« Obama: On Economy, McCain Has Had An "Election-Time Conversion" | Home | Palin Claims "Obama-Biden Democrats" Are Regularly Attacking Her Family, But... »
Obama Holds Lead In Today's Tracking Polls
Here's a wrap-up of the four major national tracking polls for today, with all of them showing Barack Obama ahead by various margins:
• Gallup: Obama 48%, McCain 44%, with a ±2% margin of error, essentially unchanged from yesterday's 49%-45% lead for Obama.
• Rasmussen: Obama 48%, McCain 47%, with a ±2% margin of error, unchanged from yesterday.
• Hotline/Diageo: Obama 47%, McCain 42%, with a ±3.2% margin of error. Yesterday, Obama had a smaller lead of only 45%-44%
• Research 2000: Obama 49%, McCain 43%, with a ±3% margin of error. Yesterday, Obama was up 49%-42%.
Adding these polls together and weighting them by sample sizes, Obama is ahead by a margin of 48.0%-44.8%, not significantly changed from a lead yesterday of 48.2%-45.2%.
Advertisement
Can it be agreed-upon that Rasmussen is officially useless and should just be ignored in general? Yeeesh!
September 22, 2008 2:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
According to the analysis of Nate Silver at his fivethirtyeight.com site, the automated machine pollsters, Rasmussen and SurveyUSA, have been about the most accurate in polls this year. So I would give Rasmussen as much weight as I give the others. Maybe a bit more weight in fact. But it IS only one poll and the others suggest a slightly bigger lead by Obama. The average of polls is probably the best guess as to what's happening.
September 22, 2008 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
The national pollsters are all pretty unrelaiable. Local pollsters are usually far more accurate.
September 22, 2008 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Eric!
What about that SUSA virginia poll?
How about a post on that?
Maybe with some note about how McCain is, ummmm, clinging to a lead there?
September 22, 2008 2:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama has a very narrow lead in Virginia (only 6 points). He is just barely over 50%. If you double the margin of error it's essentially a tie. Will he hold onto this slight edge? Only time (and a lot of snark) will tell...developing...
September 22, 2008 2:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well done, deadpixel. You are admitted into the Kleefeld saracasm observer hall of fame. Always glad to welcome a fellow traveler...
September 22, 2008 2:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Awesome :)
September 22, 2008 2:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wingnut Heads will now begin to really explode and we will hear stories of how BHO fathered an illegitmate white baby :-)
September 22, 2008 2:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
How about BHO fathered an illegitimate baby with one of his daughter's white friends.
September 22, 2008 2:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Even a baby with blonde hair and blue eyes won't be counted as a white baby if her granddaddy was Kenyan--not by those who fear interracial love and interracial families.
In my family, we learned how that brand of hate works hands-on in the early 1970s, as several of my cousins were welcomed in some homes and not welcomed in others. In my husband's family, they remember the court clerk who tried to stop his aunt and uncle (50th anniversary last summer) from marrying.
If you guys didn't learn those rules for how to tell who's white and who's worthy of love, that's one more step toward the Promised Land.
September 22, 2008 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Even a baby with blonde hair and blue eyes won't be counted as a white baby if her granddaddy was Kenyan--not by those who fear interracial love and interracial families.
In my family, we learned how that brand of hate works hands-on in the early 1970s, as several of my cousins were welcomed in some homes and not welcomed in others. In my husband's family, they remember the court clerk who tried to stop his aunt and uncle (50th anniversary last summer) from marrying.
If you guys didn't learn those rules for how to tell who's white and who's worthy of love, that's one more step toward the Promised Land.
September 22, 2008 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Where's Idiotic? Isn't this EXCELLENT NEWS!! FOR MCCAIN!!
September 22, 2008 2:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
its the economy, stupid!!!
its evident that McCain is incapable of restoring our economy to what it use to be under Bill Clinton. Look at the economic team Obama surrounds himself with and compare them to McCain's economic team run by lobbyist. Who's more serious about the economy? not McShame.
September 22, 2008 2:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have a theory: You only hear from Steve Schmidt when the McCain camp is in full panic mode. Remember him coming out of the Crypt when Palin was getting bludgeoned just after she picked McCain has her running mate. Well they must be in full panic mode again. Go check out The Page (McCain's alternate website). The guy is going postal on everyone. It can only mean their internals are scaring the bile out of them.
September 22, 2008 2:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nailed it.
Expect the topic of Bill Ayers to pop back into the coversation, given that Schmidt was trying to peddle Ayers and distract the discussion from the truckloads of cash he was getting from Mac and Mae folks.
If that doesn't work, then Rev. Wright's going to be part of the campaign as well.
Slightly OT: I'm not a huge fan of Andrew Sullivan. However, he has been absolutely outstanding on keeping up the commentary on the ludicrousness of having a veep candidate who won't talk to the press.
September 22, 2008 2:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
He was on Maher last week and was too extreme for even Bill, that he has to keep calming him down.
September 22, 2008 2:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
He went there (AYERS) for 10 min this am on the conference call, the latest ad went Rezko.
Full blown unadulterated blue funk panic mode
September 22, 2008 3:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
I always suspected John McCain would implode before Nov 4, but who knew he would implode this early.
September 22, 2008 2:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
You ain't seen nuttin' yet!
September 22, 2008 2:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't get too confident. We have the debate Friday wherein McCain will bring forth pithy, forceful, Commander-in-Chief-esque jingoistic statements that will wow the talking head punditry. Meanwhile, Obama will answer questions in adult-oriented, steady paragraphs and be called out-of-touch.
As you can imagine, I can't wait.
September 22, 2008 3:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rasmussen is subsidized by Fox News, so I wouldn't expect much accuracy there.
A strong BO performance in the debates should extend this lead. McSame debates about as smooth as a rusty bicycle chain.
GObama!
September 22, 2008 2:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
LeFt coast,
You took the words out of my mouth. Any Rasmussen/Fox Poll should be taken with a grain of salt, seriously.
September 22, 2008 2:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
So? Rasmussen has a Republican lean, that's true. But it's also been quite accurate this election cycle and it's the third highest rated pollster at FiveThirtyEight. Dismissing it because the results aren't as good as you'd like them to be is just wrong.
September 22, 2008 2:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
They have generally been accurate this cycle, but that was in the primaries. I am deeply suspicious of Rasmussan mucking with his numbers to keep it close on behalf of his own leanings and who is paying his tabs, particularly when he starts to look like an outlier.
He wasn't at all close back in 2004 general, as I recall (either that or the 2000).
September 22, 2008 2:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Like I said, they have a Republican lean. But that by no means disqualifies their results. National polling is, of course, different from state polling. But I still don't think it's fair to dismiss the accuracy just because of the lean it has. We should, then, dismiss any Democratic-leaning polls done. But for some reason (snark), no one here gives half a shit about the Democratic lean of a pollster, as long as they show Obama significantly ahead.
September 22, 2008 2:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't buy that as a blanket indictment. There are plenty on here who are quick to note outlier with respect to a given poll, and especially so if it comes from a "democratic" outfit with a good dem result.
Fact is, now that we have moved from the primary season, and the Obama/Clinton matchup, there is every reason to hold Rasmussan polls with a degree of suspicion given his bias and the outfits that pay his bills.
September 22, 2008 2:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've seen very few ever mention a weariness or suspicion from Democratic-leaning polls when they're released. Unless you can give me some good examples of a fair number of people here at TPM calling out Democratic bias from pollsters for what it is, comparable to that of the calling out done against Republican-leaning pollsters, I'll just go with what I've seen over the past many months.
September 22, 2008 3:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well Chrono, I am not going to dumpster dive this section of TPM going back to December of 2007 to find the copious Kleefeld threads on individual polls NOR the commments to all of those, but suffice it to say, in the course of any given poll, there was plenty of skepticism leveled against polling outfits for a variety of reasons, including being too partisan, both left and right.
September 22, 2008 3:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
And since I've been following such threads for such an amount of time, I can remember very few times that anyone called out a poll for its Democratic bias. On the flip side, I have seen, in practically every single thread with a poll that shows Obama "under performing", a cry of foul for Republican bias from one pollster or another, and subsequently dismissing the poll because of it. Sometimes the criticism is warranted, but in this case? No, it's not. Recognizing the Republican lean for what it is is one thing. Dismissing the poll with no real reason to do so, aside from the lean, is another.
September 22, 2008 3:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Even though the number is smaller for Ras, it indicated the same trend as the others at the same time, with McCain losing his +3 lead to now Obama's +1 lead. If one looks at the national tracking polls as an indicator of momentum and whose-message-is-resonanting, the Ras tells us the same thing as the other polls.
September 22, 2008 2:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Precisely. Attacking Rasmussen because the numbers don't give Obama a larger lead is just ridiculous, and reeks of petty partisan bias. The numbers may be smaller, but the trend is exactly the same.
September 22, 2008 3:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I gotta agree here. Unless there's evidence of tampering, which I've not seen, it seems to be as well run a poll as any.
Besides, I'd rather Dems trust the close polls more so they'll stay on their toes: McCain could win folks, must work harder!
September 22, 2008 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's not a question of "tampering", it is a question of being skeptical of where he sets his likely voter screens and how he chooses to use his party breakdowns for his polls. His choices universally yield very friendly numbers for McCain/Palin. No biggie, as long as you follow his trends only. But if I am weighing a Ras poll in a state versus, say, a SUSA poll, I tend to look longer at the SUSA poll.
In the end, IF Ras is right, and the breakdown of voters is almost as many repubs as dems, it will be a looooonnnngg night for all of us. But, if Ras is missing, either wilfully or otherwise, the rather historic voter registration and turnout efforts underway by the Obama campaign (as I think he is), then his numbers in any given state (and nationally) are going to be off by 2 or 3 points in McCain's favor.
September 22, 2008 3:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Which is why it's sufficient to recognize a Republican lean from him. But dismissing the poll because of that? Hmm...
September 22, 2008 3:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, dipshit, where did I say I was dismissing it? I can choose to view it with some skepticism, if I so choose, just as you can choose to think it is better than sliced bread.
I have reasons for viewing Ras polls with some suspicion, and they are valid. You may view those same reasons and think, hey, good poll!
Either way, you can take your "hhhmmmmmmmm" and stick it square up Matthew Weaver's nearest orifice.
September 22, 2008 3:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow. Way to throw respect out the window. And comparing me to Matthew Weaver of all people! Haha! Do you even know anything about me? How pathetic, seriously. left_coast's original post said, "Rasmussen is subsidized by Fox News, so I wouldn't expect much accuracy there." -- Seems pretty dismissive to me.
Anyway, if I have any advice for you, it's to grow up. I haven't insulted you at all, or gotten aggressive. Seriously, you don't want to start getting comparisons to our dearly beloved Senator McCain, do you? Temperament is important.
September 22, 2008 3:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nope, not comparing you to Matthew Weaver at all, just trying to suggest you stick your officiousness with regard to genuine skepticism over the Ras house effect into the nearest disgusting place I could think.
And, I might suggest you grow up as well (since you are now going to play internet games). The house effect of Ras is well documented, see this excellent pollster.com piece for all the pollsters:
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/how_pollsters_affect_poll_resu.php
They are the Republicanest leaning house effect pollster out there. There is a reason I view their polls with some eyebrow raising, and mentally add a few points to what they do. And, since the archives are turned off here and I cannot actually GO dumpster diving to show you the plentiful comments throughout the months with regard to Dem leaning pollsters, generally Harris Interactive and IPSOS polls get such skepticism, as well they should, when you consider the pollster.com house effect story.
The point is, please don't just dismissively suggest that people always throw out good polls to focus on the bad, or vice versa. There tends to be fairly level-headed chatter on here. And noting that Ras has a pronounced house effect, especially when documented as such, should not draw the high-handedness from you that it has on this thread.
Just sayin'.
September 22, 2008 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am fully aware of Rasmussen's Republican house effect, and I have no problem with viewing Rasmussen polls with skepticism. I still fail to see where I've ever suggested one not view such a poll with healthy skepticism. My issue always came from dismissing the poll because of such a house effect, which happens too regularly.
But honestly? Calling me dipshit? And yes, comparing me to Matthew Weaver (whether you want to justify why you did it or not), is just downright childish, pathetic, and insulting. When I have made no such personal attacks on you, it is simply inappropriate for you to do such to me, and your excuse of "Just sayin'" makes you look all the worse for it. Perhaps I would actually have some respect for your opinion here if you hadn't sunk to such lows. As it stands, I couldn't care less what you have to say.
September 22, 2008 3:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fair enough.
And I you.
Back to our internet corners!
September 22, 2008 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Haha. Sure. Next time, just remember to explain to me how I've sunk to lows like personal attacks and childish name-calling, ok?
September 22, 2008 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
And, actually, you have straw-manned this whole thing. The initial two posts on this topic, neither of them "dismissed" Ras. One questioned accuracy, and the other said grain of salt.
And, if you are aware of the house effect with Ras, I am not sure why either of those posts led you to suggest either of those posters was "dismissing" results. And that is where I started to weigh in.
Given that Ras is generalls 2-3 points in McCain's favor, questions of accuracy and taking same with grains of salt seems rather appropriate. None of which means Ras polls are useless. Clearly trends matter.
At any rate, sorry I called you dipshit or suggested aligning you in any way with MW (although that wasn't my intention). No one deserves that.
Whether you "respect" my posts or not, I could care less. But the flow of this discussion was based on a leap you made that I don't think warranted from the first few posts on this sub-thread.
Peace.
---Aaron
September 22, 2008 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
At any rate, sorry I called you dipshit or suggested aligning you in any way with MW (although that wasn't my intention). No one deserves that.
Ohh, ok, thanks. I appreciate that.
And no, I didn't straw-man the argument. I found the first post to be dismissive, not simply skeptical, and objected to it. I consistently said Rasmussen has a Republican lean, and my entire argument was about not dismissing the results, not being skeptical of them.
Whatever. I don't really have the time to continue this. Appreciate the apology, though.
September 22, 2008 3:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
The sudden shift in Hotline may be partly explained by Thursday's numbers dropping out. That must have been a great night for McCain, since the margin shrank by three points the following day.
September 22, 2008 2:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Like I said elsewhere about the VA poll,
If you notice, only 86% of blacks are supporting Obama. But I would guess that at LEAST 90% of them will be voting for him on election day. Couple that with Nate Silver's latest analysis concerning "allocating the undecideds" and you can safely assume that Obama is ahead by at least a point or two more.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/09/allocating-undecideds.html
September 22, 2008 2:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
What worries me in that post is the PA/OH numbers. They were already close and, if Nate of FiveThirtyEight is to be believed (and his logic seems sound), close numbers in these two states will be really close for comfort.
Coupled with voter suppression efforts, that's a lot of EV's to be banking on.
September 22, 2008 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I expect Obama to lose Ohio - but he really needs to get to work in Pennsylvania. He CAN'T lose Pennsylvania and win, unless he takes FLA.
McCain/Palin should give up on Michigan and go hard in Pennsylvania - they had originally targeted Michigan as their flip State, but Penn seems more realistic and a game changer.
September 22, 2008 2:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
No chance for them to flip PA, in my opinion, even with the polls tight. Obama's folks have NOT ignored the state with their ground game, quite the opposite. The votes for Obama in and around Philly will be mind-blowing, and will more than help over whatever Palin-philes the Repubs dredge up in the center of the state.
Come election night, 51-47 or thereabouts feels about right for that state for Obama/Biden. If the Repubs want to throw money there, I welcome it.
September 22, 2008 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Understandable. OH was always going to be close, and if Obama wins, then he's gonna squeak by. On the other hand, PA is a much safer bet. Even with tight polling numbers, it's historically blue, and though demographics are in some ways comparable to OH, PA's lean is much more Democratic than OH's is. Even when I see close polling in PA, it doesn't really worry me. I have a lot of family there, and the (smart ones) who are supporting and campaigning for Obama tell me very positive things about the goings-on on the ground.
September 22, 2008 2:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
And with FL, VA, and NC in play, along with the fact that McCain has to campaign in tandem with Palin, means that there will be little time for McCain to stump in PA.
September 22, 2008 3:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't forget Colorado.
Has McCain given up on New Mexico and Iowa?
September 22, 2008 3:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
If McCain hasn't given up on IA, he should. It's out of play, and has been for months.
September 22, 2008 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
the face that they stopped in Iowa, but had the rally in a hanger and then took off says they're probably not counting on it (and this move p.o.'d a lot of them because it meant that McCain and Palin didn't see the flood damage)
September 22, 2008 3:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
McLame has been in New Mexico once that I recall. Obama has been here twice and Hillary was here for him. Obama went to Albuquerque last month and Hillary was in Espanola and then Obama turned around and came to Espanola last week.
September 22, 2008 3:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
new poll out suggests NM maybe moving safely to Obama.
September 22, 2008 3:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've met black Virginians who are voting for McCain. I can't quantified it, but they are out there.
More importantly, I was canvassing last weekend in VA, and I think the Independents are going to swing wildly for Obama here.
September 22, 2008 3:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Never been a big fan of polls in general. It's amazing how much Oxygen is sucked out by the polls both in the MSM and the blogs. I do agree collectively (especially a cluster of state wide polls)failrly predict a trend.
It's very clear-polls no polls- Obama by far had the best week (fuck you Halperin) in the entire cycle.
In fact, if he wins we all will look back at last week to find a moment which sealed the election.
I'm just keeping my fingers crossed for the debates. I like Obama's chances very much on Friday.
September 22, 2008 2:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
co-sign with a big fat CO-SIGN.
.
September 22, 2008 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yep. I was pretty certain:
1) Obama would stay on message while avoiding bickering with McCain on trivial stuff. Bickering only wears the public out and tarnishes both candidates, which leaves people with cynicism and divisive political games.
2) Obama would let McCain put his message out. Make certain every American hears McCain's message and worldview, loud and clear. Let him claim to be a reformer and for change. Let him rally the base. Let him harp on his POW status in Vietnam.
3) Wait for the proper moment to leverage his response and define McCain for Nov 5th. It only matters what people vote on come Nov 5th. Not what they may believe in mid September. People resent being misled, and Obama has reason to be confident in his ability to damn an opponent with their own words.
4) Obama will completely unpack and lay out the real McCain before a national audience with the sort of charisma and accessibility few politicians can match. McCain's past scandals, voting record, many flip-flops on issues like SS privatization, market regulation, support and opposition to the Iraq war, etc.
5) Ultimately Obama will damn McCain's with his own words. Palin is just gravy.
All this time people have been worrying about McCain's attacks and his rise in the polls? pffft. It's the rope-a-dope.
Gore and Kerry both got sucked into the media spin cycle and bickering. That ruins any possibility for a smart campaign about real issues.
They bickered incessantly rather than picking their moments to deliver decisive blows. They tried to work the refs and complained rather than hitting back. They played defense rather than characterizing Bush from his lies and dirty tricks to reveal his Karl Rove nature and phoniness.
Thankfully, Obama has not made those mistakes, not now or in the primary, and not campaigned like most Democratic advisers would like.
Gore and Kerry were both long winded explainers. Obama picks his moment and delivers K.O.s.
September 22, 2008 4:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
I read some posts where people were discussing their thoughts on how Virginia will play out.
Numbers came out today that showed Obama crushing McCain in NoVa by 21 points. He has an overall state lead of 6 points.
Kudos to Mark Warner for not playing the middle when he was attacked by Jim Gilmore at their last debate. Warner said he was "proud to support Barack Obama", after Gilmore kept using Obamas name every time he mentioned Warners.
September 22, 2008 3:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
On Rasmussen, he nailed the final 2004 result of 2.5 points, Jackass over Kerry. On Friday, I sure wish this debate was about the economy. The timing would be perfect. This gives McCain a chance to change the subject, and if anyone ever needed it ...
I'm not worried about the O-Man's performance but rather the media spin. McCain will spout off tough-talk bullshit and they'll eat it with a cherry on top.
September 22, 2008 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I see it in a different way: Having the last debate on economic issues ensures that it'll be back in the MSM closer to the actual election date while it's undoubtedly going to be there over the next few days anyway.
The more the economy is the topic, the better.
September 22, 2008 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's a good point ... I know that when Oct. 15 rolls around I'll be happy the economy is the subject of that one. If McCain gains no ground on Friday's debate, he has almost no bullets left.
September 22, 2008 4:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yup, good in 2004, but it was 2000 I was thinking of, where he was 4.5 points too high to jackass over Gore.
So, does he have a good feel this time around, like he did in 2004? Or is he WAY off again, like he was in 2000?
Impossible to know.
September 22, 2008 4:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with your concern over the debate.
However, I really think that what we'll see is Obama throwing the "tough talk" back in McCain's face as just that... TALK.
Obama will have to do very well in the debate to win the media narrative. Expectations are so high for him and so low for McCain. Just like 2000 and 2004, and we know how well that turned out.
But going into the debate with the wind at his back I think will help him stay confident and assertive. And if he comes out looking stronger than McCain on foreign policy, well what can you say? This election will likely be in the bag.
September 22, 2008 4:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
I posted this over on the new republic blog in response to a post about polling and voter turnout:
"Check it,
I think you guys are really underestimating the turnout for AA this year. I'm guessing that as in the rest of America, AA are in the minority when it comes to blogging, but I bet not many of the MSM or white people in general listen to Urban radio. People like Tom Joiner, Michael Baisden, Steve Harvey, to name a few, who are nationally syndicated urban radio personalities.
I'm telling you, ya'll should check these shows out one day. All they talk about daily seems to be this election, and Barack Obama. They are on point when it comes to registration, voter suppression, and GOTV.
Not only that, there are AA church groups, fellowships, greek organizations, NAACP who are all doing all that they can to GOTV, and help elect Barack Obama. Trust me when I tell you that this election cycle, you won't have to worry about the turnout of AA voters. It's the voter suppression tactics that will be attempted that will need to be watched out for. And even on that subject, Urban Radio host daily talk to their listeners about voter registration and voter purges.
There are a lot of Urban Radio stations, they may not individually have the numbers that Rush or Hannity have, but as a whole, they reach a lot of young people, AA, other "urban voters".
Don't underestimate AA voters this year, you will be in for a surprise. This won't be another "why didn't AA turnout" type of election. This is our time, this is our moment."
September 22, 2008 9:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Iam, who are/what is AA? I somehow doubt you are talking about the Alcoholics Anonymous vote, so can you fill me in?
As a member of PJA (Political Junkies Anonymous) I am surprised that this is an acronym I am unfamiliar with.
Robert "POTUS, SCOTUS, GOTV, etc." Murphy
September 22, 2008 9:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh! Ding! You must mean 'African-American' voters!
Robert
September 22, 2008 9:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
"AA" African Americans
September 22, 2008 9:53 PM | Reply | Permalink