But here's the other side of the finding that asking national mood questions can skew survey results in Obama's favor. If the mere suggestion that the country might be on the wrong track is enough to send scores of independents into the Obama column, imagine what a concerted effort to frame the discourse that way might do. This is something that Hillary Clinton had started to tap into toward the end of the primary process. Screw hope -- things are bad right now -- and we need solutions.
Obama's "change" message, by contrast, has oftentimes been a little bit too abstract. Here's the messaging that Mssrs. Axelrod and Plouffe need to work on: Iraq's fucked up, the economy's fucked up, health care's fucked up, the environment's fucked up, and all John McCain can say is to "stay the course". If that's the mindset that voters take into the ballot booth with them in November, Obama will win quite convincingly.
It isn't simply a matter of trying to frame McCain as the next Bush. That allows voters to let McCain off the hook if they conclude that McCain isn't the next Bush, and McCain's favorables are strong enough that many voters won't bite on that one. Rather, it's a matter of trying to portray McCain as being out of touch because he doesn't recognize that these things like health care are problems when 70 or 80 percent of the country does.
6.27.2008
Right Track
@ 2:12 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
56 comments
Presenting himself as the agent of change when we're on the wrong track is part of what Obama needs to do. The other thing he needs to do is to defend himself against the charge that he's too inexperienced to keep the nation safe. I believe his number one priority should be to pull together a national security team full of experience and credibility and to take the experience question off the table. Then he can talk about the fact that he can put us on the right track.
Excellent point, Nate. For a while, the GOP has been doing an excellent point framing their stories, whereas the Dems have been doing their best to run on "at least we're not the GOP." In 2006, that worked, but in 2008, it won't work with McCain the "Maverick," since he's already perceived as being an independent (even if his pesky voting record indicates otherwise). I love the summary of the necessary message, and I hope that the Dems do what you suggest. Oh, and maybe they can infiltrate the polling in order to woo people over to a certain side...
Obama's strength is on the issues. McCain's strength is on "personality." It's a sad day for American Democracy if/when someone can walk to the White House ignoring the issues important to the people but claiming their own personal greatness.
I certainly hope the issues win out.
In defending their poll, somebody from either Newsweek or the LA Times poll defended their results and suggested that they sometimes pick up "trends" before other pollsters do. At the time, this seemed like a very odd claim to make - polls aren't supposed to search for "trends" that haven't manifested themselves yet. But I wonder if this isn't what this person meant: if voters have already figured out that the country's on the wrong track but they just haven't locked into the idea that this means they support Obama. If so, I suspect we'll start to see over the next few weeks.
Obama's strength is on the issues. McCain's strength is on "personality."
I disagree. McCain's horrible rictus in the lime jello speech is haunting me. And whenever he talks, I feel like I'm being condescended to. "There there, I know Iraq, healthcare, the economy and the environment look bad to the little people. But Daddy McCain knows best. Now run along."
I think you'd need a forceful, soft spoken even, very credible Veep to paint the malaise...
Jim Webb is perfect for this. No rosy DLC crap... Jim Webb again is the Veep Personified.
Thanks for unlocking the election. this is a very insightful discovery and I hope the Obama camp reads it...
what's your traffic from Chicago lately look like?
Political scientists like to say that campaigns are about informing voters and getting them to vote the way they are already destined to vote. This is why presidential forecasting models, while imperfect, are better at predicting final election outcomes than polls of real people 4 and 5 months out. Over 80% of people thinks the country is screwed up. And I have no doubt that Obama, with a talented staff and loads of money, will be able to convey that he represents change AND relief better than McCain does. McCain's only hope is that he can convince most of these shaky low-information voters (the ones that change their mind bases on how you ask the question, for instance) that they can't trust Obama or that he's too big of a gamble on national security (and certainly these things are tied in with race biases for some of these voters, but probably not most). That's what this campaign will be about. McCain's hill is much steeper to start with, but it's not impossible.
So one of the biggest events of the post-primary period took place today with Obama and Clinton in Unity, NH, looking like a ticket (even if that isn't what happens).
Yet no post on this? Might there be tea leaves to read here?
I agree...Obama would be making a big mistake to not ask Jim Webb to be his running mate. But the recent news that his team ruled out choosing a VP based on swing states was troubling to me; I think the idea that a VP pick can roll up a state automatically is ridiculous, of course, but that almost seemed to be implying that Obama would pick a running mate from a "safe" state...like, say, New York by way of Arkansas. :/
I introduced my father to this site and showed him how Obama led by about 5% nationally, and had about a 70% chance at this point of winning it all. Yet, he continued to show pessimism and point to Dukakis in '88, who led by about these totals in June. What is there to say that will make this campaign different than '88 when the GOP successfully painted Dukakis as an out-of-touch liberal?
Have you ever read Freakonomics? There is an interesting point in that book that relates to how David Duke performed in the U.S. Senate election in Louisiana in 1990. Their theory very much relates to your study of the Bradley Effect. Nice work.
Obama should choose Strom Thurmond, that would counteract both McCain's age superiority and the southern white racist vote.
I apologize that one was not appropriate, I forgot Thurmond died a few years back, should be more respectful, meant to be funny but it was not.
I was thinking of Robert Byrd not Thurmond, please mentally substitute his name in for me.
Earth to liberal bloggers: No one likes Jim Webb as a VP pick in the real world. He's great on paper, but horrible in person. He is a loose cannon, undisciplined, used to be a Republican when he worked in the Reagan administration. Not to mention his problems with women in the past.
Well this is one thing that has been confusing me from the start of this campaign. if bush has a 28% approval rating, and only 2% thinks the economy is "very good" (that was about 70% in clinton's last year by the way) it would seem to me this would be a no brainer. maybe i'm just too smart for my own good, connecting the dots too much.
Both clintons had this technique they'd use in speeches that to me seemed very powerful. they would take right wing phrases such as "family values," and suggest it is more important to "value families."
one thing you can find if you look at some hillary clinton transcripts is this type of thing:
----
I have met too many people without health care, just a diagnosis away from financial ruin. But I’ve also seen the scientists and researchers solving the medical mysteries and finding the treatments and cures that are transforming lives.
----
or
----
I’ve seen the struggling schools with the crumbling classrooms and the unfair burdens imposed by No Child Left Behind. But I have also met dedicated and caring teachers who use their own savings to buy supplies and students passionately engaged in the issues of our time, from ending the genocide in Darfur to once again making the environment a central issue of our day.
----
I think that kind of rhetoric is really good, and strikes the proper chord with the low-infos we need to talk to.
oh and new one from hillary today:
"Senator McCain and President Bush are like two sides of the same coin and it doesn't amount to a lot of change." hehe
People, it is going to be Obama-Clinton. The Obama campaign has purposely been downplaying this so that it is more of a surprise when it happens. The only people who don't like Clinton on the ticket are Republicans that aren't voting for Obama anyway and core Obamaites, who will be supporting him because he is the nominee (!).
Polls show a unified Democratic base for Obama with Clinton and a unified GOP base unified for McCain too. Given the party i.d. this year, that is almost automatically a Democratic win. Then, a recent poll showed more independents moving toward Obama when the ticket was Obama-Clinton vs. McCain-Romney than when the choice was just Obama v. McCain.
Today's event was a clear roll-out to get people used to it. It's happening. It's good, and exciting. They are complements to one another in substance and style. A winner.
New New Jersey Poll:
http://publicmind.fdu.edu/helpobama/tab.html
Obama up by 16%
Asking the directional question first does make the LAT poll sound like a push poll.
SUSA's latest on Ohio came out. Curious finding on the running mate possibilities:
a. More undecideds
b. Obama goes from +2 to a range from 0 to -4.
c. It seems the Dem VP choices (Strickland, Webb, McCaskill) all hurt Obama's chances there.
Testing VP choices right now doesn't make sense.
I hope you're wrong, Justin, because I find Hillary Clinton to be an insufferable witch. I don't think she's an agent of change; I think she's one of the most infamous icons of an incompetent, corrupt political establishment that has been entrenched in Washington for far too long.
If not Webb, I'm hoping for Kathleen Sebelius or Claire McCaskill. Isn't that what the Obama campaign is supposedly about - hope?
To mikeel, the reason undecideds go up is that most Ohioans have never heard of Claire McCasskill, Jim Webb, etc. It's like the questions on Hillary Clinton as veep: Do you want Hillary Clinton as VP? People have an answer because they know who she is. If you asked, will Claire McCaskill make you more or less likely to vote for Obama, the answer to that question would be loads of 'don't know' and 'undecided.'
Michelle would never let Barack endanger his life expectancy by having Hillary as VP (even Peggy Noonan wote in the WSJ that Hillary would poison Barack's tea in the White House). Moreover, even if Barack stayed alive, having the Clintons hovering over him would cast a pall over his presidency.
Obama will never pick Shrillary.
And WTF is up with the boner SUSA seems to have for Mike Bloomberg?? Hardly anyone else is seriously floating his name as even a long-shot possibility for either Obama or McCain's running mate. The very fact that SUSA is suggesting him for either candidate would appear to be proof perfect as to why he doesn't belong anywhere near Observatory Drive.
Bizarre.
Ret. Gen. Clark will be the VP. Watch his videos on YouTube, and you'll be impressed. He can fortify the "national security" aspect of the race.
You may know a lot about polls, but you know very little about politics -- or you are too blinded by your own leanings to see the truth. Iraq, contrary to your assertion , is not "f**ked up" things are actually going well there and now more than ever the people will begin to perceive this and not want to abandon a nation with oil reserves as great as Saudi Arabia to chaos. Especially when the stuff is at $140/BB.
That brings us to the other horn of Obama's dilemma: gas prices. He is opposed to drilling, yet the American people want us to drill more in OVERWHELMING numbers. According to the polls. Ahem!
What is a candidate to do?
These twin issues are the ones that McCain can hammer on between now and election day and use them against the exotic Barack Obama of whom many are wary and convince them that as a matter of policy his is unfit for office putting aside his debonair personality and questionable associations.
To anon @15:39. I've noticed that too. This blog is silent on polls regarding policy (I'll add the gas tax to the list). Obama is popular now, but he is getting on the wrong side of some issues. So is McCain. But this site had nothing about that.
Mark: First of all, I don't think any one in public life is a 'witch', but I don't really want to get into a fight with you over offensive nomenclature.
Sebelius and McCaskill are like weak versions of Hillary Clinton, red herrings being floated out there. Imagine the reaction from many undecided Clinton/Reagan Democratic white working-class men if one of these two are the picks. As far as they are concerned, Hillary Clinton is probably the only woman they know of they think is ready to be president. And then Obama picks a different woman who is less qualified than a James Jones or Wesley Clark (not even thinking about Hillary Clinton)? No, bad politics.
I forgot to add. Picking a woman will also go against his 'change' message because it smacks of pure politics. Why pick a woman not named Hillary Clinton this year other than because Hillary Clinton narrowly lost?
Obama is in a bind. Picking a man and some Clinton women will sit it out. Picking a woman not named Clinton will turn off a lot of working-class men.
I'm not 100% convinced that Obama is picking Clinton, but the event today feels like a roll-out. And why else would Hillary Clinton be SO on board with Obama now? Either she is dumb, and thinks she's getting picked when she is not--or it's a done deal, but only those 2 know it.
The MysteryPollster debunks McCain campaign's effort to debunk the LA Times poll. Please read it:
http://www.nationaljournal.com/njonline/mysterypollster.php
To anon @ 3:06: I agree. Does anyone here trumpeting Webb know more than 3 women who are enthusiastic about him as veep (assuming they know ALL about him)?
I don't think today's event was a "rollout" of a Clinton VP bid, even though it was certain to create that sort of media buzz. What else could Clinton and Obama do?
It's in each of their interests to support the other; Hillary has to support Obama wholeheartedly to have a future in the Democratic party (and especially so if Obama is the next President), and Obama needs to pay respect to the person who almost beat him and got 18 million votes.
And if you believe that Hillary and Obama have sincere policy preferences (and I do, for the most part), it's in Hillary's interest to support Obama for President to further the things she cares about. Did anyone really expect that she would give a tepid endorsement today?
Today is part of the natural progression of things, and it worked beautifully. Hillary Clinton is indeed a critical and indispensible part of history and the election going forward. But that part isn't necessarily as VP.
Is this stuff at the Hotline just a much simpler way of doing things? If there isn't any state-level poll data, why not give the states to the candidate's party that won in '04, mixed in with the regression?
http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/
2008/06/the_electoral_c.html#more
To VitoF: No, but there are other things to. Yesterday, at the private meeting with donors, one asked about the VP, and Hillary Clinton waved the question away so Obama didn't have to answer it.
That was a private meeting. It would not have been weird for her to just stand there and have him answer the question. There's a roll-out going on.
And I agree with in terms of their mutual self-interest. But I think, at this point, it is more in Obama's interest to play nice with her. If he loses, he's going to be another John Kerry or Mike Dukakis, thrown to the side. Ted Kennedy did fine after he completely blew off Jimmy Carter in 1980. So she could be a bit less becoming toward him and still do well. She's got a following, much like Ted Kennedy did back then (and still does).
I am buying what your selling. That makes sense and I hope the boys are dropping by.
And as to Clinton as VP, I despised the idea..until today. It does screw the "change" theme, but he's not even really using that anymore. He is in a very traditional knife fight with Krusty. Clinton would do one important thing, she would suck the balance of the oxygen out of the room. Krusty will become invisible. I think he still could do better, but I don't hate the idea anymore.
Hey, when did Virginia turn a pale red?
It was blue yesterday.....
Nate said "If the mere suggestion that the country might be on the wrong track is enough to send scores of independents into the Obama column, imagine what a concerted effort to frame the discourse that way might do. This is something that Hillary Clinton had started to tap into toward the end of the primary process. Screw hope -- things are bad right now -- and we need solutions."
Hillary shows Obama how to hit this theme against McCain in her Unity speech.
Clinton Says McCain=Bush
Just a side comment-
Look at the huge spike on the distribution chart at about 295. I know I've seen them before, and sometimes at curious places, but I don't think I've seen one this big. Just another request to have some sample maps for those highly probable (if even 1 or 2% likely) outcomes.
Also, with the time dependence now kicking in, will we start seeing more spikes? You would think that with the passage of time, the swing states would be whittled down to two or three, causing the bell curve to look more like a castle roof. The flip side of course is that if Obama actually makes good on his effort to flip the "big sky" states and the number of swing states increases.
Justin,
Contrary to what you seem to believe, NOT all Democrats love Hillary or think she is ready to be president. I know plenty of Dems and indies who are lukewarm on Obama but hate McCain and Hillary. I'm one of those indies.
I don't think it would turn off working-class men at all if Obama invited another woman to be his running mate. And Sebelius has been mentioned as a potential candidate for as long as Hillary has; there was some speculation that she might run in 2004 or be Kerry's running mate, but obviously that didn't pan out. And I think McCaskill has a much more genuine warmth than Hillary has. Hillary is, like her husband, a consummate politician who calculates all her words and actions very carefully; I don't get that vibe from Webb, Sebelius, or McCaskill nearly as much.
I am disgusted with Hillary for the way she ran her campaign for the final months of the primary season, whipping up bizarre and irrelevant statistics to claim some sort of edge over Obama, winding up a robot army of angry feminists to shriek that the Obama camp was "sexist" every time they criticized the Clinton campaign (or even just won a contest), trying to strongarm the DNC into seating the Florida and Michigan delegations despite having agreed in 2007 that those primaries would and should be invalidated, dismissing the caucuses as "unrepresentative", etc. And after seeing the way she run that campaign - with extreme dishonesty and underhanded tactics - I don't want her anywhere near the chain of succession to the presidency. Remember Dick Cheney?
I agree with you that the way this "unity" campaign is being set up, it does look increasingly likely that we will see an Obama/Clinton ticket. But I certainly won't be happy about it, and I know plenty of other people who won't be happy about it, and a lot of people - myself included - might be unhappy enough about it to just stay home on Election Day.
I have this tiny, faint, glimmering hope that this election won't mean more politics as usual. If Obama rolls Hillary Rodham Clinton out as his running mate, that little hope will be snuffed out just like that.
A request for Nate,
Nate, Love your blog, thanks for all the work. Is there any chance you could go back through the current Senate races and rank them according to winnability for the Dems? (especially in light of the expected extra Dem turnout this year for Obama). I think there is a decent chance that we can get to 60 Dem Senators this year and would be interested in donating to those Senate Races where my $ could do the most good. I realize this is a partisan request, and I'm not sure if that fits with your site.
Thanks, and Go A's
Ken
RASSMUSSEN Obama -9 in Texas
Ken,
The Senate stuff is basically like two hours away from my being able to roll out but I haven't had those two hours lately.
Marc, don't forget that few people know as much as you do about politics. Webb, Sebelius, McCaskill, Obama, Clinton (H & B): They're all politicians. Electoral politics is politics. Why did Sebelius get behind Obama and not Clinton in the primary? Political calculation: Kansas is where Obama was from and of the 2 leading candidates (both of whom are unpopular with the general Kansas electorate), Obama was the lesser of two evils. Bonus points is that she might be mentioned as a VP pick or get a cabinet post, raising her profile (same goes for McCaskill in terms of raising her profile--very political choice on her part to raise her national profile in the primary).
And white-working class men in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and other swing states have no idea who Sebelius, McCaskill, Webb, etc. are. They don't know their names have been mentioned for prez in '04 or veep in '08. Remember: we follow politics alot more than 99% of Americans if we are on this blog. Many working-class white men will look and see a woman they've never heard of getting picked over men they have heard of (and they know are qualified) such as Ed Rendell (imagine men in Penn. who supported Clinton: Obama picked an affirmative action candidate like Sebelius, when there were good candidates like Eddie Rendell or Bob Casey available? Or if they went with a woman, why not the woman I already voted for who is more qualified (in these voters' eyes, not our eyes) instead of affirmative action choices like Sebelius or McCaskill?
And I certainly don't think all Democrats are excited about Clinton: Obama wouldn't have won the primary if there weren't' some Dems that didn't like her. However, I do think about 40% of them are still excited about Clinton and ranging from some enthusiasm to outright dislike of Obama (based on recent polls showing 20% or so behind McCain and the other 20% undecided/not voting). In a Democratic year, it is easy to win with unified Dems + enough independents and I think Obama-Clinton probably does it pretty easily. I think Obama and Clinton probably struck a deal as Obama, smart as he is, sucked it up and noticed this would work as a candidacy. Clinton stepped back, quickly, probably after dealing privately with Obama.
And I am serious about this question: Is your support for Obama so weak that him picking Clinton would make you NOT vote for him, knowing he is the one that would be president? I'm curious if anything else he's done to move more to the middle (on FISA, etc.) also gives you pause, or is is just Clinton?
I do think independents who lean Obama could be turned off by a Clinton pick, but I am not sure how many there are. The few polls I've seen w/ cross-tabs show independents fairly indifferent or a wash to Clinton on the ticket versus other candidates--but the people who dislike Clinton as veep the most are hard-core Republicans and hard-core Obama folks.
So, whether we like it or not, today was part I of the Obama-Clinton '08 roll-out. If I'm wrong, I'll admit it on this web site later!
Mark,
You might need to buy this bumper sticker later this year:
http://edgeofthewest.wordpress.com/
2008/06/25/you-asked-for-it-you-got-it/
To me, this line from Clinton today in NH suggests Justin's prediction might be right: "Hillary Clinton referred to the combined 36 million votes for her and Obama becoming an “unstoppable force for change” now that they’re together."
Presumably, given how controlled Obama's advance operation is, Clinton's speech was checked by Obama's staff before she delivered it. This sounds pretty close to a ticket, though it might just be saying we're together. But when you say that number like that, it sounds like the leaders merging forces.
I, for one, found her less annoying than usual today.
Well, depending on when Obama decides to announce his pick of running mate, white working-class men could have a bit of time to get to know a more obscure (to them) pick and cozy up to the idea a little.
I don't see Sebelius or McCaskill as "affirmative action" choices. I think they'd be perfectly good choices whether Obama had run against Hillary Clinton or Guy McManly.
And yes, my support for Obama is weak enough that I would probably not vote for an Obama/Clinton ticket. I'm not much of a liberal; I'm a reluctant defector from the Ron Paul camp, actually; I'm certainly not interested in upholding the status quo that (to me) Hillary Rodham Clinton symbolizes.
There are also, I might note, quite a few people like me in pale blue states like Oregon, Colorado, and New Hampshire.
Mark: If you are a Ron Paul person, my guess is you won't be voting for Obama by the time November rolls around. For him to have to win by appealing to the middle of America, he'll piss you off way too many times. Bob Barr is there for you though.
Justin, the need to appeal to the middle of America is precisely the reason Obama should not choose Clinton as his VP (even apart for governing considerations). She does not poll well with independents.
I also wouldn't read too much into today's rally. She came out fully behind Obama as she had promised to do and as any good Democrat would do. She's no more and no less likely to be VP after today than she was before today.
Wow. Someone got pissed off in the last decade. Agree that the Obama campaign could do with smarter arguments - any time you mention "Bush" you're automatically saying something dumb - and that's the last trap Obama (President of Harvard Law Review/civl rights lawyer/teacher of constitutional law/ um...community organizer?!) should be falling into... unless he's playing for the 'American Idiot' vote.
Justin,
I have to disagree that this was a ticket preview. While picking Hillary would help the party healing process, it would do much more to energize the right wing base. Remember their hatred of anything Clinton.
Picking Hillary would give the right wing far more enthusiasm for McCain.
Personally, I prefer to do anything to avoid enegizing the Republic party (if they get to misquote our party's name, then we should return the favor).
"In waking a tiger, use a long stick." - Mao Zedong
My opinion, let the tiger sleep.
Also, Nate, another shout-out. The most recent adjustment again makes your model in close agreement with the market on intrade.com.
To counsellorben and others, I keep hearing Clinton will energize and turn out Republicans. Yet I read here and in other polls that there aren't that many Republicans.
Does anyone have any hard data on Clinton as a drag or a help on the ticket? My hunch is the unity of the Dems drowns the unity of the Republicans. When the GOP president's approval is at 27% and economic growth is only 1%, there is no sleeping tiger.
I think a case for or against Clinton hangs on independent voters. But I've seen little data on this.
The Republicans are more like a sleeping kitten. Even if they were energized and unified, there still aren't enough of them.
Presenting himself as the agent of change when we're on the wrong track is part of what Obama needs to do. The other thing he needs to do is to defend himself against the charge that he's too inexperienced to keep the nation safe. I believe his number one priority should be to pull together a national security team full of experience and credibility and to take the experience question off the table. Then he can talk about the fact that he can put us on the right track.
Been there, done that
Paul Bradford, while it might look good in the youtube video, I think Obama needs to do more than have a meeting with a group of foreign policy advisors. This was the same shtick we got from G.W. Bush in 2000 ("I'll surround myself with good advisors.").
It's a start, but he needs to do much more.
Justin,
I will never vote for Bob Barr. I don't like him at all.
It's Obama or nothing.
Mark,
Well, I guess you will be voting for Obama-Clinton over McCain if that ends up being the ticket then if it is "Obama or nothing."
Again, I asked earlier but got no response. Can anyone point me to polls showing an Obama-Clinton ticket polling worse among independents than just Obama by himself? Or maybe does Obama-Clinton do worse among swing voter groups like white women, Catholics, etc.? I can't find any polls on this, but was hoping someone could show me.
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,水噹噹,台中隆鼻,果凍隆乳,改運整型,自體脂肪移植,新娘造型,婚禮顧問,下川島,常平,常平,珠海,澳門機票,香港機票,貸款,貸款,信用貸款,宜蘭民宿,花蓮民宿,未婚聯誼,網路購物,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,白蟻,白蟻,除蟲,老鼠,減肥,減肥,在家工作,在家工作,水噹噹,台中隆鼻,果凍隆乳,改運整型,自體脂肪移植,新娘造型,婚禮顧問,下川島,常平,常平,珠海,澳門機票,香港機票,貸款,貸款,信用貸款,宜蘭民宿,花蓮民宿,未婚聯誼,網路購物,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,白蟻,白蟻,除蟲,老鼠,減肥,減肥,在家工作,在家工作,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,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,搬家公司,中和搬家,台北搬家,板橋搬家,新店搬家,線上客服,網頁設計,線上客服,網頁設計,植牙,關鍵字,關鍵字,seo,seo,網路排名,自然排序,網路排名軟體,交友,越南新娘,婚友社,外籍新娘,大陸新娘,越南新娘,交友,外籍新娘,視訊聊天,大陸新娘,婚友社,婚友,越南新娘,大陸新娘,越南新娘,視訊交友,外籍新娘,網路排名,網路排名軟體,網站排名優化大師,關鍵字排名大師,網站排名seo大師,關鍵字行銷專家,關鍵字,seo,關鍵字行銷,網頁排序,網頁排名,關鍵字大師,seo大,自然排名,網站排序,網路行銷創業,汽車借款,汽車借錢,汽車貸款,汽車貸款,拉皮,抽脂,近視雷射,隆乳,隆鼻,變性,雙眼皮,眼袋,牙齒,下巴,植牙,人工植牙,植髮,雷射美容,膠原蛋白,皮膚科,醫學美容,玻尿酸,肉毒桿菌,微晶瓷,電波拉皮,脈衝光,關鍵字,關鍵字,seo,seo,網路排名,自然排序,網路排名軟體,英語演講,托福,Toastmaster,汽車借款,汽車借款,汽車借款,汽車貸款,汽車貸款,借錢,借貸,當舖,借款,借貸,借錢,週轉,
Post a Comment