Michigan Set To Move Up To Jan. 15

Chuck Todd is confirming that Michigan looks set to officially move its primary up to January 15.

According to sources inside both parties, the two state parties in Michigan have agreed to move the state's primary -- legislatively -- to Jan. 15. This is a compromise date out of respect for Democratic Sen. Carl Levin, who really wanted to move the primary to Jan. 8. Others wanted the primary on Jan. 22 as a way to, essentially, play ball with the other early states. There was a nice window being created for a Jan. 22, 2008 event. But by moving to Jan. 15, this will put pressure on the other early states to either entertain a December event or lobby the two national parties to not sanction Michigan at all.

The state senate is going to move a bill next week and it will be legislatively driven; the state will pay for the primary, not the two parties.

I guess this will pretty much lock New Hampshire in on January 8. A couple questions remain.

First, when will Iowa hold its caucus?  Iowa has a law that its caucus must be at least 8 days prior to any other state's contest. As Jerome says below, if Iowa is truly determined to remain in 2008, they may just change that law and move somewhere during that first week of January, a move that will likely make new Hampshire's head explode.

The next question is whom does this help? The South Carolina GOP's recent move of its primary up to January 19 was widely seen as favorable to Fred Thompson who is polling strongly there. On the contrary, a July poll has Thompson tied for third in Michigan, with Giuliani ahead. Assuming these trends continue, will Michigan dilute the impact of South Carolina and give Giuliani a boost at Thompson's expense or will South Carolina still be seen as the prime mid-January GOP prize? And of course, what about poor Nevada? On the Democratic side, will Michigan now emerges as the post-New Hampshire destination rather than Nevada? The same July poll has Clinton ahead by 7 in Michigan. Will we see more attention given to the state by Obama and particularly Edwards, as Michigan is a state where one can easily see more of an economic populist message taking off?

Update [2007-8-17 17:42:23 by Todd Beeton]: How could I forget this much more recent Detroit News/WXYZ-TV poll.

Democrats (w/o Gore):

Clinton 45
Obama 26
Edwards 16
Republicans (w/Thompson and Gingrich):

Thompson 22
Giuliani 19
McCain 16
Gingrich 15
Romney 12
Thompson is doing quite well here actually and could potentially get a real mid-January boost even if he's unable to take Iowa and New Hampshire. Interestingly, the new Nevada poll has Romney 10 points up over Thompson and Giuliani who are tied. The one-two punch of South Carolina and Michigan is looking like a real speed bump for Romney.

Tags: 2008 Presidential election, Michigan primary (all tags)



Re: Michigan Set To Move Up To Jan. 15

Some one needs to stop this insanity.  At this rate, Iowa will be holding it's caucuses before Thanksgiving. Is there anyone at the DNC trying to do anything about this?

by whitbreadale 2007-08-17 12:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan Set To Move Up To Jan. 15

Amen and amen. It looks like Iowa will almost definately have to be in December now, what with its state law.

by arkansasdemocrat 2007-08-17 03:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan Set To Move Up To Jan. 15

State law also says their caucus is to be in the year of the general election.

by Jerome Armstrong 2007-08-17 05:29PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan Set To Move Up To Jan. 15

I'm beginning to wonder if this is leading us to the prospect of a brokered nomination on the Dem side. With so many states so bunched together, its possible, even likely, that no one comes out of Feb 5 in the position Kerry achieved by that point last time.

by desmoulins 2007-08-17 04:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan Set To Move Up To Jan. 15

VERY doubtful.  This thing is decided Feb. 5.  

by georgep 2007-08-17 05:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan Set To Move Up To Jan. 15

The insanity is actually having a law requiring your contest to be 8 days before any other state.  

This is the system.  The states control their electoral processes and some of the other 48 have decided they want more of a voice on the national scene.  This is Iowa and NH's problem, not Michigan, South Carolina, or Florida's.

by Double B 2007-08-17 04:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan Set To Move Up To Jan. 15

The system has broken down.  This is anarchy.  States shouldn't be able to keep moving the goal posts within the same election cycle. Something drastic needs to be done, and if that means denying IA and NH their delegates, so be it. Howard Dean needs to grow a pair, because this is getting way out of hand.  Enough is enough.

by whitbreadale 2007-08-17 09:39PM | 0 recs
as I commented below

Edwards looks a lot smarter now moving out of Nevada (which has very few delegates)

by TarHeel 2007-08-17 12:47PM | 0 recs
I wonder

I think that might come back and bite Edwards, and Obama if he doesn't campaign there, in the ass.  I can see Nevada voters and even Unions being pissed off. I know he hasn't "given" up on Nevada but reallocating staff because Nevada isn't "important" is a bad perception to set. This isn't really Obama or Edward's fault but its a bad message to send nonetheless.

I wonder if Clinton continuing to campaign in Nevada, or Obama if he continues, will help them pick up Nevada in the general election.

by world dictator 2007-08-17 12:54PM | 0 recs
Re: I wonder

Clinton is campaigning hard in NV. President Clinton will speak on behalf of Mrs. Clinton tonight in NV.

by areyouready 2007-08-17 12:56PM | 0 recs
Re: I wonder

really? Where?

by world dictator 2007-08-17 12:58PM | 0 recs
Re: I wonder

Reno convention center. Tonight at 5:00 pm Nevada time. The Hill and Bill Show.

by hwc 2007-08-17 01:06PM | 0 recs
Re: as I commented below

No candidate looks smart pulling out of states like Florida and Nevada that could flip from Republican to Democratic in the general election.

At the end of the day, the point of this process is to identify the candidate who can beat the frickin' Republicans in the electoral college tally. Flippin' red states blue is the whole enchilada.

by hwc 2007-08-17 12:56PM | 0 recs
Re: as I commented below

To be fair he didn't pull out of anywhere, he just scaled back somewhat to reallocate people to critical early states while NV's position is in flux. Some people make it sound like he closed down all his offices and all the staff are packed up and traveling in a long box filled convoy on the interstate out of town.

by Quinton 2007-08-17 01:04PM | 0 recs
Re: as I commented below

Redeployment. Cut 'n run. Peace with Honor. Call it what you want.

by hwc 2007-08-17 01:08PM | 0 recs
Re: as I commented below

Just noticed this comment. You really are quite the conservative military hawk, aren't you?

by Quinton 2007-08-31 01:43PM | 0 recs
Re: as I commented below

Look folks, Edwards did not move out of Nevada. I've been in the office since the move and the total # of staffers there has not diminished in a way anyone would recognize unless you knew everyone on the staff (I do not work for the campaign but support it). In fact, the moves had already taken place when the news broke on Wed (no doubt leaked by the Clinton campaign, which is observing the Edwards office in Iowa very closely) there had actually been reporters in the office Tuesday who had not noticed. These same reporters came back Wed after the AP story ran to ask if the campaign was shutting down.

The problem, as always, is that we have very few political reporters in this state and only one or two in Las Vegas who actually go out and get stories. So a story datelined from DC by noted AP hack Nedra Pickler runs on the wires, and everyone accepts it as gospel.

By the way, for anyone who is sure the state is locked up for Hillary, go ahead and believe that. The poll shows that she hasn't gained any ground in months even though she's gotten great press. At least 3 other campaigns have been much more active  in their voter ID efforts than Clinton has been here.

Clinton's strategy here appears to be focusing on winning over "opinion leaders" and building an infrastucture of activists (they claim 600 volunteers at this point) rather than racking up "1s". Its a smart strategy because no one is sure about how large the caucus electorate will be so no one is confident about the win number. Still, its unclear how strong their support is even among those identified opinion leaders and activists who are supporting Clinton. If the tide shifts, I think they may find that their support is a lot softer than they think it is. Clinton is likely to get help from at least one of the two Las Vegas dailies (the one that is more influential with Democrats, the Sun, is owned by the former President's college roommate), which could help her down the stretch if its close here.

The most active field effort to date has been Richardson, which explains his movement in that poll. If the calendar does cause other campaigns to pull out, Richardson benefits because this is his strongest turf and he's got a lot of support.

I've got less exposure to the Obama campaign here but they've been pursuing voter ID actively and have won some big supporters, and they just went up with Spanish-language radio ads. I see no reason not to believe Obama isn't in a good position to win here.

I like Edwards' chances here a lot, because whenever I talk to people, if he's not the first choice he's number 2. In a caucus where only 3 candidates at most are likely to be viable in most precincts, thats going to help him a lot. And the issues that are going to matter here, when people start paying attention, are Edwards' issues -- jobs, wages and workers' rights; energy and cutting carbon emissions; health coverage.  I also think the obsession with the UNITE-HERE local 622 endorsement is driven by lazy journalism; its such an easy story to write.

The shift in the calendar could really help Edwards if Michigan, which is not only a caucus state but a rather closed caucus, does move up to an early date. It would give the industrial unions, if they want do to it, a chance to really put pressure on Clinton to commit to some strong positions on trade, pension protection, etc. Michigan used to be a state known for backing outsiders (Wallace way back in 72, Carter, Jackson in 88) but I suspect that holding a caucus so early, on such short notice, will greatly favor whichever candidate gets the backing of Levin and the UAW. If he does pull off Iowa, then Michigan allows him another option besides NH.

by desmoulins 2007-08-17 03:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan Set To Move Up To Jan. 15

I think the Edwards camp has pretty good ties in MI that already knew about this prior to their NV move?  

by Jerome Armstrong 2007-08-17 12:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan Set To Move Up To Jan. 15

My "respect for Democratic Sen. Carl Levin" has increased.

by Jerome Armstrong 2007-08-17 01:01PM | 0 recs
Respect for Sen. Levin


Levin's activism for progressive causes goes back to his college days at Swarthmore College. Here's an expert from an essay he wrote for a book, "The Meaning of Swarthmore".

In 1954, Sen. Joseph McCarthy was riding high, intimidating our nation with his scare tactics and his attacks on our political freedoms. His excesses included both abusing the unique subpoena power he had as chairman of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations and pillorying people who exercised their Fifth Amendment privilege before his subcommittee.

A resolution censuring Sen. McCarthy was introduced in the Senate, and the country became embroiled in the debate preceding the vote. McCarthy's supporters around the country launched a petition drive opposing the censure and planned on delivering a million signatures to our nation's capital. Some of my classmates and I decided to solicit signatures supporting the censure of Sen. McCarthy. We collected about a thousand signatures in the Swarthmore dining room in just a few days. We then drove down to Washington in our old jalopy, to deliver our petitions to Sen. James Duff of Pennsylvania.

By chance, we arrived on the same day the million pro-McCarthy signatures were delivered in an armored truck. Newspapers across the country carried two pictures side by side. One picture showed armed guards, guns drawn, delivering the pro-McCarthy petitions. Next to it was the photo of six cherubic-looking Swarthmore students exercising their right to petition their senator. David wounded Goliath in a media battle that was unplanned and lucky.

We learned an important lesson about how massive resources in politics can sometimes be countered by a relatively small-scale effort. It also taught us about the role of dumb luck in politics (one I've seen repeated time and time again!).

The censure petition was adopted by the Senate, in part because of the courage of some senators in McCarthy's own party. That vote illustrated how important it can be at times to differ with the majority of one's own party, if the merits dictate, and in doing so, how the direction of a nation can be affected.

Ironically, history placed me, for the second half of 2001 and all of 2002, in the same position Sen. McCarthy held when we delivered those petitions-at the helm of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. When investigating the activities of Enron, Chase, Citibank, and Merrill Lynch (issuing subpoenas, watching the witnesses before me "take the Fifth"), I often thought of how Sen. McCarthy abused the powers now at my disposal, and it sensitized me to the potential for abusing power, as well as using it for the public good.

A second political event that occurred in l954 was the fall of North Vietnam to the Communists, who had defeated the French. Most of the University of Hanoi, faculty and students alike, picked up and fled south to Saigon in the hope of maintaining their academic freedom. (The Vietnam War, in which the United States would became deeply involved, was not yet on the horizon.) Several classmates and I, with students from a few nearby colleges, decided to hold a book drive to help stock a library that had to be built from scratch in Saigon. We collected thousands of books and raised the funds to ship them to Vietnam. That Swarthmore experience reinforced a belief I had long held that Americans are willing to help those in need around the world. American ideals and idealism are powerful tools for good, under the right leadership, and are readily available to be called on for great causes, such as addressing hunger or the AIDS epidemic.

http://www.swarthmore.edu/news/meaning/l evin.html

BTW, one of the other students involved in driving the McCarthy petitions down to Washington was Michael Dukakis.

by hwc 2007-08-17 01:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Respect for Sen. Levin

That's fascinating stuff.

Senator Levin's father had a prominent law firm back in the day (in partnership with his brother, whom the Detroit courthouse is named after).  Back in those days, Jewish lawyers often had to form their own law firms as the established firms wouldn't have them; the free market had a way of punishing those hiring policies, as it turns out.

Perhaps of interest only to me, my late aunt worked as a legal secretary for Sen. Levin's father, for many a year.  Sometimes he would bring his two kids into work, and little Carl and Sandy would run around the office raising hell.  (Sander Levin is now a Congressman from the Detroit area.)  My aunt would invite them to play with her typewriter in order to get them to stay in one place for a little while.

Sometimes, when I see Sen. Levin on TV, I try to picture that scene.  It's very difficult, to tell you the truth.

by Steve M 2007-08-17 02:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Respect for Sen. Levin

There's a great scene in a documentary about the Tigers 1st baseman and outfielder Hank Greenberg in which the two Levins describe listening to the [dont' remember the year] game when Greenberg's homer wins the pennant for the Tigers and running around the house screaming their heads off. Their mom thought the house must be on fire picked up the phone to call the Fire Dept.

by desmoulins 2007-08-17 04:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Respect for Sen. Levin

The Tigers won the pennant in '45, so Sen. Levin would have been about 10.  Not sure if his brother is younger or older.

by Steve M 2007-08-17 05:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Respect for Sen. Levin

The part that Levin didn't describe in the essay was the action taken by Swarthmore College. McCarthy rammed through a federal regulation that barred federal student aid for any student who failed to sign a "loyalty oath".

Swarthmore's students, as you might guess, had little use for signing McCarthyite loyalty oaths. The Board of Managers felt that requiring a political oath should not be a condition for student aid. So, they voted to withdraw the College entirely from the federal student aid program and made up the difference in student aid out of their endowment funds. The College remained out of the federal aid program until Kennedy took office and repealed the loyalty oath regulations.

All of which earned Swarthmore a nickname from none other than Spiro Agnew -- the Kremlin on the Crum, a reference to the Crum Creek that runs through campus.

Anyway, my initial point was that people should be a little more respectful to men like Carl Levin, whether you agree with him on every vote or not. Many of these politicians have spent their entire lives working for progressive causes and civil rights. It drives home the point that maybe we should stop and consider that maybe these guys have forgotten more about government than most of us will ever know and often have solid reasons for their stands on issues. Very little in government lends itself to easy black or white answers. That's why I don't hold the AUMF votes against Clinton, Biden, Dodd, and Edwards. I am much more interested in the candidates' entire careers than I am in any particular policy issue white paper.

by hwc 2007-08-17 04:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Respect for Sen. Levin

I'm a Swarthmore grad, who was also pleasantly impressed with Levin's contribution to the 'Meaning of Swarthmore' booklet (part of a massive fundraising drive).

Thanks also for the further history about S'more and the loyalty oath.  I feel compelled to add one more piece of context, though.  Swarthmore is a Quaker college, and a tradition for practicing Quakers is to oppose swearing oaths of any kind. (The workaround for oath-requiring situations in modern life is to "affirm" statements.)  No question that there was and is a current of very progressive and left politics at the college, but the institutional defiance would have been unlikely to impossible without the Society of Friends' anti-oath tradition, which assured the support of wealthy, not-liberal Quaker alumni and donors.

Back to Levin:  No one gets to live forever off what they did in the past.  Levin was a crucial voice for "getting the Iraq vote out of the way" in 2002, a terrible misjudgment.  Sure, he voted against the war resolution, but he was green-lighting the presidential candidates and members up for election in 2002 to vote for it.

Just last month, Levin was also crucial in pushing Lieberman's truly horrific "feed us war rationales against Iran every 60 days" legislation on the Democratic caucus, achieving a 97-0 vote that would have been impossible without his enthusiastic support.

It could be that Levin sees that vote as "taking Iran off the table" as an electoral club for Republicans against Dems.  I'm convinced it will instead be part of Congress' participation in laying the groundwork for another illegal war of aggression.

by Nell 2007-08-18 01:26PM | 0 recs
Michigan poll WITH Gore

Jerome, since you even put "w/o Gore" on your poll, you should have told the whole story. With Gore it looks like this:

Al Gore - 36%
Hillary Clinton - 32%
Barack Obama - 16%
John Edwards - 8%

And this is with Gore NOT an announced candidate, never having campaigned, etc. This race is clearly Gore's for the taking should he decide to enter. And if he's serious about solving the Climate Crisis before it is too late (which I think he is), he HAS to enter. Good Gore diary on DKos Rec list right now: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/8/17/ 20730/1624

by Jim in Chicago 2007-08-18 05:44AM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan poll WITH Gore

If you have any doubts about Gore or just need a refresher, sit down with a cup o joe and/or a snack for about an hour and listen to this inspired speech. I promise you won't be disappointed.


by sammy1 2007-08-18 10:04AM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan Set To Move Up To Jan. 15

Michigan as a strong union state and a caucus state (unions are great at the ground game and a cacaus is big time ground game) is a place that I've always thought that Edwards could do well in, but until it acted on it's standing threat to move up it wasn't early enough or large enough delegate wise to make much of a difference. Now it stands to. Interesting.

This tied in with NV could be a boost for Edwards. Let's say first in Iowa, maybe close second in NH and then a win in MI and NV would put SC seriously in play. Ideal world and it's months away and all, but just thinking.

by Quinton 2007-08-17 01:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan Set To Move Up To Jan. 15

The "deal" in Michigan is for a statewide primary.

Statewide primaries in large expensive media states do not help Sen. Edwards. In fact, they kill him. No money.

The more the big primary states frontload, the better for Clinton. She's the front-runner. She has money. And, she can dominate the free media in any state (and nationally) by scheduling a Hill and Bill Show.

by hwc 2007-08-17 01:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan Set To Move Up To Jan. 15

No money?


He'll have raised $40MM by the end of the year.  Plenty of money.

Don't swallow things with hooks attached.

by DrFrankLives 2007-08-17 01:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan Set To Move Up To Jan. 15

And Detroit is certainly no more expensive than Boston.

by DrFrankLives 2007-08-17 01:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan Set To Move Up To Jan. 15

$40 million doesn't buy what it used to.

And, that's assuming Edwards actually does raise $40 million. I suspect his fundraising is getting a little more difficult as the race becomes more clearly defined.

Clinton and Obama are on track to raise $100 million. The thing that really hurts about the front-loaded big state primaries is that you've got to be able to spend your whole wad between now and January.

by hwc 2007-08-17 01:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan Set To Move Up To Jan. 15

40mm is plenty  and he will have it.

And he can always pull a Kerry and uncork a loan to himself.  

by DrFrankLives 2007-08-17 01:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan Set To Move Up To Jan. 15

as has been said- context matters. if this were say ny state- sure, but each state has its own special flavor. some are more money intense than others. some are retail politics.some labor. some have higher black vote than others. etc. all of which matters. some are caucus, some are primaries, etc. all are specific

by bruh21 2007-08-17 01:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan Set To Move Up To Jan. 15

Michigan is a very strong union state, but the African-American vote is also huge for the Democrats, and Edwards seems to draw very little black support.  He can make some noise in Michigan, but I'd be surprised if he finished first.  You'd assume Hillary, who can take a big chunk of both the union vote and the black vote, would be the favorite.

NAFTA doesn't seem to hurt Hillary at all with union constituencies, as you can see by the fact that Gore won the last Michigan poll.

by Steve M 2007-08-17 02:34PM | 0 recs
keep in mind who edwards's C.M. is

David Bonior

I think he knows a thing or two about retail politics in Michigan.  Don't you?

by DrFrankLives 2007-08-17 01:02PM | 0 recs
Black electorate

The AA electorate is about 38% of all primary democratic voters.....Obama should follow suit , pull out of NV and relocate in Detroit MI...

Obama also has strong grassroots in Detroit.

by JaeHood 2007-08-17 01:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Black electorate

I disagree, Obama has the money and volunteers to play in all the early states. While Edwards has to make these type of choices Obama can beef up his Michigan campaign without hurting his NV campaign.

by nevadadem 2007-08-17 04:34PM | 0 recs
I'm glad

I think Michigan is an interesting state, more representative of the Democratic party. Plus, the upper midwest has been an important battleground.

by John DE 2007-08-17 01:29PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan Set To Move Up To Jan. 15

Fred Thompson doesn't appear to be serious about running for President, and his supporters are getting tired of being hung out to dry, so how the primary calendar roulette affects his chances is irrelevant.

by Lex 2007-08-17 01:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan Set To Move Up To Jan. 15

Doesn't Romney own Michigan?  I thought his Dad was governor there.

by DaveB 2007-08-17 01:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan Set To Move Up To Jan. 15

ya, he was but that was way back in the 60's ..    that was before vietnam, the riots, the disentegration of the auto industry...  politics and opinions have changed so much since then.   I've been in personal contact with several dozen michigan residents in the last year and not once has the family name surfaced in any of those discussions.

Although, my contacts are generally not living in geriatric communities.. so....

by soros 2007-08-17 02:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan Set To Move Up To Jan. 15

The Romney family is prominent in Michigan, although many aren't old enough to remember his father as governor.  The family name is well-known; when Mitt's brother got a divorce, his wife kept the family name in order to run for statewide office (she got hammered by Carl Levin).

Mitt Romney would make things interesting in the general election but I think at the end of the day this remains a pretty blue state.  I don't think any other Republican has a shot in the general.

by Steve M 2007-08-17 02:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan Set To Move Up To Jan. 15

George Romney-- Mitt's father-- was governor 1963-69, and Romney makes a big deal about being a "native son" when he comes here.

It's helped him a lot with the institutional support, but I'm not sure it'll translate into votes. Forty years in politics is a long time, and the Romney name hasn't been a big thing since then. Mitt's ex-sister-in-law Ronna Romney ran for Senate in 1996, but that's it. So I don't think the dynasty thing will apply here.

by Fitzy 2007-08-17 02:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan Set To Move Up To Jan. 15

Mitt's brother Scott was almost Attorney General, but he lost a power struggle for the nomination (and he probably would have lost to Granholm anyway).  So the Romney name counts for something, but obviously, it isn't all-powerful.

by Steve M 2007-08-17 03:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan Set To Move Up To Jan. 15

George Romney is a name that won't be spoken much on the campaign trail. He sealed his political career when he stated that he had been "brainwashed" in Vietnam into believing the war was worth fighting.

by hwc 2007-08-17 04:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan Set To Move Up To Jan. 15

Of course, Gore is leading in MI, which is just another early state (like NH) in which Gore would achieve instant front-runner status if he were to run. So Michigan moving up is good news for Gore.

by Kal 2007-08-17 01:57PM | 0 recs
Perspective from MI

Michigan county parties have been preparing for this date (and several others in December and January, along with the previously planed Feb date) The County Parties were instructed to secure caucus sites and train caucus site managers for all of these dates. I have to believe the event would remain a caucus, because the state of Michigan does not have money in the budget for a January and August primary election.

Michigan Dems also allow voting by mail and secure online voting.

Michigan is also one of the more diverse states, with a huge African American and Arab American population.

by JordanLFW 2007-08-17 02:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan Set To Move Up To Jan. 15

Romney would just about clinc the nomination if Mich goes 3rd. If he wins Iowa NH and Mich the momentum would be huge.

by nevadadem 2007-08-17 02:45PM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads