Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 05, 2016, 11:37:50 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 565
26  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Were losses in Midwest a backlash against smug news media? on: November 27, 2016, 09:55:11 pm
The harsh reality is that white working-class people voted to stick it to educated people that they see as oppressors, like school teachers who corrected their grammar as kids and now correct their kids' grammar, the tax assessor, the public offender who got some alleged offender off, the bankers and attorneys who overcharged... Donald Trump seemed to share their vulgarity, telling them what they wanted to hear from a political figure instead of some mealy-mouthed politeness. He promised to stick it to  the educated middle class, especially those not white, Anglo, and Christian, and he leaves no doubt that he will stick it to them. Many people see the 'suit' as an enemy unless that 'suit' seems to share his culture.

(In reality I expect him to stick it to anyone not already super-rich like he, but that comes from trying to read between the lines).

27  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: The Dems need an autopsy -- they are now a completely regional party. on: November 26, 2016, 10:27:05 pm
The future I see for the Democratic Party

Northeast Coast

West Coast

With Maine, New Hampshire and Oregon as toss ups

That suggests a political reality much like China today -- with the non-Communist partners marginalized. The Democrats will be allowed to show that there is some formal, if ineffective opposition.

In any event, if you think Obama was bad, at least he was cautious; he coordinated well with the intelligence agencies and the Armed Forces; he spoke simply but with necessary nuance; he acted without malice; he showed great respect for legal precedents and Constitutional formalities. None of that will be so with Donald Trump. So what are his virtues?

He can get America into deep trouble. He can stop inflation only by suppressing wages as his Corporate buddies want, only for the consumer economy to collapse. See also Herbert Hoover. Failing to pay attention to the Intelligence Services and Armed Forces ensures that he has more chance of a 9/11 or Pearl Harbor-style incident than he has of resolving one (think of Obama resolving 9/11 by delivering a dead Osama bin Laden to Davy Jones' locker). This is Jimmy Carter without the moral compass, and the moral compass is all that Jimmy Carter had. Because he has nothing to say to those who voted against him is "Suck it up, losers!" or something to that effect, he will get people who dislike his policies to street demonstrations and protests on many issues from minority rights to the environment.  

The only way in which Donald Trump or his successor has a chance to win the Presidency in 2020 is if the Republicans succeed in rigging the vote. Basically, if Republicans win in 2020 it will in part be because people fear horrible consequences for opposing the sort of leader whose image is in every living room, bedroom, and kitchen.  
28  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Rank the Obama/Trump states from most likely to least likely to flip back to... on: November 26, 2016, 09:57:42 pm
1. Michigan
2. Pennsylvania
3. Wisconsin
4. Florida
5. North Carolina
6. ME-02
7. Ohio
8. NE-02
9. Iowa
10. Indiana
29  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Will Trump win if he runs again in 2020? on: November 26, 2016, 09:42:48 pm
He will be an unmitigated disaster as President -- Jimmy Carter with no moral compass. His dalliance with Vladimir Putin will put America in a very bad position. He will fail to deliver on his contradictory promises and leave people angry. Civil unrest will be commonplace and he will be unable to do anything about it.
Liberals who were the bulk of the Democratic vote in 2016 will be back in 2020, most likely with younger and more eloquent leaders.
30  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Could this happen? on: November 24, 2016, 11:03:31 pm
If there is to be any split within the Republican Party, then it is more likely to reflect a power struggle or personalities and not policy. 
31  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: The United States of Gerontocracy on: November 24, 2016, 11:01:03 pm
I just thought of moving this another 5 years earlier, with some of the old dinosaurs, like Podgorny, still around.

So, Jan 1, 1977 does not look that much different, actually.

Suslov 74
Brezhnev 70
Kosygin 72
Podgorny 73
Kirilenko 70
Mazurov 62
Pelshe 77
Grishin 62
Kulakov 58
Kunaev 64
Shcherbitsky 58
Andropov 62
Gromyko 67
Romanov 53
Ustinov 68

There was a Romanov in the politburo? Is that just a coincidence or did they make a comeback? lol

Simply a common surname, a patronymic of the common given name "Roman". Any relationship to the Imperial family is unknown.

From Wikipedia:

Grigory Vasilyevich Romanov (Russian: Григорий Васильевич Романов, scientific transliteration: Grigorij Vasil'evič Romanov; 7 February 1923 – 3 June 2008) was a Soviet politician and member of the Politburo and Secretariat of the CPSU. In 1985, he was considered Mikhail Gorbachev's main rival in the succession struggle after the death of Konstantin Chernenko in March 1985.

Grigory Vasilyevich was born in Novgorod Oblast into a Russian peasant family.

A soldier in the Red Army during the Great Patriotic War, Romanov joined the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) in 1944. Romanov graduated from the Leningrad Shipbuilding Institute in 1953, and became a designer in a shipyard. He fulfilled several important posts in the party committee of the enterprise he was working at and later in the Leningrad city and regional party committees. In September 1970 he was elected First Secretary of the Communist Party Committee of the Leningrad Region. In this position he gained a reputation of being a good organizer and well versed in economic matters, winning defense investment for Leningrad. He was elected a member of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union at the XXIVth congress of the CPSU in 1971. He became a candidate member of the Central Committee's Politburo in 1973 and a full member in 1976. In 1977 he initiated a successful vote to remove Chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet, Nikolai Podgorny from the Politburo.

In 1983 Romanov attracted the attention of the new General Secretary Yuri Andropov who subsequently brought him to Moscow and helped promote him in June 1983 to the highly prestigious and influential post of a secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU responsible for industry and the military-industrial complex. During the few remaining months of Andropov's life Romanov was widely seen as one of Andropov's closest collaborators and was an ardent supporter of Andropov's comprehensive program for the reform, renewal and further development of socialism in the Soviet Union and beyond, a fact which stands in sharp contrast to the picture Gorbachev and his associates were later to paint of Romanov as a means of gaining advantage in the power struggles following Andropov's death in February 1984.

Romanov attracted international attention on November 5, 1983, during the height of Operation Able Archer. Grigory Vasilyevich addressed the Kremlin Palace of Congresses in order to commemorate the October Revolution, where he remarked:

"the development of events in the world arena demands from us the highest vigilance, restraint, firmness and unremitting attention to the strengthening of the country's defense capability... Perhaps never before in the postwar decades has the situation in the world arena been as tense as it is now... Comrades! the international situation at present is white hot, thoroughly white hot." Western analysts, unaware of the Exercise that was taking place and therefore uncertain as to why Romanov would describe the situation as "white hot", dismissed the remarks as Soviet propaganda.

During Konstantin Chernenko's short time in office as General Secretary in 1984–1985 Romanov already occupied a position clearly inferior to Gorbachev, who had been styled Second Secretary of the Central Committee since February 1984 and acted as chairman of the Politburo, Secretariat and Central Committee in the course of Chernenko's long periods of absence due to his illness.

Gorbachev vs. Romanov

Romanov was the second youngest member of the Politburo after Gorbachev. In the months preceding the death of Konstantin Chernenko in March 1985, Romanov and Gorbachev were commonly regarded to be chief rivals in the succession struggle for the post of General Secretary. Viktor Grishin was also considered a viable candidate.

However, after Chernenko's death Gorbachev emerged with the strongest position to succeed Chernenko. Andrei Gromyko, one of the oldest and widely respected Politburo members, nominated Gorbachev for the position of General Secretary of CPSU, both at the March 11 meeting of Politburo and subsequently at the March 1985 Plenum (meeting) of the Central Committee of the CPSU. Neither Romanov nor Grishin mounted a formal challenge to Gorbachev's bid and the votes in favor of Gorbachev, both in the March 11 meeting of Politburo and at the March Plenum, were unanimous.

End of career

Gorbachev quickly moved to oust Grigory Vasilevich following his ascent to become General Secretary. He informed Romanov that he had no future under Gorbachev, and sacked him three months later, in July 1985. Rumors were circulated which claimed that Romanov was involved in corruption, drunken bacchanalias, and orgies; a familiar tale following the fall of Russian leaders.

Romanov subsequently lived as a pensioner in Moscow. For several years he headed the "Association of Leningradians in Moscow".

32  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Almost impossible to knock off a first term incumbent on: November 24, 2016, 09:02:40 pm
When was the last time the pv loser got this low of a share of the vote and still won?

No PV loser/EV winner has ever gotten this low share of the vote.

When one starts with a 55% unfavorability rate, one has much credibility to develop and many bridges to build. An even 2% shift in popular vote nationwide causes him or his successor to lose Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Florida in 2020. Even shifts are rare except in nearly-even races.

People whose sensibilities he insulted in 2016 will have a hard time voting for him in 2020... and many who voted for him will have to decide that he served their needs. So he promised jobs that did not appear or brought those jobs about by degrading the pay and working conditions of those already at work. If one still has a job but is living worse while economic elites live in opulent splendor, then one might see only a raw deal.

Donald Trump will have to betray the desires that he fostered among many workers because he made promises that cannot be delivered together. Add to that, most of those who got shut out of the political process for four years will want back in, and they will be strongly motivated if they are not shut down altogether.

Is there a new JFK/TR/Obama for the Democrats?  Such a young nominee would better understand the economic and political values of younger voters while not being beholden to special interests of aging groups within the Democratic party. Remember: by 2020 all Boomers (if you use Howe and Strauss/ divide between 1960 and 1961 between Boom and X -- Barack Obama is no Boomer; he acts much more like such Presidents as John Adams, Cleveland, Truman, and Eisenhower than like Clinton or Dubya) will be 60 or older at the end of the year. Elderly politicians can govern, but they need younger supporters for the bulk of their votes. Hillary Clinton got tepid support from the youngest voters and may have lost for that.

Minorities? It is easy to say that the Republicans will do better among them because they couldn't do worse than in 2016 while running a frankly racist campaign -- but it takes a long time to undo the damaging perception.

This is before people get to see his political persona fully sink in without the pressure to moderate to seem tolerable to moderates, and before he gets culpability or praise for his economic, military, or diplomatic policies. He is about as reckless as Obama is cautious, and such bodes ill.     
33  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Almost impossible to knock off a first term incumbent on: November 22, 2016, 05:41:43 pm
The one with more charisma wins? The problems that Carter and Hoover had in winning re-election had nothing to do with charisma.

Here is how Donald Trump loses:

1. Civil unrest. Donald Trump ran on a racist campaign, and millions of people are going to dislike it because he has gored their ox or because they abhor racism even it is supposedly for their (white) tribe. We will see lots of protests and demonstrations.

2. Economic meltdown. Do seven-year recoveries last long beyond the administration under which they started when the next President changes everything? I doubt it. Get an economic meltdown or high inflation by recent standards, and Donald Trump's legacy is toast.

3. Military or diplomatic catastrophes. War can be great for the profits of merchants of death, but when the body bags return to people who don't understand why the war continues, that all changes. Anti-war demonstrations bring us back to #1.

4. Perceived corruption. I am not predicting that Donald Trump or the GOP will start using the federal treasury as personal piggy banks, but it that happens, then the Republicans own it all.

Donald Trump has no experience in elective office, high appointed office (like Cabinet Secretary or Director of the CIA) or senior military leadership. He is going to try to run the federal government much like Trump Corporation, the only model that he knows for how to administer anything. People who now take the delight when a businessman and not a politician starts running the government like a business so that it will be as ruthlessly efficient as a business with profit-and-loss are going to find that much of government (like welfare, the military, foreign policy, and justice) does not run well that way -- and for that Donald Trump will get it all wrong or have no idea.  

Practically all liberals see no home in things going well for Donald Trump as President even when they disregard ideology.

The opinion that Americans have of Barack Obama will remain high, and all that the Democrats have to do to win the Presidency in 2020 is to have someone who reminds America of the last President generally seen as good by at least 50% of the electorate.      
34  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Would Elizabeth Warren make a strong candidate? on: November 22, 2016, 12:02:58 am
If Donald Trump is as bad as I see him even before inauguration and he has changed not at all, then Democrats won't exactly need a liberal version of Ronald Reagan to oust Donald Trump.
35  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Will Trump even make it into the White House? on: November 21, 2016, 11:59:26 pm
Does anybody really think that there is a lightning bolt with the name "Donald Trump" on it? Do you know something about his health that nobody else knows?

If you know about an assassination plot, then do call the Secret Service and save yourself a long prison term. 
36  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Rust Belt 2020 on: November 21, 2016, 11:56:22 pm
Look at this here: http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/21/news/economy/kfile-trump-social-security/
Trump might not keep his populist image.

Gasp. But he was supposed to be the working class hero!

A man cannot serve two masters -- in this case the working man and the economic elites. Donald Trump or his successor will find millions of disgruntled Trump voters. Democrats will need only find the closest thing to the Second Coming of Barack Obama to win big in 2020 even with mediocre economic conditions.
37  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Is this now the best EC path for Democrats? on: November 21, 2016, 11:47:36 pm
Just wait for Donald Trump to make a fool of himself (we didn't even have to wait for the inauguration), and strategy might not matter in 2020. Meanwhile America has become the sort of place that people want to leave... one big West Virginia if it hasn't splintered as Yugoslavia did a few years ago.   
38  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Approval, Donald Trump on: November 21, 2016, 11:38:26 pm
Keep in mind that at least 45% of the country will disapprove of Trump no matter what he does.

True. But visceral contempt usually subsides only after the politician is dead.
39  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Democrats: Would you vote for Ron Wyden/Henry Cuellar? on: November 21, 2016, 11:36:10 pm
Unless I face the intimidation characteristic of a totalitarian police state (which America could become under Donald Trump) I can hardly imagine voting for any but the Democratic ticket for President in 2020.
40  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Could this happen? on: November 21, 2016, 11:33:48 pm
One election is not to establish that a state has made a fundamental change in its political orientation.
41  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Rust Belt 2020 on: November 21, 2016, 11:30:47 pm
This election shows, if anything, how white people in mass are so naive about politics.
42  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Trump 2020, like Carter 2.0 or Nixon '72? on: November 21, 2016, 10:37:42 pm
Assuming that the Republicans allow the Democrats to have a chance to win the election...

Carter 1980, except that Donald Trump is about as amoral as Jimmy Carter is moral, and Carter was not defeated by large numbers of  middle-class minorities turning against him. By 2020 practically any Democrat could defeat Donald Trump in roughly a Reagan 1980 landslide should Donald Trump's bad early favorability ratings transmute into the sorts of disapproval ratings like those even of Dubya in 2008.

He's making serious mistakes that other Presidents have never made, mistakes that someone with experience in elective office, public administration, or senior military service would never make even before his inauguration. He has doubled down on harsh rhetoric that gave millions visceral hatred in him during the election.

Donald Trump has a solid 55% unfavorability rating according to the post-election poll of Gallup, which is far above the unfavorable ratings of Clinton, Dubya, or Obama.

Favorable Ratings of Recent Presidents-Elect
                            Date    Favorable    Unfavorable
                                               %    %
Donald Trump            2016 Nov 9-13    42    55
Barack Obama            2008 Nov 7-9    68    27
George W. Bush    2000 Dec 15-17    59    36
Bill Clinton            1992 Nov 10-11    58    35

Even if Donald Trump won with less than even a plurality of the popular vote, so did Dubya. But while Dubya avoided making polarizing statements that basically told people who voted against him that they no matter in the political system, Donald Trump has said such on most issues. It is obviously far easier to develop credibility among those who might have had squishy opposition to one if one starts offering something other than "Suck it up, loser!" Meanwhile, protests and demonstrations all directed at him proliferate.

Donald Trump started out decidedly to the Right and has delved into the rhetoric of the political f-word. He might get away with it if he can succeed in creating mass enmity for minority groups, something that many Americans find appalling. Even should he back down from the virulent rhetoric, the damage may be irreparable.

Note, of course, that this projection is very different from the cause of the Carter loss to Reagan. Nobody yet predicts stagflation or some hostage crisis. Will moderate white American Christians show solidarity with minorities that did nothing wrong? I most certainly hope so. Or will white people start recognizing how dangerous and objectionable he is once he starts hurting their economic interests?  That would make Donald Trump very much a one-term President should he choose to run for re-election.  

43  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Approval/favorability of Donald Trump on: November 21, 2016, 10:03:17 pm

Favorable Ratings of Recent Presidents-Elect
   Date    Favorable    Unfavorable
      %    %
Donald Trump    2016 Nov 9-13            42    55
Barack Obama    2008 Nov 7-9            68    27
George W. Bush 2000 Dec 15-17    59    36
Bill Clinton    1992 Nov 10-11       58    35



The President-Elect gets off to a shaky start in winning support immediately after the election. To be sure, Dubya got a one-month head start over the others because of the contest over the election. That looks like a comparative triviality.

42% favorability is awful. Donald Trump won more by winning the right votes than by winning enough votes. 55% unfavorability is close to the low points of the approval ratings of Barack Obama after political setbacks, of which he had many. But this is where Donald Trump starts. In the counter-historical situation in which he would be up for re-election before even being inaugurated, he would lose such a bid. 

Don't blame the times. Barack Obama got inaugurated when people feared that the downturn that they then had would play into a reprise of the Great Depression and when some wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were going very badly for America. Times are generally much better for Americans in November 2016 than in November 2008. Donald Trump has done more to make the political times before becoming President than any prior new President-Elect since... Lincoln?

I am thinking that his "My Way or the Highway" approach to politics will ensure that liberals will have solid contempt for him for a very long time.  Liberals are now almost completely irrelevant to the federal political process until at least 2018 in a miracle for them (involving some economic or military/diplomatic disaster) and in 2020 only if they can participate meaningfully, something yet to be proved. Donald Trump is about as far to the Right as Fidel Castro is on the Left, and I doubt that he will move. Figure that he will have a solid 45% "strong disapproval" rating no matter what happens because that is the core liberal vote.

Meanwhile the approval rate for President Obama is 57%, which is extremely good for a President at the end of a second term.


Fasten your seat belts. We're in for a bumpy night. -- Margo Channing (Bette Davis),
All About Eve, 1950. (It's usually cited as "ride").

44  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: New Battleground Map on: November 21, 2016, 09:33:03 pm
In view  of the arrogance, ruthlessness, and extremism of the current Republican Party, how do we know that the 2020 Presidential election will not be rigged?
45  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Could Hillary have won if she had spent more time on PA, MI, and WI? on: November 19, 2016, 09:57:21 pm
Might have -- but Florida and either of these three states would have done the trick.

Late-season collapses, and the exposure of material from the e-mail scandal could hardly have been worse-timed. A bit earlier, and Hillary Clinton would have won... and Democrats would have eon two Senate Seats.


46  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Based on IQ, have we moved from the dumbest president ever, to the smartest? on: November 19, 2016, 08:37:18 pm
No one ever accused Obama of being an intellectual genius, and because of the fear of racism label being applied to anyone that said so, he was never openly mocked for his intellect.  But the long list of his errors in basic speaking, knowing the number of states, etc, make it clear that he is actually not very bright.

Trump on the other hand, has an IQ likely over 150, making him one of the brightest ever.  Maybe not Thomas Jefferson level, but certainly up there.

I suspect the white house staff that remains will likely be in for a surprising change of culture.

In view of the elementary-level rhetoric (OK, I don't expect people to have discourse on the level of Scientific American in speeches to mass audiences) and little evidence of ever writing anything on a genius level as I would expect of an editor of the Harvard Law Review, I see little reason to believe that he is much above average intellectually.

That he is a successful businessman? You would be surprised how little intelligence is necessary to parlay a small investment into a giant enterprise. Did anyone ever say that Harland Sanders (Kentucky Fried Chicken) or Dave Thomas (Wendy's) were geniuses? I am not impressed by his business acumen in view of his failures. Property leasing is one of the simplest models of business possible.

Of course, genius is not necessary for good political leadership (love him or hate him, Ronald Reagan was not a great brain), and it does not guarantee excellent leadership (possible extreme counter-example to the  idea that genius makes a great leader: Vidkun Quisling)

Of course I expect Donald Trump to be a dreadful President, but I will attribute that to personal qualities not related to raw intelligence. By most accounts, Ted "Unabom" Kaczynski is a brilliant man.
47  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Approval, Donald Trump on: November 19, 2016, 08:21:40 pm
Donald Trump’s approval rating is lower than that of any president-elect in recent history, a new Gallup poll found.

According to Gallup, 55 percent of Americans say they have an unfavorable opinion of Donald Trump. This is almost 20 points higher than the unfavorable rating of any other president-elect going back as far as Gallup has asked this question. Forty-two percent of Americans said they have a favorable opinion of Trump.

In the days following the 2008 election, 27 percent of Americans told Gallup they had a unfavorable view of Barack Obama, compared to 68 percent who had a favorable view. After Al Gore’s mid-December concession in the 2000 election, 36 percent of Americans had an unfavorable view of George W. Bush, while 59 percent had a favorable view. And after the 1992 election, 35 percent of Americans had an unfavorable view of Bill Clinton, compared to 58 percent who had a favorable view.


Here's where we start.
48  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Democrats will lose in 2020 on: November 19, 2016, 08:16:21 pm

Rigged election, 2020:

49  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: NBC: Hate crimes spike following the Election on: November 15, 2016, 09:02:37 pm
Yeah, Obama destroyed police. News at 11.

Under Law and Order president Trump, all the violent crimes will be punished severely.

But there were far fewer such demonstrations.

Count on this: we are going to have civil strife as we have not had since the 1970s. We are going to see far more demonstrations on the environment as Donald Trump advocates ravaging the environment for quick profits for his cronies. Just think about it: 45% of America can never agree with him.

We liberals will be behind the demonstrations on the environment. Because we are generally well educated we will be much more troublesome to the President and his stooge Congress than Tea Party types who put out placards reading

The Zoo has an African Lion
The White House has a lyin' African

We have more wit and more wisdom...

Start demonizing minorities and we will unite. Do dirty stuff to organized labor and we will join them.

We liberals are not tribal -- but we can join specialized segments of society in solidarity when they are wronged. Do bad things in our names and we will turn on you/    

The Left has been demonizing white males for over 40 years now. It will likely be a civil war, and it won't be pretty.

The white race is far too diverse for blanket demonization.
50  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Will President Trump appoint a special prosecutor to investigate.......... on: November 15, 2016, 08:58:05 pm
There's just no case. The Trump regime  will be interested in going after dissidents, intimidating, imprisoning, exiling, dispossessing, and perhaps even killing them.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 565

Login with username, password and session length


Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines