It has looked like an Obama victory for quite some time now. And it still looks that way a couple of hours before we truly know. An epic campaign is behind us.
Here's my prediction:
Obama wins Kerry states (252 EV's) + CO + VA + NV + NM + NC + MO + FL + OH = 364 EV's
So the final result will be Obama 364 - 174 McCain.
Democrats will have 58 senate seats including the independents (Coleman defeats Franken and the three southern Republicans including Chambliss win).
If Obama loses in contrary to all the polls it will have a huge impact on the country's image around the world not to mention the huge letdown to the African-American community. However, I don't think that's going to happen.
Happy election night. It has been one hell of a campaign - hopefully it gets a finish it deserves and no legal matters surface to ruin the American democracy - again.
Read more...
November 4, 2008
October 19, 2008
McCain has attacked two of Obama's three weak spots - one remains
As I listed over a month ago, three areas that can be used or perceived as Obama's weak spots are taxes, softness on foreign policy and image politics. McCain has attacked Obama for his ties with Ayers for quite some time now and has therefore used the 'image politics' card that was perhaps inevitable - Obama's not like us, he's strange or risky or elite etc. Take your pick. This time McCain chose Ayers instead of reverend Wright.
That image politics card hasn't played out well for McCain though. Polls showed that it brought his own favourability ratings down and did little good in the polls and maybe even had a negative effect. While they continue to keep that issue up on some level (how can you bury it now) they have shifted focus on Obama's tax policy which again was to be expected. Joe the Plumber, never mind how calculated or spontaneous his role in this has been, has brought this issue back to the forefront. Republicans love to talk about taxes because their message is easy to sell - the recent marginal tightening may not be because of taxes per se but even if it has it's not enough for McCain.
So McCain has extensively used two of Obama's three weak spots - one is left. That is national security and Obama's alleged naivete regarding the issue and foreign policy in general. This card will be played more agressively soon but will it have an effect?
The talk is going on about Bin Laden and his possible "endorsement" for Obama. And there's talk that he might be captured. I have argued that one of two imaginable ways for Obama to lose this election is a terrorist attack on domestic soil (the other one is a personal scandal like a sex scandal etc.). That I don't think the McCain campaign can orchestrate (conspiracy theorists may disagree) but an October suprise on national security is a real possibility. If nothing else, McCain will definately try to shift the focus on Obama's perceived softness on foreign policy issues. He has tried it already of course with his remarks about Obama's plans to negotiate without preconditions but without a good catalyst those allegations don't caught the fire McCain needs at this moment. It's almost 100% certain that McCain will attack Obama on foreign policy/national security but the effectiveness depends largely whether the McCain campaign can come up with a real "October suprise".
Then there's a chance and not a minor one that if the polls show McCain significantly behind one week before the election that he's going to refocus on image politics and bring up reverend Wright. McCain has said he won't do that but that has got more to do with the fear of being perceived as racist than with principles. If the campaign thinks they have nothing to lose they might very well bring up Wright and his clips of "hating America" again. That's a risk but one that they may feel they have to take.
Taxes, Obama's image and foreign policy/national security. All three will be in the forefront of McCain's campaign in the last two weeks. Two of those have already been played quite extensively, will the third make a difference? Read more...
That image politics card hasn't played out well for McCain though. Polls showed that it brought his own favourability ratings down and did little good in the polls and maybe even had a negative effect. While they continue to keep that issue up on some level (how can you bury it now) they have shifted focus on Obama's tax policy which again was to be expected. Joe the Plumber, never mind how calculated or spontaneous his role in this has been, has brought this issue back to the forefront. Republicans love to talk about taxes because their message is easy to sell - the recent marginal tightening may not be because of taxes per se but even if it has it's not enough for McCain.
So McCain has extensively used two of Obama's three weak spots - one is left. That is national security and Obama's alleged naivete regarding the issue and foreign policy in general. This card will be played more agressively soon but will it have an effect?
The talk is going on about Bin Laden and his possible "endorsement" for Obama. And there's talk that he might be captured. I have argued that one of two imaginable ways for Obama to lose this election is a terrorist attack on domestic soil (the other one is a personal scandal like a sex scandal etc.). That I don't think the McCain campaign can orchestrate (conspiracy theorists may disagree) but an October suprise on national security is a real possibility. If nothing else, McCain will definately try to shift the focus on Obama's perceived softness on foreign policy issues. He has tried it already of course with his remarks about Obama's plans to negotiate without preconditions but without a good catalyst those allegations don't caught the fire McCain needs at this moment. It's almost 100% certain that McCain will attack Obama on foreign policy/national security but the effectiveness depends largely whether the McCain campaign can come up with a real "October suprise".
Then there's a chance and not a minor one that if the polls show McCain significantly behind one week before the election that he's going to refocus on image politics and bring up reverend Wright. McCain has said he won't do that but that has got more to do with the fear of being perceived as racist than with principles. If the campaign thinks they have nothing to lose they might very well bring up Wright and his clips of "hating America" again. That's a risk but one that they may feel they have to take.
Taxes, Obama's image and foreign policy/national security. All three will be in the forefront of McCain's campaign in the last two weeks. Two of those have already been played quite extensively, will the third make a difference? Read more...
October 15, 2008
The debate - much fuss but likely little effect
The debate tonight has drawn a lot of attention and has created intense speculation about McCain's supposedly harder stance and more direct attacks against Obama. While it's probably true that McCain will try to land a knock-out punch more eagerly than before it's unlikely that we're going to see one, even if McCain goes into full attack mode. That wouldn't be very wise though, because the negativity of McCain's campaign last week has been perceived to been more hurtful than helpful to the Republican cause. An all-out attack would be in all likelyhood be perceived as a desperation move and it would turn a lot of voters off. So McCain probably tries to hammer Obama on a few selected issues and get a couple of zingers to connect.
Why do I say those attempts are not likely to result in a knock-out punch? Two reasons.
The target is smooth and difficult to hit and the ammunition is lacking in firepower. Obama has been almost overbearingly calm and collected in an effort to be perceived as reassuring and presidential. He has mostly succeeded. So whatever McCain throws at him it's unlikely to stump or irritate Obama. If the ammunition was good then Obama couldn't simply shield away from the attacks by being "cool" and in some ways distant but the punch in McCain's potential attacks is hardly there.
Ayers doesn't interest people and it has been beaten to death already. McCain has refused to bring up Wright which might actually work with some white voters. The economy is not a good terrain for McCain so no secret weapon there either. Foreign policy is McCain's forte but Obama has so far held his own in the debates in that area too. McCain simply doesn't have a good attack line against Obama or at least we haven't seen it yet.
In all likelyhood this debate will be more heated and will be labeled as the most interesting one of the three. We might even get some clips that will be played over and over again in the news or in Youtube. But nothing else is enough for McCain than a pure, solid victory over Obama. Based on the previous debates it's fairly safe to say that that is not very probable.
Obama is pulling away in some swing states (Virginia) and has solified his lead in others (Florida, Colorado). Obama is ahead in national polls about seven-to-eight points. The debate is the last real chance of making a big impact exluding some unforseen event and both campaigns know this. That's why Obama's going to play this safe and it would be no suprise if the next weekend's polls will be pretty much like the last weekend's. Read more...
Why do I say those attempts are not likely to result in a knock-out punch? Two reasons.
The target is smooth and difficult to hit and the ammunition is lacking in firepower. Obama has been almost overbearingly calm and collected in an effort to be perceived as reassuring and presidential. He has mostly succeeded. So whatever McCain throws at him it's unlikely to stump or irritate Obama. If the ammunition was good then Obama couldn't simply shield away from the attacks by being "cool" and in some ways distant but the punch in McCain's potential attacks is hardly there.
Ayers doesn't interest people and it has been beaten to death already. McCain has refused to bring up Wright which might actually work with some white voters. The economy is not a good terrain for McCain so no secret weapon there either. Foreign policy is McCain's forte but Obama has so far held his own in the debates in that area too. McCain simply doesn't have a good attack line against Obama or at least we haven't seen it yet.
In all likelyhood this debate will be more heated and will be labeled as the most interesting one of the three. We might even get some clips that will be played over and over again in the news or in Youtube. But nothing else is enough for McCain than a pure, solid victory over Obama. Based on the previous debates it's fairly safe to say that that is not very probable.
Obama is pulling away in some swing states (Virginia) and has solified his lead in others (Florida, Colorado). Obama is ahead in national polls about seven-to-eight points. The debate is the last real chance of making a big impact exluding some unforseen event and both campaigns know this. That's why Obama's going to play this safe and it would be no suprise if the next weekend's polls will be pretty much like the last weekend's. Read more...
October 14, 2008
Women and the debates will seal the deal for Obama
Obama is in all likelyhood going to win the election. The decisive factors besides the financial crisis in his up-coming victory are women and the debate performances.
It is clear at this point that women have not been persuaded by the Palin pick to vote for McCain. Women have traditionally been more Democratic and in this election the trend is as strong as ever. The strategy of picking Palin and luring Hillary supporters was a compelling narrative and it sounded somewhat promising but the scenario hasn't actualized one bit. Let's look at the newly released Quinnipiac state polls (10/8-12, >1000 LV, +/-3) for numbers:
Females: Who are you going to vote? (Obama-McCain)
Colorado - 54%-38% - Obama +16
Michigan - 60%-32% - Obama +28
Minnesota - 57%-34% - Obama +23
Wisconin - 59%-33% - Obama +26
Simply stunning numbers.
Let's look at the national numbers for further confirmation:
Gallup, Sep 29-Oct 05
53%-39% - Obama +14
Research2000/Daily Kos, Oct 11-Oct 13
59%-35% - Obama +19
Rasmussen (no demographics available)
"October 12, 2008: Obama leads by fourteen percentage points among women..."
So it's absolutely clear that Obama is crushing McCain on female voters. According to an exit poll in 2004 Kerry won women by three points. So this is a huge advantage for Obama. Palin has probably hurt McCain more with women than helped.
Another decisive factor in Obama's likely victory is the debates. CNN's and CBS's polls all showed that Obama won the first two debates. Let's look at the most recent data again from Quinnipiac's state polls.
Who won the second debate? (Obama-McCain)
Colorado - 56%-24% - Obama +32
Michigan - 56%-22% - Obama +34
Minnesota - 57-22% - Obama +35
Wisconsin - 58%-21% - Obama +37
Again, simply stunning numbers for Obama. The debates have really helped Obama with independents which are the key in winning this election. Obama is currently in commanding lead with independents (R2K poll +9 for Obama) and the debates have surely helped. Obama's "cool and reassuring demeanour" in the words of pundits has removed doubts that Obama's not ready for the presidency.
Women and the debates, two things that I'm sure can't be underestimated when analyzing why Obama won the election. Read more...
It is clear at this point that women have not been persuaded by the Palin pick to vote for McCain. Women have traditionally been more Democratic and in this election the trend is as strong as ever. The strategy of picking Palin and luring Hillary supporters was a compelling narrative and it sounded somewhat promising but the scenario hasn't actualized one bit. Let's look at the newly released Quinnipiac state polls (10/8-12, >1000 LV, +/-3) for numbers:
Females: Who are you going to vote? (Obama-McCain)
Colorado - 54%-38% - Obama +16
Michigan - 60%-32% - Obama +28
Minnesota - 57%-34% - Obama +23
Wisconin - 59%-33% - Obama +26
Simply stunning numbers.
Let's look at the national numbers for further confirmation:
Gallup, Sep 29-Oct 05
53%-39% - Obama +14
Research2000/Daily Kos, Oct 11-Oct 13
59%-35% - Obama +19
Rasmussen (no demographics available)
"October 12, 2008: Obama leads by fourteen percentage points among women..."
So it's absolutely clear that Obama is crushing McCain on female voters. According to an exit poll in 2004 Kerry won women by three points. So this is a huge advantage for Obama. Palin has probably hurt McCain more with women than helped.
Another decisive factor in Obama's likely victory is the debates. CNN's and CBS's polls all showed that Obama won the first two debates. Let's look at the most recent data again from Quinnipiac's state polls.
Who won the second debate? (Obama-McCain)
Colorado - 56%-24% - Obama +32
Michigan - 56%-22% - Obama +34
Minnesota - 57-22% - Obama +35
Wisconsin - 58%-21% - Obama +37
Again, simply stunning numbers for Obama. The debates have really helped Obama with independents which are the key in winning this election. Obama is currently in commanding lead with independents (R2K poll +9 for Obama) and the debates have surely helped. Obama's "cool and reassuring demeanour" in the words of pundits has removed doubts that Obama's not ready for the presidency.
Women and the debates, two things that I'm sure can't be underestimated when analyzing why Obama won the election. Read more...
October 13, 2008
The tracking polls have been very stable
A lot is going on around the election all the time. Debates, speeches, ads, attacks - the campaigning never stops and the press is more involved than ever now that there's only three weeks to the election day. The remarkable thing is that since the VP debate on 10/02 the tracking poll numbers haven't really moved. They have actually been very stable. Many pundits and casual followers alike thought that the debates would have an impact. They've had one - Obama has been able to maintain his commanding lead consistently over the past 1,5 weeks.
Let's look at the actual numbers. (McCain-Obama)
Pollster ---------- 10/02 ---- 10/13 --- movement
Gallup ------------42-49 ----- 41-51 --- Obama +3
Rasmussen ---- 44-51 ---- 45-50 -- McCain +2
Research 2000 40-51 ----- 40-52 -- Obama +1
All the movement is inside the MoE. The stability can be traced even more backwards than to 10/02. In Rasmussen's polls since 09/26 Obama has been between 50-52% and McCain between 44-45%. The stability has been simply stunning. In Gallup's polls during the same time period Obama's numbers have been between 48-52% and McCain's between 41-44%. The difference is significant and revealing. In R2K's polls again during the same time period Obama's numbers have been between 48-53% and McCain's between 40-43%.
McCain hasn't break the 45% ceiling in any of the three tracking polls since 09/26. During the same period Obama has never dropped below 48% and has been as high as 53%. That is all you need to know.
Let's look at some other tracking polls during a shorter time period (these pollster's have changed their methodology since 09/26 or don't have an easily accessible history of the poll numbers).
Pollster ----------- 10/09 ------ 10/13 ----- movement
Zogby ------------ 44-48 ------- 44-48 ----- Nothing
Diageo/Hotline - 41-47 --------42-48 ----- Nothing
Battleground --- 45-48 ---------43-51 ------ Obama +5
While these numbers tell us a lot less because they are from a shorter time period it still shows that the recent attack against Obama about Ayers has not moved the numbers at all. (Battleground has been a very shifty pollster so their numbers are not quite so useful).
The facts are these - Obama is ahead about 7% nationally (RCP avg. +6,8, Pollster avg. +7,6) and that he has had a sizeable, stable lead since the late September. Debates have been considered victories for Obama and it has negated any effect that McCain's attacks might have caused.
The future is still clear. Obama will become the next president if there's no major sudden game-changer event like a terrorist attack.
Read more...
Let's look at the actual numbers. (McCain-Obama)
Pollster ---------- 10/02 ---- 10/13 --- movement
Gallup ------------42-49 ----- 41-51 --- Obama +3
Rasmussen ---- 44-51 ---- 45-50 -- McCain +2
Research 2000 40-51 ----- 40-52 -- Obama +1
All the movement is inside the MoE. The stability can be traced even more backwards than to 10/02. In Rasmussen's polls since 09/26 Obama has been between 50-52% and McCain between 44-45%. The stability has been simply stunning. In Gallup's polls during the same time period Obama's numbers have been between 48-52% and McCain's between 41-44%. The difference is significant and revealing. In R2K's polls again during the same time period Obama's numbers have been between 48-53% and McCain's between 40-43%.
McCain hasn't break the 45% ceiling in any of the three tracking polls since 09/26. During the same period Obama has never dropped below 48% and has been as high as 53%. That is all you need to know.
Let's look at some other tracking polls during a shorter time period (these pollster's have changed their methodology since 09/26 or don't have an easily accessible history of the poll numbers).
Pollster ----------- 10/09 ------ 10/13 ----- movement
Zogby ------------ 44-48 ------- 44-48 ----- Nothing
Diageo/Hotline - 41-47 --------42-48 ----- Nothing
Battleground --- 45-48 ---------43-51 ------ Obama +5
While these numbers tell us a lot less because they are from a shorter time period it still shows that the recent attack against Obama about Ayers has not moved the numbers at all. (Battleground has been a very shifty pollster so their numbers are not quite so useful).
The facts are these - Obama is ahead about 7% nationally (RCP avg. +6,8, Pollster avg. +7,6) and that he has had a sizeable, stable lead since the late September. Debates have been considered victories for Obama and it has negated any effect that McCain's attacks might have caused.
The future is still clear. Obama will become the next president if there's no major sudden game-changer event like a terrorist attack.
Read more...
October 12, 2008
Election fraud a serious threat
The electronic voting systems have long been suspect of being unsafe. One of the most famous recent reports is Ohio secretary of state Jennifer Brunner's EVEREST report (an article, the report). Election fraud is not a wild conspiracy theory but a real threat concerning the electronic voting systems around the US and which hasn't been discussed widely enough.
One of the more famous voting machine hacking experts is Finnish Harri Hursti, who has conducted studies in cooperation with University of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania State University and University of California Santa Barbara. The team of three researchers lead by Hursti conducted a test that yielded frightening results. They managed to change the outcome of the whole election by a virus installed into a single voting machine in a single voting booth.
The group activated the voting machine's infrared gate by a magnet and transferred a virus installed into a palm pilot to the voting system. They could've used a cell phone or a programmable remote control instead also. The virus spread into all the voting machines in the voting area.
After the counting of the votes had started the virus spread into the regional central computer, from there to the state's central computer and from there to the headquarters of Elections Systems and Software (ES&S), the provider of the election system. ES&S is the largest electronic voting system provider in the United States and from their HQ the virus could corrupt voting systems in 36 states. The time that process took was less than two minutes.
That was real and it has been widely described in the EVEREST report mentioned above. Hursti himself said that "it was the most scary hacking that I've ever participated in".
Voting fraud is easy to do and it does not leave any marks. Hursti half-jokingly said that "the scary thing is what we programmers and researchers could do if we snapped and decided to manipulate elections. It's so easy that a large group of people could do it".
There are many other scary scenarios that the researchers have realized in their tests. One good place to study them is Black Box Voting.
Hacking the voting machines is real. It has been done by researchers and it can be done again. Who knows what has actually been done in real elections? When you think about the scandal in Florida in 2000 and then read about voting fraud it really brings some unpleasent thoughts into your mind. Who knows what happened in 2000? The fact is that voting fraud cannot be counted out from the equation.
In "a world's best democracy" like many claim that the United States is these kind of things should not happen. If we can't trust that our votes count then the deep core of democracy is in doubt. The new administration has to do a dramatic overhaul to the voting system because today it's unsafe. And that is not a conspiracy theory.
Read more...
One of the more famous voting machine hacking experts is Finnish Harri Hursti, who has conducted studies in cooperation with University of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania State University and University of California Santa Barbara. The team of three researchers lead by Hursti conducted a test that yielded frightening results. They managed to change the outcome of the whole election by a virus installed into a single voting machine in a single voting booth.
The group activated the voting machine's infrared gate by a magnet and transferred a virus installed into a palm pilot to the voting system. They could've used a cell phone or a programmable remote control instead also. The virus spread into all the voting machines in the voting area.
After the counting of the votes had started the virus spread into the regional central computer, from there to the state's central computer and from there to the headquarters of Elections Systems and Software (ES&S), the provider of the election system. ES&S is the largest electronic voting system provider in the United States and from their HQ the virus could corrupt voting systems in 36 states. The time that process took was less than two minutes.
That was real and it has been widely described in the EVEREST report mentioned above. Hursti himself said that "it was the most scary hacking that I've ever participated in".
Voting fraud is easy to do and it does not leave any marks. Hursti half-jokingly said that "the scary thing is what we programmers and researchers could do if we snapped and decided to manipulate elections. It's so easy that a large group of people could do it".
There are many other scary scenarios that the researchers have realized in their tests. One good place to study them is Black Box Voting.
Hacking the voting machines is real. It has been done by researchers and it can be done again. Who knows what has actually been done in real elections? When you think about the scandal in Florida in 2000 and then read about voting fraud it really brings some unpleasent thoughts into your mind. Who knows what happened in 2000? The fact is that voting fraud cannot be counted out from the equation.
In "a world's best democracy" like many claim that the United States is these kind of things should not happen. If we can't trust that our votes count then the deep core of democracy is in doubt. The new administration has to do a dramatic overhaul to the voting system because today it's unsafe. And that is not a conspiracy theory.
Read more...
October 11, 2008
Palin is not an asset to McCain but 'Troopergate' has little to do with it
Troopergate in all likelyhood will not play a decisive role in this campaign. When Palin was announced as the Republican VP-candidate and the issue first came up many people thought that would be something that would be a major achilles heel for Palin and for the whole McCain campaign. The truth is that it will not be a major event just because McCain is in such a deep trouble right now. Even Palin will not overtly suffer from this revelation (read about Troopergate here) because her favourability ratings are already quite bad and her ability to sway swing voters to McCain is questionable to say the least.
CNN's article states that "Sarah Palin may be the best thing that ever happened to John McCain's campaign for the presidency. She is the cover-girl of the campaign. But she may be heading back to the front page for a very different reason". I have to disagree vehemently. Palin's favourability rating is in an all-time low in R2K's tracking poll (-20) and while other polls show better results for Palin than this Democratic-leaning pollster the trend is clear. She has suffered immensely from her infamous interviews and even before those her star was on the decline because of all the "half-truths" concerning her actions in Alaska (earmarks etc.).
The conventional wisdom in the mainstream media still seems to be that Palin is somehow an asset to McCain. She solidified the base but the cost was huge - independents are not liking her one bit. It's easy to overvalue the "bringing home the base" factor - yes, McCain is not loved by the diehard conservatives but they would've never voted for Obama anyway. Palin just brings a bigger number of them to the polls and while that is important the independents are a much more decisive factor in who wins this election and Palin is not helping there.
I wrote on September 16th how the positive Palin effect is coming to a close.
CNN's article states that "Sarah Palin may be the best thing that ever happened to John McCain's campaign for the presidency. She is the cover-girl of the campaign. But she may be heading back to the front page for a very different reason". I have to disagree vehemently. Palin's favourability rating is in an all-time low in R2K's tracking poll (-20) and while other polls show better results for Palin than this Democratic-leaning pollster the trend is clear. She has suffered immensely from her infamous interviews and even before those her star was on the decline because of all the "half-truths" concerning her actions in Alaska (earmarks etc.).
The conventional wisdom in the mainstream media still seems to be that Palin is somehow an asset to McCain. She solidified the base but the cost was huge - independents are not liking her one bit. It's easy to overvalue the "bringing home the base" factor - yes, McCain is not loved by the diehard conservatives but they would've never voted for Obama anyway. Palin just brings a bigger number of them to the polls and while that is important the independents are a much more decisive factor in who wins this election and Palin is not helping there.
I wrote on September 16th how the positive Palin effect is coming to a close.
"McCain's campaign is now in a watershed moment. Can they salvage Palin's image and stop the slow bleeding?"
Read more...
Well, the answer is that they couldn't and Palin has most likely become a drag on the ticket. VP candidates rarely if never decide elections and most of McCain's troubles are not related to Palin (the economy, anyone?) but the storyline surrounding Palin has not benefited McCain at all. It has been a distraction and a source of much discomfort to McCain for sure. The conservative base is riled up but if the majority of the people think lightly of her regarding policy issues it's got to hurt.
Palin came, saw and conquered but also stumbled, fell and crawled back up again. But the fall wasn't pretty and her image after that is forever changed (translation: until mid-December). Troopergate is just another storyline concerning Palin and in the current athmosphere people will not really care that "she abused her powers". The firing was legal so it's all more or less semantics to the great masses. Besides, Obama's links to Ayers and Rezko make the voters easily lump all the scandals together and consider them as politics as usual. Sure, Troopergate casts another doubt over Palin but she was already damaged goods.
McCain will lose. Picking Palin didn't ultimately pay off at all. When McCain looks back at the campaign he'll surely regrets bringing Palin along. It was a risky move but McCain needed to do something drastic - this time his judgement was wrong.
Palin came, saw and conquered but also stumbled, fell and crawled back up again. But the fall wasn't pretty and her image after that is forever changed (translation: until mid-December). Troopergate is just another storyline concerning Palin and in the current athmosphere people will not really care that "she abused her powers". The firing was legal so it's all more or less semantics to the great masses. Besides, Obama's links to Ayers and Rezko make the voters easily lump all the scandals together and consider them as politics as usual. Sure, Troopergate casts another doubt over Palin but she was already damaged goods.
McCain will lose. Picking Palin didn't ultimately pay off at all. When McCain looks back at the campaign he'll surely regrets bringing Palin along. It was a risky move but McCain needed to do something drastic - this time his judgement was wrong.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
