Pew poll: Obama 44, Romney 32, Paul 18

posted at 10:09 pm on January 18, 2012 by Allahpundit

Head to head, it’s Obama 50, Romney 45. If Paul splits, it’s Perot redux.

Second look at not driving Ron Paul from the party?

Among voters ages 18-44, the margin on the right is even narrower: Obama 47, Romney 27, Paul 21. The key demographic above is, of course, independents, who split almost equally between the three. (Romney cleans up among right-leaning indies but Paul tops him among neutrals and left-leaners.) Choose your own theory to explain that. Proof that Paul is connecting with unaffiliated voters, either because of his spending policies, his dove-ishness, or simply as a none of the above? Proof that Romney’s actually a weak frontrunner, unable to crack even 35 percent among independents in a three-way race despite his own sterling track record in business and Obama’s dismal economic record? Or proof that The One has turned so toxic to indies that he can’t claim a plurality among three candidates despite the fact that he’s an incumbent and wins comfortably overall? Per the last theory, go read the Times’s story about its new poll finding “significant obstacles among independent voters” to a second term for Hopenchange:

As Mr. Obama moves toward a full-throated campaign, delivering a State of the Union address on Tuesday and inching closer to directly confronting his Republican challenger, a majority of independent voters have soured on his presidency, disapprove of how he has dealt with the economy and do not have a clear idea of what he hopes to accomplish if re-elected.

The swing voters who will play a pivotal role in determining his political fate are up for grabs, the poll found, with just 31 percent expressing a favorable opinion of Mr. Obama. Two-thirds of independent voters say he has not made real progress fixing the economy.

As for Romney, he ties Obama at 45 head to head while Gingrich trails by 11. But the same poll finds that nearly seven in 10 Republicans want more presidential candidates and the number who say they’re more enthusiastic about this election than previous ones has actually dropped seven points since September. Weak frontrunner. And then there’s this, which is potentially O’s ace in the hole:

In the latest New York Times/CBS News poll, 60 percent say Mr. Obama is attempting to work with Congressional Republicans to try to accomplish something; 27 percent say Republicans in Congress are making the same effort to work things out with the president…

Majorities of Democrats and independents say Mr. Obama is trying to work with the Republicans and only a third of Republicans agree. But nearly half of the Republicans surveyed do agree with Democrats and independents on one thing: Congressional Republicans are not working with the president to make progress on the legislative agenda.

At least 80 percent want the parties to compromise, so the perception that the GOP refuses to work with Obama is not something that’s helping them. If O really is committed to running against Congress, there’s the evidence that it might work — and since Romney’s not a dynamic personality, it might be easier for Axelrod et al. to make Congress the face of the GOP than it would with a more charismatic nominee. 2012: “Anybody But Obama” versus “The Do-Nothing Congress”?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

All polls right now outside of the GOP race are BS. It’s all hypothetical until we actually have the firm choice. Ron ain’t going 3rd party, so unwad your panties. Trump is a freaking joke and will not make a dent.
This election will be about Obama and his record. Period. The GOP could nominate ANYONE, and the election will still be about Obama and his record.
Keep repeating to all within earshot: This election is about Obama. This election is about Obama.

Sugar Land on January 18, 2012 at 11:22 PM

Yeah, no. You can support the idea of a viable third party without endorsing people who are antithetical to every value you supposedly hold. In this instance, RP played the role of useful idiot and I don’t really see any way to sugar coat that fact.

cynccook on January 18, 2012 at 10:46 PM

He wasn’t endorsing their views and positions.

Dante on January 18, 2012 at 11:32 PM

Two things:

1) It’s a poll, so BFD. Polls are not indicative of anything.

2) It’s PEW. Pew. Not non-partisan.

somewhatconcerned on January 18, 2012 at 10:36 PM

Yes. Pew has a history of manipulating their polls to push their political objectives. McCain-Feingold exhibit one.

slickwillie2001 on January 18, 2012 at 11:35 PM

Romney is the DNC’s DREAM candidate to go against Obama. If the DNC machine and Obama had to invent the perfect foil to run against, they could not have come up with anyone better than Romney.

That’s why I’ve lost hope in the Republican electorate. If they are so dumb and utterly blind not to see this.

tkyang99 on January 18, 2012 at 11:38 PM

This election will be about Obama and his record. Period. The GOP could nominate ANYONE, and the election will still be about Obama and his record.
Keep repeating to all within earshot: This election is about Obama. This election is about Obama.

So what will his record be come November? And how would Romney attack them?

Obamacare? Well, Romney ability to attack him on that is nullified by Romneycare.

That he has been creating 200k jobs a month? As opposed to Romney who has fired a lot of people?

Face it, Romney is just going to run as a not-Obama. He has no original ideas, nothing to offer himself. Like Kerry tried to just be a not-Bush. The outcome will be the same.

tkyang99 on January 18, 2012 at 11:43 PM

9% of Republicans will vote for Obama? Yeah, whatever.

Ronnie on January 18, 2012 at 11:48 PM

I’d like to see the party affiliation breakdown of this poll.

Bammers leads Romney by 5, but republican and democrats are split evenly?

Another skewed MSM poll.

SandyK on January 18, 2012 at 11:52 PM

9% of Republicans will vote for Obama? Yeah, whatever.

Ronnie on January 18, 2012 at 11:48 PM

You’d be surprised at how many Republicans want 8 years of Obama to do what the Dems did to 8 years of Bush…

Aizen on January 18, 2012 at 11:53 PM

Gulp

Allahpundit on January 18,2012

Please Allah, don’t give me “gulp”. You asked for this beatdown and now you are going to get it.

Only one person could have crushed Obama but oh no, OMG hell no!… she was so unelectable. A hick. Not serious.

Enjoy 4 more years of Obama and his frenzied liberalism trying to cram everything they can down our throats. And with the current crop of GOPee wimps we have? They might just get away with it.

rightConcept on January 19, 2012 at 12:05 AM

rightConcept on January 19, 2012 at 12:05 AM

To defend Allahpundit, Palin could have jumped in the race at any point, in fact she could jump in right now, and still win the nomination.

She did not run because, for whatever reason, she decided not to. You cannot force people to run for office, nor force them not to run.

In fact, that no true conservatives jumped into the race, despite being a nearly 100% chance to win it all, is something we need to ask ourselves – why.

Rebar on January 19, 2012 at 12:11 AM

Obama has to be near perfect in this campaign to win.

residentblue on January 19, 2012 at 12:13 AM

9% of Republicans will vote for Obama? Yeah, whatever.

Ronnie on January 18, 2012 at 11:48 PM
You’d be surprised at how many Republicans want 8 years of Obama to do what the Dems did to 8 years of Bush…

Aizen on January 18, 2012 at 11:53 PM

Four more years? There won’t be anything left….to do something to!

KOOLAID2 on January 19, 2012 at 12:19 AM

That’s why I’ve lost hope in the Republican electorate. If they are so dumb and utterly blind not to see this.

tkyang99 on January 18, 2012 at 11:38 PM

You’re of no use to anyone except Obama.

cicerone on January 19, 2012 at 12:32 AM

This steamed me… So, I didn’t read the rest of the comments and will just say it:

A second look at not driving Paul from the party? NO! He must go.

A second look at electing Romney to run against Obama.

I was a bit “sMitten” in 08. But know better now. Romney cannot hold his own against attacks. He gets flustered. Stutters. Sweats. Then tries to change the subject.

It’s not Governor Romney’s turn. It’s not inevitable.

Oxrock on January 19, 2012 at 1:38 AM

Obama’s best asset: the know-nothing Tea Party congressmen who, under the pressure of know-nothing bloggers like AP, have constantly undermined Bohener and the GOP congressional leadership (eg. the recklessness of the debt ceiling debate).

This congress should have played a lot nicer. It’d achieve basically the same things with a much smaller political cost.

joana on January 19, 2012 at 1:44 AM

Rebar on January 18, 2012 at 10:39 PM

Nah, I’ve made a comfy home here in the Republican Party.

But, you can make your way back to where your ideals came from.

gyrmnix on January 19, 2012 at 2:51 AM

That’s why I’ve lost hope in the Republican electorate. If they are so dumb and utterly blind not to see this.

tkyang99 on January 18, 2012 at 11:38 PM

The majority of the Republican electorate knows this and is searching for pretty much anyone they can find to stop Romney. The problem is that the MSM and Republican establishment are working hard together to make sure no one is able to challenge Romney. This gives challengers a bigger hill to climb than is usual.

Romney’s strategy is not to make people like him. His strategy is to drive his competitors out and force people to fall in line. His general election strategy will then be to run hard to the left (harder than he already is) as “the competent big government manager” since Republicans will have no one else to vote for.

Obama’s best asset: the know-nothing Tea Party congressmen who, under the pressure of know-nothing bloggers like AP, have constantly undermined Bohener and the GOP congressional leadership (eg. the recklessness of the debt ceiling debate).

This congress should have played a lot nicer. It’d achieve basically the same things with a much smaller political cost.

joana on January 19, 2012 at 1:44 AM

You mean the Tea Party Congressmen who have by and large fallen meekly into line with Boehner and passed most of Obama’s key agenda items like the debt ceiling increase? Are you one of those Republicans who thinks Boehner is playing 10 dimensional chess by passing every item on the Obama agenda that comes across his desk, or are you one of those Republicans who had a thrill run down his or her spine when the Bush Republicans gloated that “the era of small government is over?”

In fact, that no true conservatives jumped into the race, despite being a nearly 100% chance to win it all, is something we need to ask ourselves – why.

Rebar on January 19, 2012 at 12:11 AM

Because most of them knew what was coming to them if they dared to challenge Romney. The long knives are out for the Tea Partiers.

There’s also a possibility that they may feel national bankruptcy is unavoidable, and don’t want to be the ones blamed or left holding the bag when the economy collapses. I really hope this isn’t the case.

Doomberg on January 19, 2012 at 3:29 AM

In fact, that no true conservatives jumped into the race, despite being a nearly 100% chance to win it all, is something we need to ask ourselves – why.

Rebar on January 19, 2012 at 12:11 AM

5555555555555555555555+

TheAlamos on January 19, 2012 at 4:50 AM

Because most of them knew what was coming to them if they dared to challenge Romney. The long knives are out for the Tea Partiers.

There’s also a possibility that they may feel national bankruptcy is unavoidable, and don’t want to be the ones blamed or left holding the bag when the economy collapses. I really hope this isn’t the case.

Doomberg on January 19, 2012 at 3:29 AM

They politically killed Palin, and then blame Palin for getting politically killed.

GOP = stupidest party!

The saving grace is this: IN SO DOING, PALIN HAS BECOME IMMORTAL TO MANY CONSERVATIVES.

TheAlamos on January 19, 2012 at 4:52 AM

Ron Paul is the only small government tea party candidate running. Why wouldn’t you want to keep him in the party?

steve123 on January 19, 2012 at 5:51 AM

If Romney continues to pull ahead in these primaries, then he needs to pull Paul aside and make him an offer.

Pure and simple course of action.

Whether you like or dislike the Paulbots or the Palinistas (which I am one), Romney needs to start mending bridges and build his coalition.

Gingrich as well. Offer him Sec of State.

I for one am sick and tired of the candidates attacking each other. We need to start attacking Obama. That’s just the facts.

WE. NEED. TO. START. ATTACKING. OBAMA.

(Followme on Twitter @GadsdenRattlers or Facebook

GadsdenRattlers on January 19, 2012 at 6:59 AM

If Ron Paul splits, he kills his son’s political future, which may be the only legacy he leaves behind.

He’s crazy but not stupid.

Pcoop on January 19, 2012 at 7:24 AM

Ron Paul is the only small government tea party candidate running. Why wouldn’t you want to keep him in the party?

steve123 on January 19, 2012 at 5:51 AM

That could be very important in sending a message to Romney to be more conservative. Romney can be swayed. Obama not so much.

CW on January 19, 2012 at 7:25 AM

LOL…

So Mr “Electable” is not all that electable? We owe Pew some flowers and chocolate.

Usually the polling organizations wait for us to nominate our “electable” RINOs before they tell us that “Ooops… they are not so electable.”

Second look at Perry?

It’s better we nominate the only candidate with the RECORD that can defeat Obama than these clowns that only have RHETORIC that can never beat Obama.

TheRightMan on January 19, 2012 at 7:27 AM

In fact, that no true conservatives jumped into the race, despite being a nearly 100% chance to win it all, is something we need to ask ourselves – why.

Rebar on January 19, 2012 at 12:11 AM

answer: we eat our own. i hate the field, i really do, but at some point we have to admit that we get the candidates we deserve.

Coolidge_Conservative on January 19, 2012 at 7:30 AM

The real story here is not Ron Paul. It’s all about the growing disaffection of voters from both parties. Ron Paul is merely the voice behind the number shift.

Fletch54 on January 19, 2012 at 7:30 AM

Second look at Perry?
It’s better we nominate the only candidate with the RECORD that can defeat Obama than these clowns that only have RHETORIC that can never beat Obama.
TheRightMan on January 19, 2012 at 7:27 AM

NO. Perry’s record is dubious at best. If you think Romney would be ripped apart by Obama, wait till he steamrolls Perry on his “record”. You want to hand Obama an answer to his re-election prayers? Nominate Perry.

Fletch54 on January 19, 2012 at 7:36 AM

Reap what you sow, America. PBHO has been in your face for 3 long years and it’s brought what exactly besides destruction? 4 more years of the same, you would have to be mentally incompetent to vote for that.

Bishop on January 18, 2012 at 10:13 PM

Amen to that…. It’s been like this for a very long time now. This is why today we are seeing more and more people vote without thinking about who they are voting for because they have been deceived big time. It won’t get any better, it’s going to get a lot worst, sorry to say.

Shain1611 on January 19, 2012 at 7:49 AM

You know who likes this poll?

Obama – Because he be leading!

Romney – Because he appears to be cleaning up on the independents.

The Media – They may actually be drooling over a Romney nomination more than Obama.

Ruling Class – Because they can’t lose either way!

Now, if that there doesn’t concern you, please remove yourself from the ranks of rational thinking beings.

!

insidiator on January 19, 2012 at 7:58 AM

Rand Paul has a nice GOP career–it would be a shame if something happened to it…

That’s why Ron Paul won’t run as an independent/third party candidate.

MidniteRambler on January 19, 2012 at 7:58 AM

As usual, the numbers do not add up because they weight the number of Democrats in the sample higher. Look at the components. Even though many other polls say conservatives are a larger component, this poll assumes there are many more democrats.

Connecticut on January 19, 2012 at 7:59 AM

These polls mean nothing at this point.

As for me, I’m voting for ABO.

If I get an opportunity to vote in a Primary (usually chosen long before my State), it will be for anyone but Romney. Any candidate that gets a nod by the MSM, Republican elites (Bush, Rove, Krauthammer, etc) won’t get my support. They all pushed McCain in ’08 because he was the “only one electable” by independents. That didn’t work out so well.

SoldiersMom on January 19, 2012 at 8:09 AM

If the public wants the GOP to work with Obama, as the poll suggests, why did they turn out as they did in 2010 to vote against Obama’s party? The voters are going to intentionally create divided government to stop Obama & Pelosi, then turn around less than one year later and cry about gridlock!?!? This makes no sense whatsoever. Either the polling methodology is flawed or the public is stupid. Maybe the real headline should be “60% credit GOP for gridlock.”

80% want compromise? On what, exactly?

This is just more manufactured polling data intended to shape public opinion rather than reflect it.

SAMinVA on January 19, 2012 at 8:11 AM

I love it. You stupid Republicans and Democraps think you own the only rights to run in elections. Arrogant, obtuse, and self serving monkeys, every one of you.

libertarianlunatic on January 19, 2012 at 8:13 AM

libertarianlunatic

Truth in advertising, I dig it!

insidiator on January 19, 2012 at 8:27 AM

Today the media, both the left AND the right are giving us the same story. Now that Santorum won Iowa by 34 votes, he and Romney effectively TIED. When it was thought that Romney won by 8 votes, Romney WON Iowa.

The latest Santorum is ad ‘oh-so-accurate’.

The choice is clear. Stay in-line or find a new line you can believe in.

Carnac on January 19, 2012 at 8:28 AM

In fact, that no true conservatives jumped into the race, despite being a nearly 100% chance to win it all, is something we need to ask ourselves – why.

Rebar on January 19, 2012 at 12:11 AM

There is one running, but so-called conservatives are disgusted and threatened by what true conservatism looks like.

Dante on January 19, 2012 at 8:29 AM

If Ron Paul splits, he kills his son’s political future…

Pcoop on January 19, 2012 at 7:24 AM

That is silly and abhorrent logic.

Dante on January 19, 2012 at 8:34 AM

If Ron Paul splits, he kills his son’s political future…

Pcoop on January 19, 2012 at 7:24 AM

That is silly and abhorrent logic.

Dante on January 19, 2012 at 8:34 AM

I disagree. Mark Levin already promised to destroy Rand if Ron runs 3rd Party and guarantees Obama’s re-election.

It’s one of those Jersey promises, capice?

insidiator on January 19, 2012 at 8:42 AM

Hmmmmm…”Polls mean nothing! Don’t pay any attention…” “Polls show that Romney is the only one who can beat Obama!!! Embrace Romney!!!!” Which is it?

ddrintn on January 19, 2012 at 8:43 AM

This poll is blatantly BS.

In the Obama V Romney head to head match they have both parties going 90% for their candidate and then independents going for Romney by 10 pts…and yet Obama has a 5 pt lead in the overall? Riiiight, sure.

Even looking a little deeper they say Dems go for Obama 91/7 and Repubs go for Romney 90/9. There are several things wrong with this, but I’ll just cover the main two issues:

1) Does anyone actually believe that there are more Repubs ready to cross over than dems?

2) Does anyone actually believe that with Romney the Dem base is within 5 pts of Repubs for support on their candidate (let alone ahead by 1 as this claims)?

In conclusion, this poll is full of crap. Its purpose in life is for the LSM to spin a horse race out of thin air and libtards to feel a little better about life so they don’t commit suicide before November.

Period.

Sqrl on January 19, 2012 at 8:48 AM

I disagree. Mark Levin already promised to destroy Rand if Ron runs 3rd Party and guarantees Obama’s re-election.

It’s one of those Jersey promises, capice?

insidiator on January 19, 2012 at 8:42 AM

LOL. As if that little, shrill man has any power to do so.

Dante on January 19, 2012 at 8:58 AM

Someone said this in another thread and it’s stuck with me…but it certainly is a bit creepy how some Ronulans are treating Ron Paul and Rand Paul as interchangable. That alone should give you pause.

JohnTant on January 19, 2012 at 9:07 AM

Someone said this in another thread and it’s stuck with me…but it certainly is a bit creepy how some Ronulans are treating Ron Paul and Rand Paul as interchangable. That alone should give you pause.

JohnTant on January 19, 2012 at 9:07 AM

Um, it’s not the Paul supporters doing that. Look at how many of his critics are saying that if Paul, Sr. goes third party it’ll hurt Rand.

Dante on January 19, 2012 at 9:16 AM

In order to get the Paulinistas to stay on board, Romney or whoever the GOP nominee is, should immediately ask Ron Paul to be his Fed Chairman.

SandyK on January 19, 2012 at 9:22 AM

Dante on January 19, 2012 at 8:29 AM

My colostomy bag was never as full of shite as you.

catmman on January 19, 2012 at 9:22 AM

Easy fix for Romney:

1. Win the effin’ primaries if you can.
2. Publicly embrace ending war on drugs.
3. Pay lip service to “end the bailouts” stuff.
4. Credit the old loon with the #2 and #3.
5. Promise to appoint Rand Paul to the cabinet or VP slot.
6. Quietly reassure banks that #3 was, in fact, lip service.
7. Win the general election with 40%+ support from 18-29 age group.

Archivarix on January 19, 2012 at 9:27 AM

Um, it’s not the Paul supporters doing that. Look at how many of his critics are saying that if Paul, Sr. goes third party it’ll hurt Rand.

Dante on January 19, 2012 at 9:16 AM

It certainly is. Your Ron Paul Commenter in Chief, the honorable JohnGalt23′s favorite quote is, “Tell me again why Ron Paul shouldn’t run Third Party.”

hawkdriver on January 19, 2012 at 9:42 AM

It certainly is. Your Ron Paul Commenter in Chief, the honorable JohnGalt23′s favorite quote is, “Tell me again why Ron Paul shouldn’t run Third Party.”

hawkdriver on January 19, 2012 at 9:42 AM

Why are you always unable to follow a discussion?

Tant said Paul supporters think Ron and Rand are interchangeable, and I explained how it’s his critics who think they’re interchangeable. Your quote has nothing to do with this (and Galt says that when a Republican says they’d vote for anyone but Paul).

Dante on January 19, 2012 at 9:47 AM

test

Steve Z on January 19, 2012 at 10:13 AM

To defend Allahpundit, Palin could have jumped in the race at any point, in fact she could jump in right now, and still win the nomination.

She did not run because, for whatever reason, she decided not to. You cannot force people to run for office, nor force them not to run.

In fact, that no true conservatives jumped into the race, despite being a nearly 100% chance to win it all, is something we need to ask ourselves – why.

Rebar on January 19, 2012 at 12:11 AM

I’ll tell you why. Because for all of their (conservatives) bleating about the msm narrative, they still bought into it.

rightConcept on January 19, 2012 at 10:16 AM

Obama has to be near perfect in this campaign to win.

residentblue on January 19, 2012 at 12:13 AM

LOL!!!! You have got to be kidding me? He can say or do anything he wants and get a complete pass. Just like he has gotten a pass for the last 3 years abd more.

Gingrich can absolutely mop the floor with him in any debate but what do you think the narrative will be? Do you think the msm will talk about Obama’s lack of command on the issues?

hahaha!

Not a chance.

They don’t call him the anointed one for nothing.

rightConcept on January 19, 2012 at 10:19 AM

Even looking a little deeper they say Dems go for Obama 91/7 and Repubs go for Romney 90/9. There are several things wrong with this, but I’ll just cover the main two issues:

1) Does anyone actually believe that there are more Repubs ready to cross over than dems?

2) Does anyone actually believe that with Romney the Dem base is within 5 pts of Repubs for support on their candidate (let alone ahead by 1 as this claims)?

In conclusion, this poll is full of crap. Its purpose in life is for the LSM to spin a horse race out of thin air and libtards to feel a little better about life so they don’t commit suicide before November.

Period.

Sqrl on January 19, 2012 at 8:48 AM

Exactly. How does Obama lose Indies 40-50 but beat Romney by 50-45 overall?

It’s possible to calculate the party breakdown of the sample from the internals and overall results:

Romney: 0.90R + 0.07D + 0.50I = 0.45
Obama: 0.09R + 0.91D + 0.40I = 0.50
Overall: R + D + I = 1.00

Three equations, three unknowns. Invert the matrix, do the math, and you get R = 0.230, D = 0.351, I = 0.419. The poll sample is skewed 12% toward Democrats!

In the real electorate, expect at least 33% Republicans to 35% Democrats and 32% Indies. With the same splits between the candidates as in this poll, Romney would win 48.1% to 47.6%.

Steve Z on January 19, 2012 at 10:26 AM

Steve Z on January 19, 2012 at 10:26 AM

Not to mention the skew toward indies from your math. Such hackery should be called out, but never does.

SkinnerVic on January 19, 2012 at 1:53 PM

Proof that Paul is connecting with unaffiliated voters, either because of his spending policies, his dove-ishness, or simply as a none of the above?

Paul is connecting to these voters because of his message of liberty and that is it! Being able to do whatever you want under their own house as long as they are not harming anybody else, may not be a big deal to you but it is a huge deal to so many voters and would be voters. Democrats pander to them with rights. Ron Paul is not offering any spending policies that would attract them. The candidate that offers the most gov spending are the ones that get the 50 and older voters. Mitt Romney is getting almost all of these voters.

Capitalist75 on January 19, 2012 at 3:29 PM

I avoid Pew which IMHO runs polls to drive agendas

Why would Paul want to split the vote if he knew it would elect Obama?

Answer: Paul will split the vote if he wants Obama elected over a conservative he dislikes. Paul dislikes conservatives intensely.

Paul is working overtime to disable any viable conservative candidate. From what I can see, that is his only reason to be in the primaries,

He isn’t stupid but he has a mean streak. Some say Perot was only in the race to trash Bush. Perot certainly disappeared from the earth after he leveraged Clinton

The Country Club set is not clubbing Paul. because he is helping them. By keeping Paul viable to game the primaries they are feeding the alligator

entagor on January 19, 2012 at 3:46 PM

Comment pages: 1 2