Polls: This Mitt fellow is becoming more likeable by the day

posted at 1:31 pm on November 4, 2012 by Mary Katharine Ham

I know many conservatives bristle at the notion of “likeability” or personal “favorability” as an important campaign metric, dismissing it as a shallow consideration not worthy of news coverage.

But, the fact is, it does matter. It is not, on its own, a qualification for office, but we are human beings and we make many decisions based on whether we like or dislike others. If you don’t think it’s a boon to be likeable, imagine Ronald Reagan’s presidency with Harry Reid’s personality.

The likeability issue has probably received an outsized amount of coverage during President Obama’s four years in office because, as economic stats stalled and fell, Obama’s personal “favorability” didn’t, allowing media to crow about its preferred candidate’s appeal.

No longer. In the waning days of this election, Mitt Romney has closed the likeability gap—formerly Obama’s greatest asset— in four separate polls (three national, one battleground), rising to his highest levels of the campaign in the eyes of voters.

WaPo/ABC:

Fifty-four percent of likely voters in the latest ABC News/Washington Post tracking poll express a favorable opinion of Obama overall, the most basic measure of a public figure’s popularity. Yet 53 percent now see Romney favorably – a majority, remarkably, for the first time.

It’s a dramatic gain for Romney, who emerged from the Republican primaries as the least popular major party candidate in polling back to 1984 and remained there up to the debates. Just 40 percent saw him favorably as recently as late August, and it was essentially no better, 44 percent, after the party conventions.

Politico/GWU:

Romney and Obama are now at parity on likability: 51 percent view Obama favorably while 50 percent view Romney favorably. Meanwhile, 45 percent of respondents view Obama unfavorably and 44 percent view Romney unfavorably.

In the Oct. 1 Politico/GWU poll, taken entirely before the first debate, Obama outdid Romney 51-46 on this measure.

Same in the most recent Fox poll:

In addition, the two are about equally liked by voters. Fifty-two percent have a favorable opinion of Obama, while 51 percent have a positive view of Romney.

Pittsburgh Tribune poll of Pennsylvania, which shows a 47-47 race in the Keystone state today:

Obama enjoyed wide leads in state polling during most of the race. That narrowed when Romney’s image improved as a result of the October presidential debates. Susquehanna found 48 percent of voters view Romney favorably, the first time he tied Obama on that measure. A Trib poll in September found Obama with a 47 percent favorability rating, compared with Romney’s 41 percent.

The NBC poll’s numbers on individual questions won’t come out until tonight. The race is a dead heat in four national polls and Romney has closed the likeability gap, while Democrats show signs of improving their enthusiasm numbers. Will the former offset the latter? Romney’s problems with likeability were widely seen as a large part of the reason people didn’t view him as a viable alternative to the president. He has changed his image perceptibly since the first debate, wiping out what used to be sometimes a double-digit advantage for the president.

Is it enough to push a few extra voters to the polls in Northwest Ohio and Eastern Ohio coal country, Western Pennsylvania, and the Philadelphia burbs? Or, given the high numbers of early voters, did folks just learn to like Mitt a little too late?

Since we’re going anti-Eyeore in this post, let’s also give you a shot in the arm with Guy Benson’s 6 Reasons to be Optimistic this weekend.

Front-page photo credit to Nate Beeler

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 9 10 11

Bwahahah

CNN D +11?

Del Dolemonte on November 5, 2012 at 12:08 AM

1001

John the Libertarian on November 5, 2012 at 12:10 AM

Turncoat Roberts, now stab you in the back Christie. Whew, what an election cycle. Sure hope the R & R team pulls it off. Those Obamacare taxes alone are going to do me in.
And does Boehner still get to be speaker of the house?!?
& will Allen West & Michelle Bachman pull through?

Belle on November 5, 2012 at 12:21 AM

Forgive me if this has already been stated, but I am not surprised to see Mittens’ likeability gap closing and I think he would far surpass Bronco if more uninformed types could see the stuff Glenn Beck uncovered about him about how much he has helped people in need over the years. All we ever hear about is how much money the guy has. What no one ever hears is how he has used his wealth to help others who need it. This is what the left will never understand. They can bark all day long about the eeeevil rich but it is people with wealth who have the means to help those who don’t. And the fact is, most rich people do. And Mittens has not only given financially, but he has given of his time, too, and has never asked for recognition. If this were not a pattern in his life, if it were a practice he’s taken up recently, I would be cynical about it. But it seems to be his personal philosophy, that he feels a duty and responsibility to use his wealth and influence to help those who need it. I’ll probably always be lukewarm toward him with respect to his politics — he’s just too much of a centrist for me — but I’m comforted in knowing he’s a man of true character. That was enough for me to pull the proverbial lever for him.

NoLeftTurn on November 5, 2012 at 12:30 AM

hawkdriver on November 4, 2012 at 10:12 PM
…I understand that bud…but when you see what’s going on about you…can you go with the flow for once for all the crap in the past… when it’s not really hurting anything…or do you have too just be… the only dick?

KOOLAID2 on November 4, 2012 at 10:35 PM

Kool, I wasn’t saying anything to the troll. You’re not calling me a dick are you?

hawkdriver on November 5, 2012 at 12:33 AM

I came to the realization the other day that the reason I can’t seem to let myself get too optimistic that Romney will win is because I was *so* sure that the Supreme Court was going to rule Obamacare unconstitutional. When they didn’t, I was just in total shock. And that I think is where my fear of being positive about a win is coming from. Stupid I know, but it is what it is. :)

JennM111 on November 4, 2012 at 7:02 PM

This is me, exactly.

cptacek on November 5, 2012 at 12:38 AM

NoLeftTurn on November 5, 2012 at 12:30 AM

There’s a bigger problem there though. A generation or two of citizens are being taught that big business is inherently evil, and that if someone is rich, they either stole their money or inherited it from someone that stole it. That’s what happens when you turn K-12 over to greedy union socialism.

slickwillie2001 on November 5, 2012 at 12:38 AM

Just to prove my point, here comes another poll that shows the contest….you guessed it…TIED.

http://www.gravispolls.com/2012/11/gravis-marketing-national-poll-shows.html#more

D+8 sample. Is it just me or are all the polls now just juggling numbers around to show a tight race?

tkyang99 on November 5, 2012 at 12:48 AM

Strong Independent Voter Movement to Romney in the last 48 hours

Pat Caddell stated today on Fox News that he is seeing strong momentum toward Romney. In today’s Rasmussen national poll which is a 3 day tracking poll shows that Romney’s lead among independents has gone up from 3 on Friday, to 5 yesterday, to 9 today. Agenda pollsters are also picking this up as well, though their polls are still heavily weighted toward Democrats. Romney is on an upward trend heading into Election Day which is perfect.

Bad timing for Obama. Looks like the Sandy bump is over.

tkyang99 on November 5, 2012 at 12:55 AM

hawkdriver on November 5, 2012 at 12:33 AM

…lordy no!…you were admonishing me for my juvenile response…and I understood your point…I was saying under the circumstance’s… HE didn’t need to be a dick!

KOOLAID2 on November 5, 2012 at 1:07 AM

…hey! …this thread is headed to a thousand without the troll argument…don’t start putting your head where the liberals have theirs…k?
.
.
.

NO TROLLS…!!!

KOOLAID2

Why not, it’s pretty clear that’s where you’ve put yours at this point. If you want mindless groupthink, I recommend Kos. In the meantime, until you or anyone else here starts paying for my internet connection, I’ll respond to whoever the fluke I want…k?

xblade on November 5, 2012 at 1:07 AM

Why not, it’s pretty clear that’s where you’ve put yours at this point. If you want mindless groupthink, I recommend Kos. In the meantime, until you or anyone else here starts paying for my internet connection, I’ll respond to whoever the fluke I want…k?

xblade on November 5, 2012 at 1:07 AM

…k…why sure there mindless moron…what ever floats your little boat!
Have fun!

KOOLAID2 on November 5, 2012 at 1:11 AM

xblade on November 5, 2012 at 1:07 AM

…lighten up!…hey little boat with the expensive internet connection!…I left you a message on the other thread (Quotes of the Day) at 12:35 AM…you are funny!…I liked that one!

KOOLAID2 on November 5, 2012 at 1:21 AM

You’re not calling me a dick are you?

hawkdriver on November 5, 2012 at 12:33 AM

The trollcot seems to have been the most successful campaign to be unified against one of the most corrupt and tenacious trolls we’ve seen in a long time. I seriously believe he/she to be high up in the Obama campaign because of the internals and historical polls at his/her fingertips. What tripped the panic alarm and called for such drastic measure was because said troll laughed about Benghazi and the deaths of what I argue are the best and bravest soldiers I’ve ever seen. Those SEALs should be given the CMoH, and hopefully, once Romney is elected, that is exactly what will happen.

John the Libertarian on November 5, 2012 at 1:28 AM

Christie woulda never played well in the south…Ryan was an excellent choice a running mate.

workingclass artist on November 4, 2012 at 9:08 PM

Just think of Christie in the VP debate.. He would have tried to out-yell Biden and have tried to have been the uber Alpha male. Which would have meant that he would have turned out to be as big a jerk as Biden. That debate did Biden no favors and did Ryan quite a few. Ryan probably played it quite right because aww.. he is so adorkable and there are lots of grannies who just want to feed him pot roast and wish he was single so that they can introduce him to their daughters.

I also don’t think that Rubio would have been a good choice however. The whole idea behind the VP debate was to get Ryan to have a Dan Quayle moment. Rubio was more likely to provide that than Ryan.

Illinidiva on November 5, 2012 at 2:07 AM

Dunno if anyone’s still reading this thread, but JPeterman et al., I wanted to let you know that I tried submitting “trollcott” to Urban Dictionary, and they decided not to publish it. :-(

Maybe someone else might have more of the writing style Urban Dictionary is looking for?

Mary in LA on November 5, 2012 at 2:31 AM

Maybe someone else might have more of the writing style Urban Dictionary is looking for?

Mary in LA on November 5, 2012 at 2:31 AM

Let’s try again with popular support after Nov. 6.

John the Libertarian on November 5, 2012 at 2:40 AM

Let’s try again with popular support after Nov. 6.

John the Libertarian on November 5, 2012 at 2:40 AM

Sounds great to me!

(and what are we doing up so late at night??? Oh, well, as long as we don’t sleep through Tuesday…) :-)

Mary in LA on November 5, 2012 at 2:59 AM

Trollcott:

The banding together of disparate anonymous contributors at a social media website to ignore or otherwise not engage a troll that has been identified as a corrupt voice who will not be, for whatever reason, banned by website management.

A boycott of a troll who is particularly offensive and may be being paid by a third party to do so. A collective agreement and solidarity on behalf of regular website contributors to not argue with, debate or otherwise engage said troll in an effort to discourage his or her participation.

John the Libertarian on November 5, 2012 at 2:59 AM

I get and honor the trollcott, but honestly, gumby was such a low-level mindless talking point moron, he didn’t bother me at all. In fact, I found him quite amusing in his ineptness and inability to legitimately argue ANYTHING factual. Just like his false messaih, everytime he tried to extend beyond Axeldouche’s talking points, he made a complete fool of himself. Moronic prediction after moronic prediction about never-gonna-happen “bounces” for Barky were TITANICALLY wrong and this happened day after day after day…right up to today when he tried to debunk the Redskins/incumbent loss by saying that the “1-7 Panthers had ZERO CHANCE of beating the Redskins, and AS ALWAYS, he was wrong, AGAIN. LOL

The kid is a mindless hopeychangy-bot programmed by Axeldouche/Cutter and paid by the post. After the Marxists are humiliated on Tuesday night, we’ll never hear from him again.

Farewell Dumby, we hardly knew ye…
LOL

Strike Hornet on November 5, 2012 at 3:29 AM

gumby was such a low-level mindless talking point moron

Strike Hornet on November 5, 2012 at 3:29 AM

I agree with you on every point. But I do not for a moment believe gumby wasn’t an Obama operative. Too much access to internal polling and historical polling and high-level talking points.

John the Libertarian on November 5, 2012 at 3:38 AM

Trollcotting works (I much prefer it to banning), and it amuses me to look at the rationale of those who dislike it and disagree with it: the dissenters are are almost universally either the negative, unconstructive, disruptive trolls themselves who are being deprived of the attention they crave, or they are those who aren’t very insightful or observant about how these trolls operate, and who overestimate their own importance and impact on countering these trolls.

Go trollcott! :)

Anti-Control on November 5, 2012 at 4:25 AM

I have no idea how so many actually “like/d” Obama: he was repugnant from the start. And, no, I did not take a wait and see position with the guy, either: he was bad from the beginning.

Still, McCain did not have a chance at winning. No way that was going to happen.

It was a dark time all around.

I hope we kick this bum out and I will enjoy his squirming for an eternity. If you thought Carter was crap, wait until you see an ex-president Obama.

And, MKH, please don’t use that term “metric” when you mean “measure”.

Don’t like the terms “optics” or “narrative”, either….

And no “LOLs” in the comment section: pitiful and childish!

Have a nice day!

Sherman1864 on November 5, 2012 at 4:34 AM

John the Libertarian on November 5, 2012 at 1:28 AM

Yeah I followed all that. I just wanted to make sure KoolAid2 wasn’t mad about a comment.

hawkdriver on November 5, 2012 at 4:46 AM

Sherman1864 on November 5, 2012 at 4:34 AM

o_O

hawkdriver on November 5, 2012 at 4:48 AM

Anti-Control on November 5, 2012 at 4:25 AM

No, it is important to counter them, but you don’t have to engage in direct debate with them. To pretend like they aren’t there lets them spread their BS unchallenged. What was stupid was when people would demand that Gumby and others answer lists of questions. They would ask over and over, “why haven’t you answered my questions yet, Gumby?! I’m waiting.”

Challenging or countering someone’s spam does not require you to quote their message or even mention them by name in your response.

Some of you may be able to pretend like the trolls are not here for the remaining day or two before the election, but I think we all know that this “trollcott” would never have lasted if it had had begun months ago.

bluegill on November 5, 2012 at 4:50 AM

bluegill on November 5, 2012 at 4:50 AM

I say that you are a whiny, delusional person with a next-to-nonexistent sense of humor and an inflated self-opinion.

What evidence can your provide to counter that – insults? ROFL@you and your predictability!

Anti-Control on November 5, 2012 at 4:54 AM

But I do not for a moment believe gumby wasn’t an Obama operative. Too much access to internal polling and historical polling and high-level talking points.

Couldn’t one get this through following the appropriate people on Twitter? That’s all it was, relayed Twitter bulletins from lib mouthpieces printed here as she read them. And yeah, I always thought the person in question is a woman.

Marcus on November 5, 2012 at 4:55 AM

What’s more, totally ignoring the trolls would deprive HotAir readers of some very necessary, effective and dismissive mocking of the trolls. It is also important to expose the dishonest ones for what they are. A lot of people reading aren’t as savvy about all of this stuff as many of you.

It is also important to make clear what someone means by the term “troll.” If a troll were posting purely disruptive pointless garbage meant to sidetrack the conversation and only get attention in an annoying way, then I would totally agree with the idea of ignoring the trolls.

However, the “trolls” we are talking about here do have a point and a purpose. Choosing to ignore or not challenge or counter someone simply because they are posting opposing views, even if they are doing it in a dishonest way, doesn’t really take the power away from these so-called trolls. All you would be doing in that case is disarming and essentially sticking fingers in your ears saying, “Lalala, I can’t hear you!”

In short, rather than totally ignoring them, it is best to try to be smart about how you counter them. Face it, this is a political site, and there will always be fights about the campaigns and there will always be attempts to spin news in one side’s favor. You can’t expect this to be a warm and fuzzy polite chat room all of the time. That’s not what this place is.

bluegill on November 5, 2012 at 5:05 AM

Anti-Control on November 5, 2012 at 4:54 AM

Thanks, I love you too!

bluegill on November 5, 2012 at 5:08 AM

Couldn’t one get this through following the appropriate people on Twitter? That’s all it was, relayed Twitter bulletins from lib mouthpieces printed here as she read them. And yeah, I always thought the person in question is a woman.
Marcus on November 5, 2012 at 4:55 AM

Absolutely. Besides, it had already been established that the person in question had been doing the exact same thing years ago on other websites to try to help Democrat campaigns. Whether or not the person is officially involved with any Democrat organization, the idea that they displayed high-level access to info is laughable. This stuff isn’t hard to find on your own.

As for the woman thing, certainly seems possible. There is a passive quality to its writing, and it seems to have little interest In tit-for-tat debates and angry, insulting comebacks. I actually think that approach of this person frustrated a lot of people who wanted to see some kind of anger or annoyance displayed by the troll, as we had seen from other liberal posters. I actually think it is a male who just doesn’t have a terribly well-developed or exciting social life.

bluegill on November 5, 2012 at 5:22 AM

I am a long time advocate of ignoring trolls. Responding to them gives their drivel attention and makes it look as if it were worthy of argument–big mistake. Responding also allows them to derail threads to what they want to talk about, something I have seen here all too often. When a troll derails a thread he is laughing as he types. He is in control of the conversation. He has the power. Never give power to an enemy. Never.

“Trollcot” is brilliant and I hope it catches on.

SurferDoc on November 5, 2012 at 5:25 AM

I’m dedicating this tune to all the HotAir regulars that got upset with each other for responding and or “not” responding to trolls during the TrollCott1.0.

Please hold hands while we sing it together.

My next comment will be from a tree stand deep in the woods at the Hawkdriver Secret Compound. Be jealous, Bishop.

hawkdriver on November 5, 2012 at 5:32 AM

All we ever hear about is how much money the guy has. What no one ever hears is how he has used his wealth to help others who need it. This is what the left will never understand. [...]. But it seems to be his personal philosophy, that he feels a duty and responsibility to use his wealth and influence to help those who need it. I’ll probably always be lukewarm toward him with respect to his politics — he’s just too much of a centrist for me — but I’m comforted in knowing he’s a man of true character. That was enough for me to pull the proverbial lever for him.
NoLeftTurn on November 5, 2012 at 12:30 AM

I agree. I always thought it was silly how people said that Mitt was unlikable. To me he is extremely likable. I think people often confuse bigmouth, back-slapping, loud, put-on folksy “charm” for likability.

Guess what, someone who is simply a decent person who doesn’t feel the need to put on a showy performance trying to convince you how likable they are comes across a lot better to a lot of people. It is annoying when some equate practiced “charm” with warmth.

There is something to be said for someone who conducts himself with dignity, class and with appropriate formality when running for the highest office. Since when did acting like an oafish, belching “regular guy” or a hip comedian become some kind of positive attribute for higher office, anyway?

Oh, and as far as I’m concerned, the class envy stuff is only for bitter, envious, whiny losers.

bluegill on November 5, 2012 at 5:38 AM

Public service announcement, especially for those who live in a city as I do:

Don’t forget to switch your Romney yard side with a neighbor’s Obama sign on election night.

You’re welcome.

justltl on November 5, 2012 at 6:23 AM

Public service announcement, especially for those who live in a city as I do:
Don’t forget to switch your Romney yard side with a neighbor’s Obama sign on election night.

You’re welcome.
justltl on November 5, 2012 at 6:23 AM

Lol. Love it!

bluegill on November 5, 2012 at 6:31 AM

Thanks, I love you too!

bluegill on November 5, 2012 at 5:08 AM

Considering that you couldn’t refute what I said about you with evidence, I congratulate you for giving about the best possible answer short of that!

Anti-Control on November 5, 2012 at 7:31 AM

I am a long time advocate of ignoring trolls. Responding to them gives their drivel attention and makes it look as if it were worthy of argument–big mistake. Responding also allows them to derail threads to what they want to talk about, something I have seen here all too often. When a troll derails a thread he is laughing as he types. He is in control of the conversation. He has the power. Never give power to an enemy. Never.

“Trollcot” is brilliant and I hope it catches on.

SurferDoc on November 5, 2012 at 5:25 AM

Excellently stated! :)

Anti-Control on November 5, 2012 at 7:33 AM

Scarborough very negative about swing state polls especially Colorado and Ohio and Virginia. Says that they all look bad for Romney. Didn’t mention Michigan or Wisconsin. Joe also found joking about Benghazi just hilarious! Treating it as a joke. I want to throw a brick through my tv.

kit9 on November 5, 2012 at 7:38 AM

Rass R-49. O48. Bounce is over he is heading back to 47

Conservative4ev on November 5, 2012 at 8:17 AM

I agree. I always thought it was silly how people said that Mitt was unlikable. To me he is extremely likable. I think people often confuse bigmouth, back-slapping, loud, put-on folksy “charm” for likability.

Mitt is very likable at a personal level and I never bought into the demonizing attacks. After living in Utah for several years, I also have a very positive impression of Mormons and their culture.
Having said that, if your candidate in the GOP primaries was steamrolled by the Mitt money machine that played hard and loose with the facts in a ad blitz, you may see him differently.

My biggest problem with Mitt is his tendency toward marketing himself and his positions to the electorate as best suits the current race.
Mitt governed as healthcare mandate moderate in Massachusetts, then turned right in attempts to win primaries, and now has turned back to the center as a general election candidate. Which Mitt will emerge if elected President? There’s not way to know.

bayam on November 5, 2012 at 8:23 AM

gumby was such a low-level mindless talking point moron

Strike Hornet on November 5, 2012 at 3:29 AM

I agree with you on every point. But I do not for a moment believe gumby wasn’t an Obama operative. Too much access to internal polling and historical polling and high-level talking points.

John the Libertarian on November 5, 2012 at 3:38 AM

Is he gone yet

Conservative4ev on November 5, 2012 at 8:34 AM

TROLLCOT! All of ‘em.

kingsjester on November 5, 2012 at 8:38 AM

I’m not expecting miracles from Romney. All I’m expecting from him is to buy us time–another four or five years to hopefully shore things up and begin correcting this mess. If Obama wins, then I honestly don’t think we’re going to make it to 2016–I think it all falls down and goes boom. It’s like I said earlier, we all know what we’re getting here. We know who and what Obama is, we know who and what Mitt is. We know what both stand for. We know that once we pick a path, that’s it, there’s no turning back. If Obama wins, I don’t want one single Obama voter coming to me saying “I didn’t he’d do THAT!” or “I didn’t see THAT coming!” because, so help me God, I’ll laugh in their face.

Tomorrow will tell the tale, then I go back to watching everything here. I’m already feeling like I’m looking too long into the abyss…

Matt Helm on November 5, 2012 at 8:40 AM

I’m not expecting miracles from Romney. All I’m expecting from him is to buy us time–another four or five years to hopefully shore things up and begin correcting this mess. If Obama wins, then I honestly don’t think we’re going to make it to 2016–I think it all falls down and goes boom. It’s like I said earlier, we all know what we’re getting here. We know who and what Obama is, we know who and what Mitt is. We know what both stand for. We know that once we pick a path, that’s it, there’s no turning back. If Obama wins, I don’t want one single Obama voter coming to me saying “I didn’t he’d do THAT!” or “I didn’t see THAT coming!” because, so help me God, I’ll laugh in their face.

Tomorrow will tell the tale, then I go back to watching everything here. I’m already feeling like I’m looking too long into the abyss…

Matt Helm on November 5, 2012 at 8:40 AM

I turned around on Mitt with the debates. Granted, I was going to vote for him. However my opinion changed during the first debate. He did the one thing I didn’t think he would do; he attacked. He made Obama think staring at his shoes would make Mitt go away.

I realized I had been pushing Mitt into the position that Democrats had painted for me; an aloof rich guy. He’s more than that, he is a businessman. He made his bones by taking companies that were on the brink and turning them around, and going into boardrooms and convincing them they had the magic.

I don’t expect miracles of Mitt, but he’s made a believer out of me.

itsspideyman on November 5, 2012 at 8:58 AM

hawkdriver on November 5, 2012 at 4:46 AM

…who the heck would be mad at you?…(hope you get a trophy one!)

KOOLAID2 on November 5, 2012 at 9:00 AM

Here is my prediction:

Swing States:

Romney: Florida, North Carolina, Virgina, Colorado, Ohio, New Hampshire

Obama: Pennsylvania, Michigan, Iowa, Wisconsin, Nevada

Result:

Romney 279 Electoral Votes

Obama 259 Electoral Votes

Dollayo on November 5, 2012 at 9:17 AM

The Republicans (hopefully Conservatives) have a REAL chance to increase their House seats and take over the Senate by several seats.

Worthwhile reading for the day before the presidential election 2012:

Romney for President
The Obama record is unimpressive.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/332484/mitt-romney-president-editors

AdrianS on November 5, 2012 at 2:15 PM

Comment pages: 1 9 10 11