July 20, 2011

Poll Analysis:PPP National vs. Obama

PPP has released their national vs. Obama for the month of July. It doesn’t look good for Obama.

First the top line:

(vs. Obama) Obama Candidate UnDec Diff
Romney 45 45 10 0
Bachmann 48 41 11 -7
Pawlenty 48 39 13 -9
Cain 48 36 16 -12
Palin 53 37 9 -16

Romney is tied with Obama. Bachmann, the flavor of the month, is still seven points back near Pawlenty’s -9. Cain continues to struggle, and Palin assumes her usual place in the rear.

Here are the trends for their national vs. Obama poll for this year

(7/20) (6/13) (5/11) (4/13) (3/15) (2/16) (1/20)
Romney 0 -2 -5 -6 -5 -5 -5
Bachmann -7
Pawlenty -9 -11
Cain -12 -10
Palin -16 -14 -17 -18 -15 -18 -17

Over the past year Romney has improved to the point of tying with the President. Palin is practically unchanged from January. She is still nearly 20 points behind the President.

Finally, here is an interesting crosstab that PPP provides on their blog post announcing this poll. It shows the percentage of the Undecided in the first table that approve or disapprove of the job Obama is doing. It is most enlightening:

(Undecided vs. Obama) Approve Obama Disapprove Obama Diff
Romney 21 61 40
Bachmann 10 67 57
Pawlenty 9 75 66
Cain 8 76 68
Palin 5 84 79

This drives home the point that the vast majority of those who haven’t made up their minds on whom to vote for do not like Obama’s job performance. If you add those undecideds who approve of him to his vote number and add those who disapprove to his opponent’s number, you get the following version of the first table:

(Undecided added) Obama Candidate Diff
Romney 48 52 4
Pawlenty 50 50 0
Bachmann 51 49 -2
Cain 51 49 -2
Palin 54 46 -8

Suddenly, Romney leads by four. Pawlenty, Bachmann, and Cain are all looking good, and even Palin is well within striking distance.

Things do not look good for the President; that is for sure. Even PPP headlines this poll as “Obama in perilous shape “. If he cannot get this economy turned around, he is headed for a one-and-out.

For more details, see Kavon’s post below.

***Update:  CraigS pointed out an error in the tabulation. It has been corrected. Thanks Craig. ***

Trackback URL for this post:
http://race42016.com/2011/07/20/poll-analysisppp-national-vs-obama/trackback/

79 Responses to “Poll Analysis:PPP National vs. Obama”

  1. Jaxemer11 Says:

    Why no Perry? Because it is PPP and they want Perry to get in. The polls that match Perry against Obama show him doing dreadfully. Almost as bad as Palin.

  2. CraigS Says:

    Mark
    I believe the Bachmann – Obama numbers are flipped from the PPP poll. I think the allocated numbers still give the edge to Obama 51-49 % for Bachmann. I think. Double check

    CraigS

  3. Thomas Alan Says:

    Shouldn’t these polls dispel the DOOOOOOM we’re hearing about how Obama’s winning the debt fight so handily he’ll cruise to re-election?

  4. Jaxemer11 Says:

    I don’t think anyone is paying attention to the debt fight.

  5. Thomas Alan Says:

    4:

    I tend to agree. It’s such a procedural thing that most people can’t get it. Personally, I’d like to nail Obama to the wall for trying to get away with calling taxes “revenues”, I think there’s some daylight there for his desperation to raise taxes but being afraid to call it that.

    Anyway, aside from Michelle Bachmann, it’s not something our candidates are getting involved in either way aside from in broad strokes. It’ll be long forgotten by the time 2012 actually rolls around (I’m not one to think this is a real crisis btw).

  6. marK Says:

    Craig,

    You are right. Nice catch. Thanks.

  7. Jonathan Says:

    #3:

    Jim Geraghty at NRO had his friend “Number Cruncher” look at the polling data about the debt and the President. Basically what they came up with is that yes, the debt fight is hurting the GOP in Congress, but also President Obama. Essentially people are unhappy with both sides. Combining that with the economic woes, people are basically mad at Congress more than the President, but they don’t like him too much either. (read all of it here: http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/272174/obama-winning-or-tying-debt-ceiling-fight-losing-2012-battle

    The good news is that the heat on the Republicans is on Congress, not on our would-be nominee.

  8. Adam X (Run Rick Run!) Says:

    Jax,

    The difference is that no one knows Perry. Everyone knows Palin.

  9. asparagus Says:

    The downside of this debt ceiling is that it energizes the tea party more and we end up with more Christine O Donnell candidates and less Scott Brown candidates and we blow our chances of taking back the Senate in ’12. America likes divided government. So if you get your tea party President, you are going to get saddled with a Dem controlled House and Senate to balance that out. If you get Romney, who is less trusted by tea party, you have a chance of controlling House and Senate if American people believe he will balance the more extreme elements of the tea party. You can have one or the other but you won’t get both. If I’m tea party, I’d rather have the tea party congress and a Republican president. What hurt you last time wasn’t the RINO President, it was the RINO President and a RINO House.

  10. CF Says:

    #9

    True, except you have it backwards. The real Tea Party, not the media’s definition of it, actually supports Romney above everyone else according to most polls.

    It’s the kooky Conservative Evangelicals that don’t support him. As soon as you start throwing social issues into it, you’re not longer “Tea Party”.

  11. Adam X (Run Rick Run!) Says:

    If I’m tea party, I’d rather have the tea party congress and a Republican president.

    But it’s not that simple. If Romney is president and the political winds shift a bit and the Dems get the congress back in two years – then we are saddled with a liberal legislature and a president with a history of smiling and signing liberal legislation into law. And that’s when the party is fighting among the various factions.

    No thanks.

  12. Adam X (Run Rick Run!) Says:

    The real Tea Party, not the media’s definition of it, actually supports Romney above everyone else according to most polls.

    I’m laughing here. And really looking forward to testing your theory when the campaign heats up.

    Mr. Mandate is not well-loved by Tea Partiers.

  13. Adam X (Run Rick Run!) Says:

    It’s the kooky Conservative Evangelicals that don’t support him

    And I’d watch that coming from a Mormon who just about an hour ago suggested women should have their right to vote rescinded.

    A cynical evangelical might think that you think the wife should stay at home, barefoot and pregnant with the other wives. I’m sure you don’t want to go that far, right?

  14. CraigS Says:

    Adam X
    Doesn’t the Rasmussen Poll show Romney and Bachmann in a dead heat at 26 % each among Tea Party voters ???

    CraigS

  15. Adam X (Run Rick Run!) Says:

    Rasmussen has a history of overestimating Romney support in the 2008 elections. And part of his support is name ID.

  16. Craig For Huck Says:

    15, Exactly, Adam.

  17. PabloZed Says:

    Rasmussen was terrible in 2008 if I recall.

  18. CraigS Says:

    I’m confused. Who has a poll that is worth anything ? Zogby ???

    CraigS

  19. asparagus Says:

    I think most people support the goals of the tea party, just disagree with the tactics and the candidates they put up. I’ve been listening to Bill Bennett lately. He seems to get it, that its about the art of the possible. The people I hear on talk radio think they have a mandate to govern. They don’t. Obama got smacked down last election. That didn’t give the tea party licence to put up their most extreme and unqualified candidates. Everywhere they put up an extreme and unqualified candidate like O’Donnell, they lost. Put up a Scott Brown type in a liberal seat and you win.

  20. marK Says:

    Craig:“I’m confused. Who has a poll that is worth anything ? Zogby ???”

    Why, Craig, I’m surprised at you. The only polls that are worth anything are the ones that agree with your point of view. Surely you knew that?

    :-) :-D :-)

  21. Riccardo Says:

    Asparagus…could not agree more. Very good.
    I am a Freedom Works member, and deeply comitted to Romney’s successful candidacy. I am not alone…

  22. asparagus Says:

    Romney has Bachmann’s back. Contrast this to Pawlenty’s weaselly comment.

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/59518.html

  23. Adam X (Run Rick Run!) Says:

    Pawlenty is being kind of a jerk there – but Pawlenty knows it’s do or die. Mitt doesn’t need Iowa and so he can appear more magnanimous. In fact, it’s probably better if Bachmann doesn’t fade fast because Mitt will need her to siphon support away from Perry in South Carolina.

    Because South Carolina will again be the ball game.

  24. Jonathan Says:

    #19:

    Absolutely. You can’t run and elect a Jim DeMint in places like Massachusetts. It simply can’t be done. So nominating a candidate like that to run in places like the Bay State is political stupidity. You can have conservative, even Tea Party-like candidates win, but they have to do more than say no. Look at Marco Rubio here in Florida. Not only a strong conservative, but somone who could also get things done for Florida. If he had been as far-right and crazy as say Sharron Angle or Christine O’Donnell, we would be talking about Senator Crist.

  25. Craig For Huck Says:

    22.

    Thank you, Mitt. Tim, get lost. Or go after ObamneyCare like I asked you to in the first place months (even years!) ago.

  26. Jonathan Says:

    #22:

    Smart move on Romney’s part. He takes Bachmann’s side in this and he ingratiates himself with the hard-core right. He also looks like a front-runner who’s trying to keep the GOP as one big happy family.

  27. PabloZed Says:

    I don’t think Romney is the frontrunner anymore. Bachmann has already caught him and perhaps more importantly, she is in position to post points first.

  28. Greg Says:

    I can see Mitt win Nevada, New Hampshire and Florida, without necessarily winning South Carolina and Iowa. Florida is heavy on independents. Oh, and the new Idaho caucus will actually be before Florida as well.

  29. Jonathan Says:

    #28:

    Independents are not allowed to vote in Florida primaries. Only registered Republicans get to vote in our primary.

    That being said, I think Romney, Huntsman and Pawlenty are the types of candidates who can do well in appealing to the wide coalition of voters that make up the Florida Republican Party.

  30. Adam X (Run Rick Run!) Says:

    If Bachmann wins Iowa and then she manages to poll within single digits of Romney in New Hampshire then she’s definitely the front runner because she will beat Mitt in South Carolina.

    The only thing that would change that calculus would be Perry – who needs to pee or get off the pot pretty soon.

  31. Adam X (Run Rick Run!) Says:

    No one cared about Nevada in 2008 because 26 percent of caucus goers were Mormon and nearly 100 percent of that group supported Romney.

    For the same reason no one is really going to care about Nevada this year either.

  32. Greg Says:

    PabloZed, how has Bachmann caught Romney? Look at the early states of Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina & Florida. Romney has solid leads in all but Iowa.

  33. Massachusetts Conservative Says:

    27

    Wishful thinking of the highest order.

  34. Adam X (Run Rick Run!) Says:

    That being said, I think Romney, Huntsman and Pawlenty are the types of candidates who can do well in appealing to the wide coalition of voters that make up the Florida Republican Party.

    Perry too. Because half of Florida is essentially like Alabama and Perry has proven appeal to Hispanics. Especially if Mitt is his major opponent, Cubans in south Florida will reject Mitt (like they did last time because of his immigration rhetoric) in favor of Perry. Pawlenty probably won’t even be around for Florida and I don’t see Bachmann making much of a connection with latinos.

  35. Jonathan Says:

    #31:

    Nobody cared about Nevada because it was on the same day as the South Carolina primary. All the candidates except Romney were stumping in the Palmetto State, so it isn’t surprising that everyone ignored Nevada. Also, Romney got 51% of Nevada caucus-goers so to say Romney won just beacuse of Mormons is a vast oversimplification, and just not true. Romney won because there was no one else campaigning there.

  36. Greg Says:

    Bachmann won’t do as well in South Carolina as Iowa. Iowa is in her backyard. She’s not a southerner

  37. Greg Says:

    Nevada will matter a lot because it will have it’s own day this year, and it will be the first Western state.

  38. Adam X (Run Rick Run!) Says:

    Assuming Bachmann wins Iowa, Romney needs a very convincing win in New Hampshire. If Bachmann is nipping at his heels and he barely wins, and then loses SC he’s in trouble.

    On the other hand, if Romney can post a double digit win in New Hampshire and battle Bachmann or Perry to a tie in SC then he *might* be able to survive. Winning South Carolina is the only way he wins the nomination for sure.

  39. Jonathan Says:

    #34:

    The part of Florida that is like the rest of Dixie, North Florida, has a very tiny population and not enough to win the state. Romney did best in Duval County (Jacksonvile), which is also in N. Florida.

    The Cuban vote was split between the two moderates last time; John McCain and Rudy Giuliani (whose best showing was Miami-Dade County). Romney also did very well in Collier County (Naples), agin also in South Florida.

    The Sunshine State will be decided by the I-4 corridor. In 2010, 46% of the votes cast in Florida was in the I-4 corridor. You win here and don’t bomb everywhere else, you win Florida.

  40. Adam X (Run Rick Run!) Says:

    Romney got 51% of Nevada caucus-goers so to say Romney won just beacuse of Mormons is a vast oversimplification, and just not true. Romney won because there was no one else campaigning there.

    Well they are sort of related. Yes, it’s true that Romney didn’t get to 51 only because of Mormons – but he knew and everyone else knew that he started off at 26. Because of that no one else bothered to compete.

    And Wyoming had its caucus on its own day too. No one cared about Wyoming at all.

    Republicans put a lot of stock in SC because it looks an awfully lot like the Republican Party as a whole and is a good metric for deciding overall support. That’s why it’s been decisive in the nominatine process since Reagan.

  41. Craig For Huck Says:

    Yep, Adam. Your 30 & 31 is the way it is. And should play out nicely for Michele (without Perry dividing up the conservatives)..

    Romney would then have to pull a miracle in Florida.

    The Bachmann momentum will THEN be huge. That’s not to say that Romney won’t go on all the way to Tampa with tons of delegates in his pocket. It’s just that Michele will have that exact number she needs to celebrate.

    In that case, I hope she chooses Huck to balance out her lack of government executive gravitas.

    I know Mitt would very likely pick Huck. 10 1/2 > 4

  42. Greg Says:

    Adam X, it’s not the only way Romney can win. He has a huge lead in Florida and has been there a ton. There is not a lot of time to campaign between SC and Florida. I don’t think SC is a make-it or break-it state by any stretch.

  43. PabloZed Says:

    #32 – Greg, Bachmann has caught Romney nationally in at least one recent poll, has a big lead in IA, and is even leading in PA where Romney was recently campaigning. I think we can all agree that Romney’s lead in SC is charmin soft.

    I agree completely with Adam’s analysis.

  44. Greg Says:

    A Bachmann/Huck ticket wouldn’t bring any new states or delegates, unfortunately.

  45. Adam X (Run Rick Run!) Says:

    39,

    Huckabee got upwards of 20 percent in Marion and Lake Counties and everywhere north. And as for Duval, Romney’s not running from the right this time. Now he’s Mr. Moderate.

    And yes, the Cuban vote was definitely split between two moderates – but those same Cubans are going to see television commercials of Mitt from his 2008 campaign in debates with Giuliani demanding that those Hispanics’ amigos return to their native country before becoming citizens. Good luck to Mitt in gaining support from them.

    Perry definitely has a very viable path in Florida.

  46. Craig For Huck Says:

    Greg,

    Since ’80 it has been. We’ll see if it continues to be. Romney should pray he breaks the 32 year streak.

  47. Jonathan Says:

    #42:

    Depends on the narrative. If Bachmann wins huge in SC, then it would scramble the race in Florida. Ditto Perry. Look at McCain’s win in 08. If Huckabee had won SC in 2008, Romney might well have won Florida. Or maybe Rudy would’ve done better? We just don’t know.

    However, if Romney comes in 2nd by a slim margin, then he could pull the better-than-expected card and use that to his advantage in Florida. The expectations game in South Carolina will be important to establishing momentum heading into Florida.

  48. Greg Says:

    Romney had a strong double-digit lead nationally on Bachmann in 3 of the last 4 polls. You sure love to cherry-pick. Romney has had a 8-12% lead in South Carolina in all of the recent polls down there. And Romney is competitive with Obama in all of the national polls, while Bachmann loses easily to Obama. It’s funny how you can grasp the one exception and ignore all of the reputable polls.

  49. PabloZed Says:

    #46 – Yup. Just to be precise, its IA or NH + SC that has been determinative.

    I don’t know why anyone would risk everything on the chance it doesn’t determine the nominee this time.

  50. Greg Says:

    Charleston has become a big-business city over the last decade. Romney has a ton of support in South Carolina, and he has a ton of endorsements lined up for the right moment

  51. Greg Says:

    Nobody would risk everything on the chance it doesn’t play a part this time, which is why Romney had a 9% point lead in last week’s poll os SC. The local political leaders in SC will by and large endorse Romney.

  52. Jonathan Says:

    #45:

    Huckabee got 19% in both Marion and Lake county last time. And yeah, he did well in the Panhandle, but like I said, there just aren’t a lot of people in N. Florida. Huckabee won 4 counties in Florida, 4 more than Rudy, yet he still came in 4th behind Hizzoner. Banking on the Panhandle to win is a bad strategy.

    Cubans are different on immigration than other Hispanics. They came as refugees, not illegal immigrants. They’ve also integrated into Florida very well. They are just a different group than your typical Hispanic from, say Puerto Rico or Mexico.

  53. Craig For Huck Says:

    If Mitt raise expectations high in SC like some of his fans are trying to do here, THEN loses big to Bachmann (or Perry) in the Palmetto State, he’s toast in Florida.

    Thems the rules ;)

  54. Adam X (Run Rick Run!) Says:

    50,

    We heard all that in 2008 too. He was also leading in polls in South Carolina in 2008 too.

    The only way Romney wins South Carolina is if he has a big and conclusive win in New Hampshire. Even then it’s going to be a battle.

  55. Craig For Huck Says:

    ..since ’80

  56. Adam X (Run Rick Run!) Says:

    52,

    I’m not banking on the Panhandle. I think we’re talking past each other here. I’m not using Huck’s win as a baseline for Perry.

    My sense is that *anywhere* Huckabee got close to 20 percent in Florida (which is MORE than just the Panhandle) is going to be receptive to Perry. Plus Perry is going to have a big money advantage Huckabee didn’t have and can exploit Mitt’s bone-headedness among the Cubans.

    If Perry can dominate in the north, post a respectable showing in the suburbs and I-4 and outreach to Latinos then he can definitely win.

  57. PabloZed Says:

    A couple things to consider when arguing that SC may not play its traditional roll: 1) It would not be a positive story if the first time a woman wins IA and SC that suddenly it doesn’t matter and 2) South Carolina, indeed the south as a whole, has an interest in SC maintaining its kingmaker status.

  58. Adam X (Run Rick Run!) Says:

    South Carolina, indeed the south as a whole, has an interest in SC maintaining its kingmaker status.

    Absolutely true. The south won’t and should not have to relinquish it’s kingmaker status to northern states that have zero ability to deliver their electoral votes in ANY given election.

    A good year like 2004? We still can’t win states like Pennsylvania or Michigan.

    The northeast and west coast don’t deserve a say in our nominating process.

  59. hamaca Says:

    45. Adam X

    And yes, the Cuban vote was definitely split between two moderates – but those same Cubans are going to see television commercials of Mitt from his 2008 campaign in debates with Giuliani demanding that those Hispanics’ amigos return to their native country before becoming citizens. Good luck to Mitt in gaining support from them.

    So how many illegal immigrant Cubans would you say there are in Florida?

  60. Craig For Huck Says:

    Right on both points, Pablo. I feel for Mitt thoiugh. It’s gotta be so hard running against a Michele Bachmann with her historical quest gaining such massive momentum after a blowout win in Iowa and a second place in New Hampshire…

    Going into SC, then Florida. How negative on her can Romney even go?

    He remembers how he overdid it last cycle leaving bad feelings AND this time it’s a five foot nothing, Tea Party, conservative radio, media, and Fox News favorite, straight talkin’, bold and courageous little woman. (With a former gold gloves boxer who used to coach Reagan at her side.)

    Sounds like a couple of bulldogs fighting a poodle.

    Uh-oh.

  61. Adam X (Run Rick Run!) Says:

    59,

    Not sure – but more importantly, it didn’t make any difference to legal Cubans in 2008 when that group shunned Romney.

  62. PabloZed Says:

    #60 – I agree it will be hard going after Bachmann. The guys in the race should study Obama v Clinton and see what he did right and wrong. I would stick to her record and public statements.

  63. Jonathan Says:

    #59:

    Cubans who flee from their homeland aren’t illegal immigrants, they are political refugees and classified as such. There’s a big difference.

  64. CraigS Says:

    Mark 20
    Just exactly what is your basic problem, guy. Off your meds today ? I’m not trying to pick a fight with you. What’s your issue. I’ve supported lots of candidates whose polling has been in the tank for as long as you’ve been on this planet.

    CraigS

  65. hamaca Says:

    63. Exactly my point. The number of Cuban illegal immigrants in the U.S. is zero–as long as they make it to land, they’re good to go. So it is unlikely that any lack of support for Mitt in the Cuban community was due to his stance on illegal immigration.

  66. hamaca Says:

    64. CraigS–I’m venturing a guess that Mark was engaging in a bit of sarcasm and not directed at you, but rather those who are too selective in which polls they accept.

  67. Jonathan Says:

    #65:

    Sorry, I misread the tone of #59. My apologies.

  68. CraigS Says:

    Sorry Mark,
    That was stupid remark in 64. Mea Culpa, amigo. It’s been a long day here and I totally misread your remarks . Even so, my response was stupid.

    CraigS

  69. Spenza Says:

    #33 MC, yeah, that guy sounds like he walks around permanently with his head in the sand.

  70. Franklin Says:

    Nobody would risk everything on the chance it doesn’t play a part this time, which is why Romney had a 9% point lead in last week’s poll os SC. The local political leaders in SC will by and large endorse Romney.
    ===========================================
    The poll also showed that Palin, Bachmann, and other conservatives combine for 49% which is equal to the 49.6% or so that Haley got. Haley got no support from local political leaders.

    The south has generally gone the way of SC. Candidates that do well in SC do well in the south. McCain struggled to a win in SC and struggled in the south. SC is the largest prize in the first 4 states and Winner Take All. SC could very well be as big a prize as Florida.

  71. Ci2Eye Says:

    #56 Adam,

    I am a Southerner. Mike Huckabee is a Southerner too and he appeals to folks in the rural parts of Alabama, Tennessee, Georgia, South Carolina and the rest of the southern states. He speaks like, acts like and understands other Southerners. Rick Perry is a Texan. We don’t view Texans as one of us. Trust me on that. Whatever successes Huckabee had in the South do not automatically apply to Perry.

  72. Jaxemer11 Says:

    Lots of crack smoking among the RomNots tonight, as usual. It’s funny when they try to use history to prove something that isn’t historically accurate … And deny all the history that says Mitt is the heavy favorite right now. That must be some good crack.

  73. Jaxemer11 Says:

    I would bet money that Bachmann doesn’t come close to winning the nomination. Where do you guys get whatever it is your smoking?

  74. Fredrick Says:

    #73. How do you come to that conclusion? I hope you are right.

  75. PabloZed Says:

    Jaxemer – tell us where in the last 30 years someone lost either IA or NH and SC and got the nomination. What part is historically inaccurate?

    And don’t think we southerners aren’t aware why Romney wants to win the nomination without IA, SC or much of the south. Its reverse bigotry to avoid white christian evangelicals simply because they believe differently. That is what its all about and running to FL is not going to save him.

  76. hamaca Says:

    75.

    Its reverse bigotry to avoid white christian evangelicals simply because they believe differently.

    LOL! You mean the ones he reached out to in 2008, but who proclaimed we can never allow a Mormon near the White House or that a vote for Romney is a vote for the devil? What was that one guy’s name? Warren Cole Smith? Gee, maybe if he’d just pay them all one more visit, explain where he’s coming from, that Mormonism really isn’t that bad, they’d suddenly have a change of heart and enthusiastically support him and tell all their congregations how much they admire Mitt. How about the ones that are praying over Perry and telling him it’s a calling from God that he run? Perhaps one stump speech is all it’d take.

    Mitt spent a lot of time and effort in 2008 reaching out to these people. What’s the saying about continuing to do the same thing, but expecting different results? I’m sure he’ll be visiting us here in the South when the time’s right to talk with those of us who actually want to hear what he has to say, supporters or not.

  77. Anthony Dalke Says:

    I’ve got to say, I pay pretty close attention to the numbers for Obama in these head-to-head polls. Candidates with lower name recognition, like Pawlenty, typically hold Obama to around the same top-line number as Romney, but in this one, Mitt clearly comes out ahead.

    If this continues, it will become apparent that Romney has a stronger position against the President, and he and his followers will have a clear argument to make.

  78. Jaxemer11 Says:

    75 – Iowa has never been good at predicting the eventual nominee. Iowa is irrelevant.

  79. Jaxemer11 Says:

    75 – OK I’m done with you! There is no evidence of this supposed “reverse bigotry” you speak of and no evidence that Mitt wants to ditch the south. You are an idiot!

Join The Community


Sponsored Ad

Meta

Site Meter

Recent Posts

Sponsored Ad

Categories

Archives

Search

Blogroll

Site Syndication

Main