5.29.2008

Incoming!

It's hard to come up with an objective measure of which candidates are being attacked the most, but this ought to be a reasonably interesting proxy.

I looked at the press releases from five sources: the Clinton campaign, the Obama campaign, the McCain campaign, the RNC, and the DNC, and counted the number of times that McCain, Clinton or Obama was mentioned in the headline of the press release. (For Obama press releases, which tend to have vague headlines like "Barack Obama Statement on Iran", I also counted hits in the press release abstract). Then I sorted the hits by the month of the campaign from September onward.

These figures were tallied by hand and so may be slightly imprecise, but you should certainly get the general idea. Also, this should be obvious, but the idea was to account for attacks only, so I didn't count instances in which say a DNC press release mentioned Clinton, or a McCain release mentioned McCain himself.



Let me also give you that data in tabular form, and then a few observations.



Observations:

1. It's manifest that the big break in the Democratic campaign came in February. Obama took just 10 incoming hits in January, but 51 in February, as both the RNC and the Clinton campaign significantly ramped up their efforts against him.

2. Clinton's incoming hits peaked in January, and have since dwindled basically to nothing. She hasn't been the subject of either an RNC or a McCain press release since March. Overall, since March 1st, Obama has taken 151 incoming hits, McCain has taken 144, and Clinton has taken 9.

3. The Obama campaign does very, very little attacking (quite possibly too little), at least in the form of press releases. That doesn't mean that they won't go negative, but they prefer to wait for an opportunity to counter-punch and/or to do so somewhat surreptitiously. But what they won't usually do is to try and dictate the course of a news cycle with an attack.

4. In contrast, the Clinton press shop is always operating at a fever pitch, and much of that involves attacking their opponents. During March and April, the Clinton press shop was hitting Obama nearly once a day. But the Clinton campaign has also delivered considerably more hits on McCain than the Obama campaign has (at least through its press releases). Also, note that Clinton has considerably cut down on her hits on Obama for the past several weeks.

34 comments

BR said...

Thanks for the analysis.

It's yet another reason that general election polls for Clinton are meaningless at this point - if any of her opponents thought she still had a chance, they'd be attacking her too, driving down her numbers. But they're not.

Meanwhile, Obama's getting hit from both sides, driving down his numbers. (I'm not saying it's unfair - I believe that once Clinton drops out, Obama will gradually recover among Clinton-supporting Dems over a month or two.)

Jonny said...

I thought that the Clinton campaign was far more negative but I was careful and dismissed that thought as irrational partisanship. But now it turns out I was being rational with this evidence.

LM said...

Great work Poblano - confirms what I've always suspected, but so nice to see it in 'black and white'!!! Cheers.

Michael said...

Interesting idea, and probably qualitatively correct. I'm not sure how you correct for things like this:

"United States Senator Barack Obama issued the following statement today after learning of the death of the police officer guarding Senator Clinton's motorcade in Dallas"
-February 22, 2008

"Today, as Senator Barack Obama continues his "Stand for Change" tour, supporters introduced him at events in Williamsburg, Coralville, Clinton, Davenport and Muscatine."
-December 28, 2007

Clearly these are not attacks, but I'm guessing - and please correct me if I'm wrong - that they get counted as attacks in your scheme.

hosertohoosier said...

There is a better methodology that could be employed here. It is explained in the article "Extracting Policy Positions from Political Texts using Words as Data" in APSR May 2003. Authors are Laver, Benoit and Garry.

What it essentially does is take one set of text as a baseline, and estimates the probability that another text is of the same type. It has been used on party manifestos, where you take say, the Conservative party platform and estimate the probability that other, future documents are functionally similar or not, so as to find ideological change. It can be used for speeches and, I would guess, press releases. Essentially you would use some attack release as a baseline and estimate the probability that various other press releases were attacks, so as to weight them. This would also help capture campaigns that snidely slip the odd negative remark in the back.

PS: on the subject at hand, Obama doesn't need to attack Clinton, since the press does that job for him. His campaign has very successfully adopted a "jump in front of buses" approach - trying to narrow possible discourse so that Clinton must either go negative or engage in a personal qualities debate (like the change-experience debate that dominated the early race, which she couldn't win).

Anonymous said...

hosertohoosier:

"His campaign has very successfully adopted a "jump in front of buses" approach - trying to narrow possible discourse so that Clinton must either go negative or engage in a personal qualities debate (like the change-experience debate that dominated the early race, which she couldn't win)."

Could you please explain what you mean by this? Google turned up no results for "jump in front of buses" relating to rhetorical techniques and it's not at all clear what you mean or how Obama would be able to limit discourse or force Clinton's hand in any way.

Anonymous said...

I got up this morning to write to protest your reports on Clinton doing better than Obama in the general election, and was heartened to see this. It explains half the story. Clinton has been much more on the attack in personal ways against Obama than vice versa. Sure, there's been press and blogosphere attacks on Clinton, but for the past two months, those have been pretty evenly spread between the two. My point is that the Republicans would surely be attacking Clinton on a number of personal integrity issues were she to win the nomination and voters who are not reminded of these - pardons, biling records, campaign finance issues, mishandling of health care reform - are inclined to say they'd vote for her in the GE.

Second, she has ginned up her supporters to be resentful of the outcome. Part of this is the natural response of a losing campaign, but the Clinton's are taking this overboard - attacking the process as unfair, and generating resentment amongst women and lower income whites, who are thus angrily saying they'll vote McCain in the GE. It's a self-serving and dangerous (for Democrats) ways of conducting a campaign, but it's inflating her numbers relative to Obama in the GE in all the polls - which is why the polls are worthless. Why aren't you making that point?

I'm a lifelong Red Sox fan, and I never believed they'd beat the Yankees until they finally did. the Clinton's feel like the Yankees to me. Since they're not out of it yet, I hate to see her get a free pass on these issues.

Pablo

hardheaded liberal said...

Another analysis showing that the Republicans think that Obama will be a tougher candidate to beat. If the RNC thought that Clinton would be harder than Obama to beat in November, the RNC would have been attacking Clinton at least as often as it has attacked Obama.

Brandon said...

hardheaded, they were attacking Obama because he was the front runner. Obama is clearly the weaker GE candidate.

french imp said...

Those charts are very interesting.
They confirm my subjective impressions.

Would it be possible to display a diagram showing the attacks *from* a given candidate (or entity)?

Anonymous said...

Great analysis!

Brandon - Sen. Clinton looks like the stronger GE candidate today, in May, because in the matchup polls he loses more Democrats to McCain than does Clinton. That might continue into the general, but I wouldn't bet on it.

Also, it would be nice if the Clinton campaign could stop setting up the argument that he stole the election. We had a primary. The rules were clear. If he gets more delegates, he wins. Period.

Anonymous said...

Brandon...Republicans are currently boosting Hillary more than they're boosting McCain. To think that they would do so because they think she's the stronger opposition to McCain is absurd.

They still want to go up against Hillary, but their virtually panic-stricken that it looks like Obama is going to get the nomination, and they're doing whatever they can to stop it.

It's all backfiring though, just as Hillary's efforts are. Those old politics don;t work in a YouTube world.

VM said...

RE: Michael @ May 29, 2008 3:30 AM

He said this above:
"Also, this should be obvious, but the idea was to account for attacks only, so I didn't count instances in which say a DNC press release mentioned Clinton, or a McCain release mentioned McCain himself."

So, he filtered out articles/releases that weren't attacks.


RE: brandon @ May 29, 2008 6:03 AM

It is untrue that Obama is the weaker GE candidate. It seems you've fallen for the Clinton Spin.

Anonymous said...

This just goes to show that this race has been over since Wisconsin. The media may not have noticed, but the Republicans did.

Another Mike said...

Great analysis. It certainly lends support to my belief that Clinton's general election poll numbers are artificially inflated due to the lack of attacks from Obama and Republicans that she would be certain to face if she were the nominee. Not to mention the fact that Obama's general election poll numbers already have built in the resentment factor of Clinton supporters saying they won't vote for him (fanned by Clinton), while the opposite is not nearly as strong (but would be if supers were to steal the nomination from Obama).

On one other issue, however, I must disagree with some of my fellow Obama supporters. While I agree that Republicans would much rather face Clinton in the fall than Obama, I do not think RNC press releases is good evidence for this proposition. Their press releases seem to track whoever has the front runner status. Otherwise, you would have to say the RNC feared Clinton more than Obama in late 2007, since more attacks were directed at her in that time frame.

Anonymous said...

Excellent analysis. Thank you.

Beth in VA said...

This can't be highlighted enough. Clinton would be hammered much more in the polls if Obama and the RNC weren't being so easy on her. Imagine the terrible ads that could be made against her that aren't being aired.

Yet she has been attacking him, and his supporters all along. I guess that what I take personally--all the attacks that we are naive and cultists to support him. It turns us off to no end.

Anonymous said...

Excellent analysis! Now if Hillary would just stop her whining...

Anonymous said...

If Hillary was the front runner or what they feared most, the Republicans would bury her. Obama has gone easy on Clinton because he'd like to be able to pull the party together starting next week.

If the skeletons of Hillary's past that Rove & Co would dig up had been used against her, there's no way she'd be doing as well in the polls as she is. There's more than one dirty issue available to tag Clinton with for every day of the general election. The GOP swiftboaters would be like kids in a candy store if she took the nomination.

The other thing that the Clinton polls don't show would be the backlash if after winning the delegates, Clinton stole it.

Pat Newcomb said...

Wow, what a bunch of skewed self-serving trifle this is! - How clever of you to only track press releases? That's not where the action is. It's in those wonderful stump speeches going all the way back to July 2007.
Here's what I call an attack - "she'll do or say anything to get elected" (as if he didn't)
This is not an attack --
"My opponent has less experience in government and politics than I do" - That's just simply the truth.

You're going to have to do better to convince anyone who wasn't already looking for justification of their own point of view in your fancy distortion of the facts.

Anonymous said...

Pat Newcomb:

Obviously, this only measures a single vehicle of attack. Doesn't pretend to do otherwise.

But I'd love to see your research into this question using the text of speeches of both candidates! Would you also include off-the-cuff remarks?

Gus

Anonymous said...

Pat Newcomb:

"Here's what I call an attack - "she'll do or say anything to get elected" (as if he didn't)
This is not an attack --
"My opponent has less experience in government and politics than I do" - That's just simply the truth."

If we're going to be fair then let's be fair. "she'll do or say anything to get elected" is an attack but it's also true of Clinton.

"My opponent has less experience in government and politics than I do" doesn't appear to be an attack but its truth is debatable. Obama has held elective office for more years than Clinton has and has held important positions in Illinois politics for many years before that. Clinton, on the other hand, has only her marriage and campaigning for republicans prior to her current seating in the senate.

As she often does, she says "experience in government and politics" here rather something simple like "time in governement" because she is allowing herself to later define what exactly she means if anyone ever calls her on it. "Experience" and "politics" are both intentional vagueries on her part which make her statement ultimately useless as something substantive and purposed solely to smear her opponent in relation to herself, not actually give the public something insightful upon which to make an informed decision. Only by including her marriage and her time volunteered for republicans can you come to the conclusion that she has spent more time in "politics and government", and it's still not clear that that amounts to more "experience".

Remember, these people have all gone to law school so they know the importance of specificity in language. It is more instructive to look at what they are specifically saying (as long as they aren't misspeaking) than what they imply their intent is.

Anonymous said...

I've been hoping someone would make this point in the wake of all this noise about Clinton's relatively strong polling at the moment. I'd also add that while the hits to McCain have been not hugely less than the hits to Obama, I suspect that they've had less impact because the spotlight has been squarely on the Democratic nomination battle, and so headlines with the Democrats in them are more likely to register more.

Other commentors have noted that the polling also likely reflects the current bitterness on the part of Clinton supporters. Clinton's argument about her relative strength completely fails to incorproate the fact that she'd be facing no small amount of bitterness herself if she somehow managed to get the nomination at this stage. It's easy now for Obama supporters to say they'd hypothetically vote for Clinton in a Clinton-McCain match up. But that doesn't begin to measure how much disaffection would set in if the superdelegates bypassed the guy who won the majority of elected delegates to get to Clinton. Hard to gauge what the impact of that would be.

In short, I really don't think there's any evidence that Clinton actually would run better in November. The two factors I've just mentioned easily erase her relatively small advantage. And I would tend to think she'd actually run worse. Depending on exactly how she managed to wrest the nomination from Obama at this late stage, she might run MUCH worse.

Anonymous said...

Something slightly on topic concerning media narratives for each candidate for those of you interested:

http://journalism.org/node/11266

The data looks to end in early March so I think it probably misses a lot of the more recent trends (ie more positive views of Clinton on Fox News) but it might give evidence for or against a lot of theories people are throwing around.

jon said...

Excellent analysis, very informative -- it's great to see the scope of your analysis steadily expanding. Thanks as always!

Jackie said...

I've always figured the RNC is more afraid of Hillary, since they say (or had been saying) that they were eager to face her... that's just classic reverse psychology, isn't it?

I'd be very curious to see a similar analysis of MSM coverage. My impression has been that the Obama campaign has not done a great deal of attacking because they've been able to let the media go negative, while the Clinton campaign has not had that luxury. I'm surprised that the disparity is so great, though. Nice analysis!

信次 said...

情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,美國aneros,rudeboy,英國rudeboy,英國Rocksoff,德國Fun Factory,Fun Factory,英國甜筒造型按摩座,甜筒造型按摩座,英國Rock Chic ,瑞典 Lelo ,英國Emotional Bliss,英國 E.B,荷蘭 Natural Contours,荷蘭 N C,美國 OhMiBod,美國 OMB,Naughti Nano ,音樂按摩棒,ipod按摩棒,美國 The Screaming O,美國TSO,美國TOPCO,美國Doc Johnson,美國CA Exotic,美國CEN,美國Nasstoy,美國Tonguejoy,英國Je Joue,美國Pipe Dream,美國California Exotic,美國NassToys,美國Vibropod,美國Penthouse,仿真按摩棒,矽膠按摩棒,猛男倒模,真人倒模,仿真倒模,PJUR,Zestra,適趣液,穿戴套具,日本NPG,雙頭龍,FANCARNAL,日本NIPPORI,日本GEL,日本Aqua Style,美國WET,費洛蒙,費洛蒙香水,仿真名器,av女優,打炮,做愛,性愛,口交,吹喇叭,肛交,魔女訓練大師,無線跳蛋,有線跳蛋,震動棒,震動保險套,震動套,TOY-情趣用品,情趣用品網,情趣購物網,成人用品網,情趣用品討論,成人購物網,鎖精套,鎖精環,持久環,持久套,拉珠,逼真按摩棒,名器,超名器,逼真老二,電動自慰,自慰,打手槍,仿真女郎,SM道具,SM,性感內褲,仿真按摩棒,pornograph,hunter系列,h動畫,成人動畫,成人卡通,情色動畫,情色卡通,色情動畫,色情卡通,無修正,禁斷,人妻,極悪調教,姦淫,近親相姦,顏射,盜攝,偷拍,本土自拍,素人自拍,公園露出,街道露出,野外露出,誘姦,迷姦,輪姦,凌辱,痴漢,痴女,素人娘,中出,巨乳,調教,潮吹,av,a片,成人影片,成人影音,線上影片,成人光碟,成人無碼,成人dvd,情色影音,情色影片,情色dvd,情色光碟,航空版,薄碼,色情dvd,色情影音,色情光碟,線上A片,免費A片,A片下載,成人電影,色情電影,TOKYO HOT,SKY ANGEL,一本道,SOD,S1,ALICE JAPAN,皇冠系列,老虎系列,東京熱,亞熱,武士系列,新潮館,情趣用品,情趣,情趣商品,情趣網站,跳蛋,按摩棒,充氣娃娃,自慰套,G點,性感內衣,情趣內衣,角色扮演,生日禮物,生日精品,自慰,打手槍,潮吹,高潮,後庭,情色論譠,影片下載,遊戲下載,手機鈴聲,音樂下載,開獎號碼,統一發票號碼,夜市,統一發票對獎,保險套,做愛,減肥,美容,瘦身,當舖,軟體下載,汽車,機車,手機,來電答鈴,週年慶,美食,徵信社,網頁設計,網站設計,室內設計,靈異照片,同志,聊天室,運動彩券,大樂透,威力彩,搬家公司,除蟲,偷拍,自拍,無名破解,av女優,小說,民宿,大樂透開獎號碼,大樂透中獎號碼,威力彩開獎號碼,討論區,痴漢,懷孕,美女交友,交友,日本av,日本,機票,香水,股市,股市行情, 股市分析,租房子,成人影片,免費影片,醫學美容,免費算命,算命,姓名配對,姓名學,姓名學免費,遊戲,好玩遊戲,好玩遊戲區,線上遊戲,新遊戲,漫畫,線上漫畫,動畫,成人圖片,桌布,桌布下載,電視節目表,線上電視,線上a片,線上掃毒,線上翻譯,購物車,身分證製造機,身分證產生器,手機,二手車,中古車,法拍屋,歌詞,音樂,音樂網,火車,房屋,情趣用品,情趣,情趣商品,情趣網站,跳蛋,按摩棒,充氣娃娃,自慰套, G點,性感內衣,情趣內衣,角色扮演,生日禮物,精品,禮品,自慰,打手槍,潮吹,高潮,後庭,情色論譠,影片下載,遊戲下載,手機鈴聲,音樂下載,開獎號碼,統一發票,夜市,保險套,做愛,減肥,美容,瘦身,當舖,軟體下載,汽車,機車,手機,來電答鈴,週年慶,美食,徵信社,網頁設計,網站設計,室內設計,靈異照片,同志,聊天室,運動彩券,,大樂透,威力彩,搬家公司,除蟲,偷拍,自拍,無名破解, av女優,小說,民宿,大樂透開獎號碼,大樂透中獎號碼,威力彩開獎號碼,討論區,痴漢,懷孕,美女交友,交友,日本av ,日本,機票,香水,股市,股市行情,股市分析,租房子,成人影片,免費影片,醫學美容,免費算命,算命,姓名配對,姓名學,姓名學免費,遊戲,好玩遊戲,好玩遊戲區,線上遊戲,新遊戲,漫畫,線上漫畫,動畫,成人圖片,桌布,桌布下載,電視節目表,線上電視,線上a片,線上a片,線上翻譯,購物車,身分證製造機,身分證產生器,手機,二手車,中古車,法拍屋,歌詞,音樂,音樂網,借錢,房屋,街頭籃球,找工作,旅行社,六合彩,整型,水噹噹,貸款,貸款,信用貸款,宜蘭民宿,花蓮民宿,未婚聯誼,網路購物,珠海,下川島,常平,珠海,澳門機票,香港機票,婚友,婚友社,未婚聯誼,交友,婚友,婚友社,單身聯誼,未婚聯誼,未婚聯誼,婚友社,婚友,婚友社,單身聯誼,婚友,未婚聯誼,婚友社,未婚聯誼,單身聯誼,單身聯誼,婚友,單身聯誼,未婚聯誼,婚友,交友,交友,婚友社,婚友社,婚友社,大陸新娘,大陸新娘,大陸新娘,越南新娘,越南新娘,外籍新娘,外籍新娘,台中坐月子中心,搬家公司,搬家,搬家,搬家公司,線上客服,網頁設計,線上客服,網頁設計,網頁設計,土地貸款,免費資源,電腦教學,wordpress,人工植牙,關鍵字,關鍵字,seo,seo,網路排名,自然排序,網路排名軟體,

平平 said...

^^ nice blog!! thanks a lot! ^^

徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 抓姦, 離婚, 外遇,離婚,

徵信, 外遇, 離婚, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信社, 征信, 征信, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 征信, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社,

平平 said...

^^ nice blog!! ^@^

徵信, 徵信, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 感情挽回, 婚姻挽回, 挽回婚姻, 挽回感情, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信, 捉姦, 徵信公司, 通姦, 通姦罪, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 捉姦, 監聽, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 外遇問題, 徵信, 捉姦, 女人徵信, 女子徵信, 外遇問題, 女子徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 徵信公司, 徵信網, 外遇蒐證, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 感情挽回, 挽回感情, 婚姻挽回, 挽回婚姻, 外遇沖開, 抓姦, 女子徵信, 外遇蒐證, 外遇, 通姦, 通姦罪, 贍養費, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信公司, 女人徵信, 外遇

徵信, 徵信網, 徵信社, 徵信網, 外遇, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信, 女人徵信, 徵信社, 女人徵信社, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 女人徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社,

惠玲 said...

花蓮租車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車公司,花蓮租車,花蓮一日遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮旅遊,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,租車,賞鯨,花蓮旅遊,花蓮泛舟,花蓮賞鯨,泛舟,溯溪,花蓮租車,花東旅遊,花蓮租車,花東旅遊,花蓮租車,租車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮旅遊租車,花蓮租車,花蓮旅遊,租車,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,花蓮美食,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,租車,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,花蓮租車公司,花蓮賞鯨,花蓮租車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮旅遊地圖,花東旅遊,花蓮租車

惠玲 said...

吉安慶修院,花蓮七星潭,花蓮旅遊景點林田山,花蓮石藝大街,花蓮鯉魚潭,花蓮太魯閣國家公園,太魯閣砂卡礑步道,合歡山武嶺,花蓮太魯閣九曲洞,花蓮七星柴魚博物館,花蓮漁港,花蓮瑞穗牧場,台東旅遊景點,花蓮玉里安通溫泉,蓮花池步道,花蓮立川漁場,太魯閣國家公園,豁然亭,台東旅遊,七星潭風景區

惠玲 said...

花蓮租車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車公司,花蓮租車,花蓮一日遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮旅遊,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,租車,賞鯨,花蓮旅遊,花蓮泛舟,花蓮賞鯨,泛舟,溯溪,花蓮租車,花東旅遊,花蓮租車,花東旅遊,花蓮租車,租車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮旅遊租車,花蓮租車,花蓮旅遊,租車,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,花蓮美食,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,租車,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮租車,花蓮租車,花蓮租車公司,花蓮賞鯨,花蓮租車,花蓮旅遊,花蓮旅遊地圖,花東旅遊,花蓮租車

酒店上班請找艾葳 said...

艾葳酒店經紀公司提供專業的酒店經紀, 酒店上班小姐,八大行業,酒店兼職,傳播妹,或者想要到打工兼差打工,兼差,或者八大行業,酒店兼職,想去酒店上班, 日式酒店,制服酒店,ktv酒店,禮服店,整天穿得水水漂漂的,還是想去制服店上班小姐,水水們如果想要擁有打工工作、晚上兼差工作兼差打工假日兼職兼職工作酒店兼差兼差打工兼差日領工作晚上兼差工作酒店工作酒店上班酒店打工兼職兼差兼差工作酒店上班等,想了解酒店相關工作特種行業內容,想兼職工作日領假日兼職兼差打工、或晚班兼職想擁有快速賺錢又有保障的工作嗎???又可以現領請找專業又有保障的艾葳酒店經紀公司!

艾葳酒店經紀是合法的公司工作環境高雅時尚,無業績壓力,無脫秀無喝酒壓力,高層次會員制客源,工作輕鬆,可日領現領
一般的酒店經紀只會在水水們第一次上班和領薪水時出現而已,對水水們的上班安全一點保障都沒有!艾葳酒店經紀公司的水水們上班時全程媽咪作陪,不需擔心!只提供最優質的酒店上班,酒店上班,酒店打工環境、上班條件給水水們。心動嗎!? 趕快來填寫你的酒店上班履歷表

水水們妳有缺現領、有兼職缺錢卡奴的煩腦嗎?想到日本留學缺錢嗎?妳是傳播妹??想要擁有高時薪又輕鬆的夜間兼職工作,打工機會和,假日打工,假日兼職賺錢的機會嗎??想實現夢想卻又缺錢沒錢嗎!??
艾葳酒店台北酒店經紀招兵買馬!!徵專業的酒店打工,想要去酒店的水水,想要短期日領,酒店日領,禮服酒店,制服店,酒店經紀,ktv酒店,便服店,酒店工作,禮服店,酒店小姐,酒店經紀人,
等相關服務 幫您快速的實現您的夢想~!!

freefun0616 said...

酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,

,