Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 12, 2019, 08:13:54 am
News: 2019 Gubernatorial Predictions close today at noon

  Atlas Forum
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2012 Elections
  The Official Obama Approval Ratings Thread
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 226 227 228 229 230 [231] 232 233 234 235 236 ... 410 Print
Author Topic: The Official Obama Approval Ratings Thread  (Read 1014857 times)
Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl
Libertas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14,902
Finland


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5750 on: August 18, 2010, 12:30:09 am »


Isn't a populist the exact opposite of a libertarian?

No, not in the least. 

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

That would be de-alignment and we are getting more partisan. 

You seriously think there will be a realignment towards Republicans when more people disapprove of their job in the congress than the Democrats? It doesn't mean the Democrats don't lose big in 2010, since they are the incumbents. But what it means is that Republican support will be very shallow and the electorate could abandon them for the slightest of reasons. 

The electorate is changing.  Looking at 1980, the people who won were very different that the people who lost in 1976.  It is more than hating the incumbents; they are starting to hate what the incumbents stand for.

If we're going to go by that, then this leads to anarchy...maybe even fascism....

Those are two very different possible outcomes...unfortunately we're already trending rapidly toward the latter.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14,480


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5751 on: August 18, 2010, 12:51:06 am »


Isn't a populist the exact opposite of a libertarian?

No, not in the least. 

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

That would be de-alignment and we are getting more partisan. 

You seriously think there will be a realignment towards Republicans when more people disapprove of their job in the congress than the Democrats? It doesn't mean the Democrats don't lose big in 2010, since they are the incumbents. But what it means is that Republican support will be very shallow and the electorate could abandon them for the slightest of reasons. 
It is more than hating the incumbents; they are starting to hate what the incumbents stand for.

Like 2008?
Logged
??????????
StatesRights
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31,159
Political Matrix
E: 7.61, S: 0.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5752 on: August 18, 2010, 12:54:03 am »
« Edited: August 18, 2010, 12:56:04 am by StatesRights »

The 1st gives you the right to practice your religion not WHERE to practice your religion. Do you oppose zoning laws? Would you oppose putting a porn shop in a neighborhood next to an elementary school?

It would be a clear violation of the First Amendment to mandate that a religion be practiced only in places that its adherents find inconvenient. A law that required Jews in Michigan to build any synagogues in Kentucky would of course be un-Constitutional.

We have laws against having bars and liquor stores within certain distances of schools.   Of course, liquor does not have First Amendment protection. But religion does.

Church, temple, synagogue, mosque -- they are all equal under the law. If you disapprove of a mosque being next to a school, then you must oppose any religious building being next to any school. That implies, of course, that a Catholic Church could not have an abutting parochial school... do you agree?

Religious institutions get turned down for new construction all the time. How dare the localities deny their first amendment rights! The first amendment clearly states you have the right to worship, it doesn't guarantee you the right to have your place of worship wherever you want it. Using the argument that the left and Obama has used regarding this current issue if a porn shop is simply using their first amendment rights to freedom of the press, why do you want to suppress them?


So in terms of impact on a community, "mosque" = "porn shop".

Thank you States, for being so open in exposing this issue as just plain anti-Muslim bigotry from the right.

"We conservatives know not all Muslims in America are al-Queda sympathizers, buuuuttttt......."

Thanks for missing the point. Read above. Do you oppose zoning laws?

And as for Islam badger, I know enough about it to know I have a strong dislike for it, as for what other conservatives think about it I don't know nor hardly care.
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,412
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5753 on: August 18, 2010, 08:35:28 am »
« Edited: August 18, 2010, 12:41:10 pm by pbrower2a »

Nevada State Survey of 750 Likely Voters

Conducted August 16, 2010

By Rasmussen Reports

 

1* How would you rate the job Barack Obama has been doing as President… do you strongly approve, somewhat approve, somewhat disapprove, or strongly disapprove of the job he’s been doing?

24% Strongly approve
21% Somewhat approve
  7% Somewhat disapprove
48% Strongly disapprove
  1% Not sure

Missouri Survey Results (PPP)

Q1 Do you approve or disapprove of President
Barack Obama’s job performance?
Approve .......................................................... 39%
Disapprove...................................................... 57%
Not sure .......................................................... 4%

KY (Ipsos)



Key:


<40% with Disapproval Higher: 40% Orange (50% if 60%-69% or higher disapproval, 90% if >70%)
40-43% with Disapproval Higher: 50% Yellow  
44% with Disapproval Higher: 40% Yellow  
45-49% with Disapproval Higher: 30% Yellow  
<50% with Approval Equal: 10% Yellow (really white)

<50%  Approval greater: 30% Green
50-55%: 40% Green
56-59%: 60% Green
60%+: 80% Green
DC, what else could you expect?


Months (All polls are from 2010):

A -  January     G -  July
B -  February   H -  August
C -  March        I -  September
D -  April          J  -  October
E -  May           K -  November
F -   June         L -   December

 

S - suspect poll (examples for such a qualification: strange crosstabs, likely inversion of the report (for inversions, only for polls above 55% or below 45%...  let's say Vermont 35% approval or Oklahoma 65% approval), or more than 10% undecided. Anyone who suggests that a poll is suspect must explain why it is suspect.

Partisan polls and polls for special interests (trade associations, labor unions, ethnic associations) are excluded.

Z- no recent poll

MY PREDICTION OF THE 2012 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION:




District of Columbia, assumed to be about a 90% win for Obama, 3
deep red                  Obama 10% margin or greater  122
medium red              Obama, 5-9.9% margin  77
pale red                   Obama, margin under 5% 82
white                        too close to call  54
pale blue                  Republican  under 5%  47
medium blue             Republican  5-9.9% margin  25
deep blue                 Republican over 10% 160



44% approval is roughly the break-even  point (50/50) for an incumbent's win.  I add 6% for approval between 40% and 46%, 5% at 46%, 4% between 47% and 50%, 3% for 51%, 2% for 52% or 53%, 1% for 54% and nothing above 55% or below 40% for an estimate of the vote.

 This model applies only to incumbents, who have plenty of advantages unless they are demonstrable failures.

......

Logged
Zarn
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,820


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5754 on: August 18, 2010, 08:43:00 am »


Isn't a populist the exact opposite of a libertarian?

No, not in the least. 

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

That would be de-alignment and we are getting more partisan. 

You seriously think there will be a realignment towards Republicans when more people disapprove of their job in the congress than the Democrats? It doesn't mean the Democrats don't lose big in 2010, since they are the incumbents. But what it means is that Republican support will be very shallow and the electorate could abandon them for the slightest of reasons. 
It is more than hating the incumbents; they are starting to hate what the incumbents stand for.

Like 2008?

When they elected even more Democrats?
Logged
J. J.
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32,909
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5755 on: August 18, 2010, 08:48:30 am »

Rasmussen Obama (National)

Approve 44%, u.

Disapprove 55%, u.


"Strongly Approve" is at 27%, +1.  "Strongly Disapprove" is at 44%, -1.

Still in range.
Logged
J. J.
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32,909
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5756 on: August 18, 2010, 08:51:46 am »


Isn't a populist the exact opposite of a libertarian?

No, not in the least. 

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

That would be de-alignment and we are getting more partisan. 

You seriously think there will be a realignment towards Republicans when more people disapprove of their job in the congress than the Democrats? It doesn't mean the Democrats don't lose big in 2010, since they are the incumbents. But what it means is that Republican support will be very shallow and the electorate could abandon them for the slightest of reasons. 

It is not incumbency.  The electorate is rejecting the ideology of the Democrats of 2006-2008.  They are however, not turning to the Republican ideology of 2000-2006.  They are moving in a different direction.
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,412
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5757 on: August 18, 2010, 09:12:07 am »
« Edited: August 18, 2010, 12:39:32 pm by pbrower2a »

The 1st gives you the right to practice your religion not WHERE to practice your religion. Do you oppose zoning laws? Would you oppose putting a porn shop in a neighborhood next to an elementary school?

It would be a clear violation of the First Amendment to mandate that a religion be practiced only in places that its adherents find inconvenient. A law that required Jews in Michigan to build any synagogues in Kentucky would of course be un-Constitutional.

We have laws against having bars and liquor stores within certain distances of schools.   Of course, liquor does not have First Amendment protection. But religion does.

Church, temple, synagogue, mosque -- they are all equal under the law. If you disapprove of a mosque being next to a school, then you must oppose any religious building being next to any school. That implies, of course, that a Catholic Church could not have an abutting parochial school... do you agree?

Religious institutions get turned down for new construction all the time. How dare the localities deny their first amendment rights! The first amendment clearly states you have the right to worship, it doesn't guarantee you the right to have your place of worship wherever you want it. Using the argument that the left and Obama has used regarding this current issue if a porn shop is simply using their first amendment rights to freedom of the press, why do you want to suppress them?

It would seem that zoning laws could be used to zone "out" religious bodies of any kind... but never with discrimination! Architectural constraints could be used against eyesore entities. I can assure you that some mosques are architectural gems.

Bigotry against Islam has much the same psychological dynamics as Jew-baiting that has had catastrophic consequences not only for Jews but also the people who fell for the hatred. What is your fear of Islam, anyway? If you have ever been on Michigan Avenue in greater Detroit you will find one of the clearest divides of culture in the world. On the Detroit side of the city limit is a world of bars, liquor stores, sexually-oriented businesses, drunks, and prostitutes. On the Dearborn side I find that people walking the streets are normal families. The businesses are shish-kebab establishments.  No, they aren't all Muslims; the community has plenty of Christians and Jews who like things that way. A whore, addict, or drunk apparently doesn't last long in Dearborn; the schmuck will be arrested and sent back to Detroit after a short stay in the city jail.


Right. Better a mosque than a whorehouse. Better the hijab than a prostitute's get-up. Better "Allah Akbar!" from a minaret than a marquee that touts "Sophisticated Adult Entertainment"  under the image of a scantily-clad girl (probably on heroin).


So in terms of impact on a community, "mosque" = "porn shop".

Thank you States, for being so open in exposing this issue as just plain anti-Muslim bigotry from the right.

"We conservatives know not all Muslims in America are al-Queda sympathizers, buuuuttttt......."

Thanks for missing the point. Read above. Do you oppose zoning laws?
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.


The test of your genuineness of support of democracy is your acceptance that much that you encounter will violate your sensibilities. Everyone believes in freedom of speech for himself and like-minded people; genuine democrats (as opposed to monarchical absolutists, theocrats, fascists, ba'athists, commies, and Nazis) believe in freedom of expression for those whose ideas disgust them. You need not like Islam to recognize it as a religion deserving the Constitutional protection of the First Amendment.

President Obama is right on the issue of an Islamic cultural center near Ground Zero.
Logged
ConservativeIllini
Full Member
***
Posts: 104


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5758 on: August 18, 2010, 12:08:21 pm »

Gallup just updated

41% approve (-1)
52% disapprove (+1)

Definitely not just statistical noise from ~46% anymore
Logged
Jbrase
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7,005
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5759 on: August 18, 2010, 12:13:33 pm »

This confirms PPP's PA poll from yesterday, Nevada on the other hand has swung back a bit.

Rasmussen:
NV: 45/55 (?) (upon looking closer when undecideds are included it = 101%, so I'll just assume approval is 44% until they fix it.)
PA: 43/56

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/


Logged
Jbrase
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7,005
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5760 on: August 18, 2010, 12:14:55 pm »

PA & NV


30%-39%-Dark Dark Red
40%-44%- Dark Red
45-49%- Red
tied - White
Under 50% approval but approval higher than disapproval- Yellow
50%-54%- Light Green
55%-59%- Green
60%+- Dark Green
Logged
Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14,480


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5761 on: August 18, 2010, 01:58:54 pm »


Isn't a populist the exact opposite of a libertarian?

No, not in the least. 

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

That would be de-alignment and we are getting more partisan. 

You seriously think there will be a realignment towards Republicans when more people disapprove of their job in the congress than the Democrats? It doesn't mean the Democrats don't lose big in 2010, since they are the incumbents. But what it means is that Republican support will be very shallow and the electorate could abandon them for the slightest of reasons. 
It is more than hating the incumbents; they are starting to hate what the incumbents stand for.

Like 2008?

When they elected even more Democrats?

2006 is a better comparison, I agree. But a lot of people still felt that the Republicans were incumbents in 2008 because Bush was still president. You would be surprised at how little people know about the house and senate.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14,480


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5762 on: August 18, 2010, 02:05:18 pm »


Isn't a populist the exact opposite of a libertarian?

No, not in the least. 

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

That would be de-alignment and we are getting more partisan. 

You seriously think there will be a realignment towards Republicans when more people disapprove of their job in the congress than the Democrats? It doesn't mean the Democrats don't lose big in 2010, since they are the incumbents. But what it means is that Republican support will be very shallow and the electorate could abandon them for the slightest of reasons. 

It is not incumbency.  The electorate is rejecting the ideology of the Democrats of 2006-2008.  They are however, not turning to the Republican ideology of 2000-2006.  They are moving in a different direction.

I don't necessarily disagree with you there, but I don't think this new movement is towards hard right politics. Rather it's a move away from business as usual in Washington and a search for common sense politicians ( this is why Obama was so popular when he was promising change in Washington). What seems to concern the tea partiers (like how Obama might be a muslim/foreigner, or how he is trying to take away "their" country) does not seem to concern normal Americans. The only thing the median voter and the Tea party share in common is frustration.
Logged
J. J.
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32,909
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5763 on: August 18, 2010, 02:27:59 pm »

Obama brought the change, but public sentiment shifted to another type of change.



I don't necessarily disagree with you there, but I don't think this new movement is towards hard right politics. Rather it's a move away from business as usual in Washington and a search for common sense politicians ( this is why Obama was so popular when he was promising change in Washington). What seems to concern the tea partiers (like how Obama might be a muslim/foreigner, or how he is trying to take away "their" country) does not seem to concern normal Americans. The only thing the median voter and the Tea party share in common is frustration.

You are thinking the desire is to return to the 2000's.  It isn't.  Interestingly, if you remove the name Obama and insert Carter, you could be talking about 1978.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14,480


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5764 on: August 18, 2010, 02:36:15 pm »

Obama brought the change, but public sentiment shifted to another type of change.



I don't necessarily disagree with you there, but I don't think this new movement is towards hard right politics. Rather it's a move away from business as usual in Washington and a search for common sense politicians ( this is why Obama was so popular when he was promising change in Washington). What seems to concern the tea partiers (like how Obama might be a muslim/foreigner, or how he is trying to take away "their" country) does not seem to concern normal Americans. The only thing the median voter and the Tea party share in common is frustration.

You are thinking the desire is to return to the 2000's.  It isn't.  Interestingly, if you remove the name Obama and insert Carter, you could be talking about 1978.

The 2000's was a time of bipartisanship where timely, common sense legislation was passed? Uh..no. People didn't like how business is conducted in Washington (always about helping special interests as opposed to the country as a whole) and they wanted a change there. That is certainly why Obama was elected over Clinton and to a lesser extent his victory over Mccain was due to the same reason. Yet Washington still runs in the same exact way (stimulus goes more to public employee unions as opposed to building roads with contractors or the recent push to help the teachers union) and people are pissed off again. That doesn't mean they suddenly love Sarah "refudiate" Palin.
Logged
Dgov
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,558
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5765 on: August 18, 2010, 04:54:21 pm »

Gallup just updated

41% approve (-1)
52% disapprove (+1)

Definitely not just statistical noise from ~46% anymore

Wow, this is what, the 4th straight day of increasing Disapproval?  Either the Mosque is really hurting Obama, or Gallup has registered a handful of bad samples in a row.
Logged
Zarn
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,820


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5766 on: August 18, 2010, 08:43:47 pm »

There was not any change between Bush and Obama. People thought that going Crat would bring it. It did not.

While not an appealing option, people may hold their noses in hopes that the GOP has changed its ways.
Logged
J. J.
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32,909
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5767 on: August 18, 2010, 09:12:09 pm »

Gallup just updated

41% approve (-1)
52% disapprove (+1)

Definitely not just statistical noise from ~46% anymore

Well, we are not seeing a parallel with Rasmussen.
Logged
Beet
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 24,863


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5768 on: August 18, 2010, 09:22:44 pm »

There was not any change between Bush and Obama. People thought that going Crat would bring it. It did not.

While not an appealing option, people may hold their noses in hopes that the GOP has changed its ways.

Disagree. Obama wouldn't do something stupid like squander massive surpluses in good economic times, launch a disastrous war on trumped up evidence, or encourage, protect and promote something as disastrous as one bubble on top of another. Say what you want about Obama, he has a temperate nature, not a reckless one.

It's the Republicans who haven't changed. Handed a guaranteed win cycle where they could have chosen moderates or normal conservatives, they've put themselves at risk to nominate far out tea party candidates. Handed an opportunity by the Senate filibuster to cooperate and help shape the health care bill, they instead chose to gamble on obstruction and lost any say in the final bill. The Republicans gamble with their future just as they gambled (and lost) America's future when they were in charge.
Logged
Zarn
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,820


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5769 on: August 18, 2010, 09:26:45 pm »

There was not any change between Bush and Obama. People thought that going Crat would bring it. It did not.

While not an appealing option, people may hold their noses in hopes that the GOP has changed its ways.

Disagree. Obama wouldn't do something stupid like squander massive surpluses in good economic times, launch a disastrous war on trumped up evidence, or encourage, protect and promote something as disastrous as one bubble on top of another. Say what you want about Obama, he has a temperate nature, not a reckless one.

It's the Republicans who haven't changed. Handed a guaranteed win cycle where they could have chosen moderates or normal conservatives, they've put themselves at risk to nominate far out tea party candidates. Handed an opportunity by the Senate filibuster to cooperate and help shape the health care bill, they instead chose to gamble on obstruction and lost any say in the final bill. The Republicans gamble with their future just as they gambled (and lost) America's future when they were in charge.

This is another good reason why the Dems will lose. Ignorance.
Logged
Beet
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 24,863


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5770 on: August 18, 2010, 09:28:44 pm »

There was not any change between Bush and Obama. People thought that going Crat would bring it. It did not.

While not an appealing option, people may hold their noses in hopes that the GOP has changed its ways.

Disagree. Obama wouldn't do something stupid like squander massive surpluses in good economic times, launch a disastrous war on trumped up evidence, or encourage, protect and promote something as disastrous as one bubble on top of another. Say what you want about Obama, he has a temperate nature, not a reckless one.

It's the Republicans who haven't changed. Handed a guaranteed win cycle where they could have chosen moderates or normal conservatives, they've put themselves at risk to nominate far out tea party candidates. Handed an opportunity by the Senate filibuster to cooperate and help shape the health care bill, they instead chose to gamble on obstruction and lost any say in the final bill. The Republicans gamble with their future just as they gambled (and lost) America's future when they were in charge.

This is another good reason why the Dems will lose. Ignorance.

Huh? I knew how bad this year was going to be more than a year ago. Obama's going to be punished for the consequences of Bush's bust. And the Republicans will take credit when the economy recovers later because debt was paired down during the Obama years. Congrats, you got out of the consequences of your own actions. You got nothing to complain about.
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,412
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5771 on: August 18, 2010, 10:11:39 pm »

Big news -- the last US combat troops are leaving Iraq.

Hallelujah!
Logged
J. J.
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32,909
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5772 on: August 18, 2010, 10:13:53 pm »

Big news -- the last US combat troops are leaving Iraq.

Hallelujah!

Until the questions, "Who lost Iraq," is asked or an Iranian problem comes up.
Logged
izixs
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 981
United States


Political Matrix
E: -8.31, S: -6.51

P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5773 on: August 19, 2010, 12:59:42 am »

Big news -- the last US combat troops are leaving Iraq.

Hallelujah!

Until the questions, "Who lost Iraq," is asked or an Iranian problem comes up.

Easy, the same people thought we'd win in six months due to being greeted as liberators.
Logged
pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21,412
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5774 on: August 19, 2010, 08:39:28 am »

Maryland Survey of 750 Likely Voters

Conducted August 17, 2010

By Rasmussen Reports

 

1* How would you rate the job Barack Obama has been doing as President… do you strongly approve, somewhat approve, somewhat disapprove, or strongly disapprove of the job he’s been doing?

   

    41% Strongly approve
    15% Somewhat approve
      7% Somewhat disapprove
    38% Strongly disapprove
      0% Not sure

Small area for so many electoral votes. 



Key:


<40% with Disapproval Higher: 40% Orange (50% if 60%-69% or higher disapproval, 90% if >70%)
40-43% with Disapproval Higher: 50% Yellow  
44% with Disapproval Higher: 40% Yellow  
45-49% with Disapproval Higher: 30% Yellow  
<50% with Approval Equal: 10% Yellow (really white)

<50%  Approval greater: 30% Green
50-55%: 40% Green
56-59%: 60% Green
60%+: 80% Green
DC, what else could you expect?


Months (All polls are from 2010):

A -  January     G -  July
B -  February   H -  August
C -  March        I -  September
D -  April          J  -  October
E -  May           K -  November
F -   June         L -   December

 

S - suspect poll (examples for such a qualification: strange crosstabs, likely inversion of the report (for inversions, only for polls above 55% or below 45%...  let's say Vermont 35% approval or Oklahoma 65% approval), or more than 10% undecided. Anyone who suggests that a poll is suspect must explain why it is suspect.

Partisan polls and polls for special interests (trade associations, labor unions, ethnic associations) are excluded.

Z- no recent poll

MY CURRENT PREDICTION OF THE 2012 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION:




District of Columbia, assumed to be about a 90% win for Obama, 3
deep red                  Obama 10% margin or greater  122
medium red              Obama, 5-9.9% margin  77
pale red                   Obama, margin under 5% 82
white                        too close to call  54
pale blue                  Republican  under 5%  47
medium blue             Republican  5-9.9% margin  25
deep blue                 Republican over 10% 160



44% approval is roughly the break-even  point (50/50) for an incumbent's win.  I add 6% for approval between 40% and 46%, 5% at 46%, 4% between 47% and 50%, 3% for 51%, 2% for 52% or 53%, 1% for 54% and nothing above 55% or below 40% for an estimate of the vote.

 This model applies only to incumbents, who have plenty of advantages unless they are demonstrable failures.

......


Logged
Pages: 1 ... 226 227 228 229 230 [231] 232 233 234 235 236 ... 410 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC