginia gets 266 electoral votes.

Any distribution that provides three more electors gets a 269-269 tie, determined by the political party with the most state congressional delegations (that would be the Republicans.) Four electors takes away the tie.

Democrats must play a beat-the-cheat strategy because the Republican nominee, the Republican party, and Koch front groups will cheat as much as they must to win if they have the chance. Remember -- if they win, then nobody dares ask any questions unless he doesn;t care whether he has a job working for an American employer.
22  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Obama's Exec Order a landmine in waiting for GOP in 2016 on: November 18, 2014, 10:13:37 am
The President plays chess; his opponents play slots.
23  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: 2016 map with 2014 exit poll results? on: November 17, 2014, 09:24:05 pm
How would that look? Could someone be so kind as to create an EV map based on the House exit polls, or any of the 2014 exit polls? I'm not into the map-making stuff.


Obviously it's not going to happen, but I'm interested.

Democrats win all states to the north of the Potomac, Virginia, Illinois, Minnesota, New Mexico, California, Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington. Michigan, Wisconsin, Nevada, and Colorado are genuine toss-ups. The rest goes Republican.
24  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: 2016: Democrats start with at least 207 EV's, Republicans with 164 on: November 17, 2014, 09:19:59 pm
By figuring that Republicans really have no chance of winning either Michigan or Pennsylvania in a close election but have a chance in Nevada, and calling NE-02 a toss-up )it voted for a Democrat for the US Congress) I get this result:

 Democrats    237    33    --    99 Winning Combinations »
Republicans    163    107    --    56 Winning Combinations »
Ties         23 Tie Combinations »
25  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: MI GOP to advance EC reallocation plan on: November 17, 2014, 08:21:19 pm
This would be great to do in all states where we have state legislative majorities and governorships.  In this case, the real Michigan will finally get a chance to have a say, and we can expand the swing state map for Republicans. Folks outside Detroit  can finally have their voices heard after years of being drowned out.



Republicans have so gerrymandered the state that Battle Creek, East Lansing, Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo, and Lansing are in Republican districts.

I suppose that Battle Creek, East Lansing, Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo, and Lansing aren't part of the "real Michigan".

Your Real America is the part that thinks that evolution and a universe much older than 6000 years old are demonic deceits, that the only purpose of Earthly life is to so suffer for economic elites that they get Pie in the Sky when you die, that global warming is a complete hoax, that gays are all child-molesting perverts, and that Barack Obama is every loathsome thing. possible. 

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 415


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines