The latest in our occasional series informing you about the country's worst nightmare: a 269-269 Electoral College tie...
As you may have noticed from our scenario chart, the probability of a tie has increased dramatically in recent days and now stands at 3.2 percent. This is partly because, as we draw closer to election day with the race remaining tight, the probability of any one candidate running away with the election diminishes -- meaning that all "close" electoral permutations, including ties, become more likely.
However, there is one specific scenario that is driving this outcome. That is the scenario wherein Barack Obama wins the Kerry states plus Iowa, New Mexico and Colorado, but loses New Hampshire. Of the 320 times that our simulation ended in a tie, this particular scenario was responsible 294 times. Indeed, we presently have Obama winning precisely the Kerry states plus Iowa, New Mexico and Colorado, so all that would be needed to make a tie occur is to flip New Hampshire back to McCain, and entirely reasonable possibility.
Four other 269-269 tie permutations came up with less frequency:
20 times: Obama wins Kerry States + IA + NM + NV. This once had seemed like the most plausible tie scenario, but it requires Obama to win Nevada while losing Colorado, and increasingly unlikely parlay.
3 Times: Obama wins Kerry States + IA + NM + WV. Functionally equivalent to the scenario above since West Virginia and Nevada each have 5 electoral votes.
2 Times: Obama wins Kerry States + IA + NM + CO + VA - MI. Michigan has moved slightly toward Obama in the post-convention polling while Virginia has remained stuck in place, making it less likely that the states would invert positions as this scenario requires.
1 Time: Obama Wins Kerry States + IA + NV + CO - NH. Obama winning Nevada while losing New Mexico now seems very unlikely.
By the way -- the way that the tipping point math works out, about 80 percent of the tie outcomes involve McCain winning the popular vote. This is by far the messier of the two scenarios. Since the Democrats will almost certainly control a plurality or a majority of House delegations in the incoming Congress, a tie accompanied by an Obama win in the popular vote will lead to a lot of fanfare but ultimately little drama -- Obama will become the next President. But if McCain wins the popular vote, there will be far more pressure on Democratic Representatives to vote against their party. I still tend to think that this scenario favors Obama (formally, our model splits them 50:50) but a whole number of factors come into play, including:
(i) The size of the Democratic edge in House delegations;
(ii) The magnitude of McCain's popular vote margin;
(iii) Whether any states have their outcome determined by recounts. For instance, if Obama loses a controversial recount in Virginia by a few thousand votes and this produces a 269-269 tie, Representatives will have a far easier time finding it "fair" to vote for him than if the reverse were to occur.
(iv) The overall tenor of the campaign from here forward.
9.19.2008
12th Amendment Update: Tie Probability Continues to Increase
@ 3:56 AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
423 comments
Eric: I'm not arguing for or against the EC. I am making the point that adding up 51 individual state contests and trying to conclude that they represent what would be the result of a nationwide popular vote contest is wrong.
But that's also true on a state level. Different precincts manage elections differently. The ballots are often very different, the machines used are different, the number of polling places per voter are different, etc.
abovemypaygrade,
I hate your idea! Seriously, it just encourages gerrymandering of congressional districts. We've already gone way too far in that direction, but to make it determine presidential elections would be much worse.
May have been mentioned, but what if Obama wins one split electoral vote from NE? They split their votes now.
There are other scenarios involving a tie if Obama wins an EV from Nebraska. But, given recent polling of NE as a whole, it seems very unlikely that Obama will win one there.
Here's another breakdown of the State-by-State House vote, taking into consideration the top 30 races the National Journal has identified as vulnerable. Not that that's gospel, but it gives you an idea where things might go.
Solid Republican 7
Likely Republican (tie) 3
Likely Republican (switch) 6
Vulnerable Republican (tie) 1
Vulnerable Republican (switch) 5
Tie not vulnerable to switch 1
Tie vulnerable to go D 1
Vulnerable Democratic (switch) 0
Vulnerable Democratic (tie) 2
Likely Democratic (switch) 10
Likely Democratic (tie) 5
Solid Democratic 9
In other words, the Democrats have 24 states they can more or less count on, and four more likely to at least tie, perhaps go/stay D. Sounds like they would have the upper hand.
Here are the individual state analysis, with the current party split plus National Journal top 30 states identified.
States likely to have a Republican vote for President in the House:
Republican control by a margin of at least 2, with <2 vulnerable (7 states)
Alabama 5-2 1 Republican vulnerable
Florida 16-9 1 each vulnerable
Michigan 9-6 1 Republican vulnerable
Nebraska 3
Oklahoma 4-1
Texas 19-13 1 Democrat vulnerable
Virginia 8-3 1 Republican vulnerable
Republican control but could tie with one R loss, not vulnerable (3 states)
Idaho 2-0
Kentucky 4-2
South Carolina 4-2
Republican control, but could flip with one R loss, not vulnerable (6 states)
Delaware 1
Georgia 7-6
Missouri 5-4
Montana 1
Utah 2-1
Wyoming 1
Republican control, but vulnerable to tie (1 state)
Minnesota 5-3
Republican control, but vulnerable to switch (5 states)
Alaska 1 1 Republican vulnerable
Louisiana 4-3 1 each vulnerable
Nevada 2-1 One R vulnerable
New Mexico 2-1 One R vulnerable
Ohio 10-7-1 1 D seat vacant, 3 possible D pickups
Tied currently (2 states)
Arizona 4-4 One R vulnerable
Kansas 2-2
Democratic control, but vulnerable to switch
-none-
Democratic control, but vulnerable to tie (2 states)
Mississippi 3-1 one D vulnerable
New Hampshire 2 one D vulnerable
Democratic control, but could flip with one D loss, not vulnerable (10 states)
Colorado 4-3 one R vulnerable
Iowa 3-2
Indiana 5-4
New Jersey 7-6 two R vulnerable
North Carolina 7-6 one R vulnerable
North Dakota 1
South Dakota 1
Tennessee 5-4
Vermont 1
West Virginia 2-1
Democratic control, but could tie with one D loss, not vulnerable (5 states)
Arkansas 3-1
Hawaii 2
Maine 2
Rhode Island 2
Wisconsin 5-3
Democratic control by a margin of at least 2 with <2 vulnerable (9 states)
California 34-19
Connecticut 4-1 one R vulnerable
Illinois 11-8 two R vulnerable
Maryland 6-2
Massachusetts 10
New York 23-6 three R vulnerable
Oregon 4-1
Pennsylvania 11-8, one D vulnerable
Washington 6-3 one R vulnerable
@ Jirque, et al-
The National popular vote compact is a great, workable idea. Definitely worth reading more at
http://www.nationalpopularvote.com
I do agree with other commentators that if Obama wins w/out the popular vote, or wins on an electoral tie, then there may be the political will to finally create NPV thru amendment. But the compact is actually a better, more constitutionally moderate approach in alot of ways. It keeps the basic paradigm of elections as being controlled by and the purview of the states intact, and avoids the various problems associated with national registration, a majority popular vote requirement, etc. Of course, in MY ideal world, there would be a National Vote by Instant Runoff Voting, AND there would be a nation mandate for voter registration (a constitutional right to vote). But I think the compact is a way to get it done, and finally end the ridiculousness of a system that makes 70% of the country irrelevant to the result of the election. What about One Person One Vote?
Of course, NPV would also mean Nate would have to create a new model. ;)
One other thing- If Obama wins without the popular vote, there would also be a bit more impetus for "red" states, eg safe states who always go republican, to sign on to the compact.
Thankfully, the model here (and common sense) seem to find very few scenarios in which McCain pulls a Bush. If he loses the popular vote, he'll almost certainly lose the election.
(Full disclosure: I worked on pushing the National Popular Vote Compact in Rhode Island this year)
If it's a tie and if the vote is by the current lame duck Congress (I'm not sure about that), then, wouldn't Leiberman in the Senate support McCain/Palin and wouldn't that give us President Obama and Vice President Palin?
I'm just saying - if that happens, Obama better step up personnel in the Secret Service.
You forgot the really exciting scenario. If the House fails to break the tie by March 2009, (the kind of snafu house dems are capable of orchestrating), then Cheney becomes President. Of course, if Cheney dies by then, Pelosi become President.
Scenarios where Pelosi becomes President (including Kucinich's double impeachment) amuse me.
Then again, if Cheney became the next President, I think the sheer number of exploding heads might cause permanent damage to the progressive movement.
pacific moderate: What motivation would there be for the overwhelmingly Democratic electorate of California to dilute its electoral votes by proportional allotment unless Republican Texas simultaneously does the same?
None. But you missed the text of the legislation: first, it allocates ALL the state's popular votes to the winner of the national popular vote. Second, it goes into effect only when enough other states do the same to constitute and electoral college majority.
So it doesn't matter which states do it, whether they're "red" or "blue." They could all be blue states, but they retain their present status--sending all their electoral votes to whomever wins the state--until enough states pass similar legislation. When enough other states do so, we will have a national popular vote system without having had to amend the constitution.
It's really a very clever idea.
abovemypaygrade: A good compromise would be by congressional district I think. Each Congressional district gets 1 EV. Each state as a whole gets say 1 EV based on State outcome (instead of the current 2 which I think overweights the importance of statehood versus individuals within that state. But instead of winner take all do the Maine/Nebraska thing each EV at congressional districts is up for grabs. It puts almost all 50 states in play every election, except several very red or very blue single district states.
I think that's a bad idea for three reasons.
First, it replicates the problems of the present winner-take-all state-by-state system except it does it 435 times. One could win a a bare majority of districts by one vote each and get zero votes in all the others and win the national election with barely more than 25% of the vote.
Second, entire regions would still be ignored by candidates because they're reliably for one party or the other.
Third, as a prior post points out, if you thing gerrymandering is bad now with House seats, it will be even worse with the presidency on the line. If the districts are not drawn fairly, then the contest won't be fair either.
Novel Federal Challenge to Twelfth Amendment Seeks "Automatic" Result of McCain and Obama as President and Vice-President, Together
Author of unusual constitutional challenge claims fundamental error against Preamble of United States Constitution by passage of Twelfth Amendment, arguing change flip-flopped original design, basic purpose and underlying premise for election of America's top two offices of President and Vice-President.
Indianapolis, IN (FreedomNewsWire™) September 15, 2008 -- Although written in a rather difficult 'patriotic' style, the peculiar pleadings in a federal challenge drafted by a local constitutional practioner appear to suggest a fairly clear argument. The author states that the primary purpose of contractual language contained within the Declaration of Independence and subsequent Federal Constitution expressly require that the 12th Amendment be promptly struck down, for any variety of legal doctrines also provided. If successful and allowed to stand, the ruling would restore the Electoral College back to the original structure as per our Founding Fathers, and Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Barack Obama (D-IL), both of whom are now firmly established as - by far - the top two leading candidates, would then, in fact, jointly ascend to the offices of President and Vice-President, together, as a legally-foregone conclusion.
Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution originally specified that Electors voted only amongst the different Presidential candidates, and then the top two winners, regardless of party affiliation, would become President and Vice-President, in order of the total number of votes cast. The Twelfth Amendment, ratified during 1804, altered the total selection process by adding the notion of a running mate to be also voted for, and future elections became primarily based upon entire political parties, instead of focusing on the unique qualifications and skills of individual candidates, themselves.
The author of the constitutional challenge appears to claim that alteration was fundamental error, by removing a built-in design for continual blending or "rehealing" of our Country's wandering political parties every four years, and, instead, changing into a system of voting that ensures continual division and redivision of our Nation, further and further apart.
The lawsuit apparently is filed in an undisclosed United States District Court, names a principal plaintiff as "next friend" of all other American citizens, and is suing, among some number of other government units and individuals, the entire Federal Government of the United States. It is not difficult to speculate at reasons why the identifying information has been omitted, although there is a hint of that being only temporary. Any reasonable federal judge surely would have preferred keeping the case quiet until some significant further development, considering the current political climate.
The filings available to the public glaringly do not include an actual complaint, but the 12th Amendment challenge is obviously framed as a breach of contract. While also not mentioned, another possible legal result could be to 'moot' - or, to make 'legally irrelevant' – the recent federal suit filed by Attorney Phillip J. Berg against Senator Obama in Philadelphia's Eastern District, over alleged U.S. citizenship issues of the Senator, since Obama might then no longer be technically within a current, legal state of "running" for the Presidency, maybe also depriving Berg of what is known as 'standing' to continue challenging the Senator about that particular qualification for the Nation's highest office.
Another important item seems to be missing from the new arguments. After learning of the bold suit, a quick look-see at the 12th Amendment clearly revealed another issue that this federal judge should consider. It seems that an election for the Vice-President is also supposed to have its own “distinct” voting and counts, or, in other words, separate from that cast for the President, in what would appear also along the same lines of the legal author's basis for making a constitutional challenge. However, an online search did not reveal any images of actual election ballots, where the selections for President and Vice-President were actually separate, which questions the validity of many elections.
Related writings entered into the novel federal suit further claim divine inspiration, the "inevitability" of several political leaders rising soon to various top offices, name a dozen Governors, Senators and Representatives into a bipartisan task force for families, also forecast various cultural healings across race, gender, political parties and social classes, as well as foretell the skyrocketing of our stock markets, the end of the current national homeowners and mortgage crises, and that the judge in the same federal case will easily ascend to the U.S. Supreme Court, to name a few.
The author claims that the political office advancements, cultural healings, spiritual revival, and booming revitalization of our Nation's economy are merely the only logical conclusions remaining after such a monumental ruling would come to pass, because of sudden renewal in the overall confidence and security in our system of government, and therefore of our entire Country, itself. He claims that should also quickly translate into generally strong, positive growth factors for America, with economic increase and stability for all people, and seems to suggest that our Nation's families are now broken and suffering, and in general need of repairs, precisely because of the government's continual redivision.
He argues that restoring the first system of electing our President and Vice-President is a contractual obligation to all American citizens (a.k.a., 'We The People', 'The Public Trust', or 'The Social Compact'), because it is necessary "in order to form a more perfect Union," or, as he also puts it, "in order to [always be] form[ing] a more perfect Union." The constitutional protagonist further argues that the process for all future Presidential elections, maintained in the original design manner, should continually re-strengthen and increase our Nation like clockwork, every four years, and goes so far as to describe a celebration for the official changes, even naming lists of religious faith personalities, dozens of leaders of government, and others, to all attend a special concert to coincide with the patriotic holidays.
Some of legal filings seem a bit unorthodox, but it should be nice to see such dramatic, progressive and widespread change, and so we decided to support this unusual effort, setup the repeater point, and forward the basic information out. We will try to stay abreast of developments, and post any new filings and events as they become available. All of the currently-known filings and communications were made accessible to the general public at the following link:
http://unitedcivilrights.org/members/heavenonearth
For more information, as provided by Cornell Law School:
Article 2, Section 1 of the United States Constitution
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articleii.html#section1
The Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.amendmentxii.html
###
The suit described above seem to me to be nothing short of bizarre.
One can't challenge a constitutional provision simply because one thinks it was a "fundamental error" or constitutes some "breach of contract." (Well, one can challenge it, but one won't win in court.) The Constitution is the highest law of the land and trumps all other provisions, including contract law. If enough people think that some part of the Constitution is bad policy, then the only way to change it is through an amendment. It cannot be struck down by a simple lawsuit--otherwise, our most fundamental freedoms would be at risk if a series of judges thought that, well, they're just a bad idea. And that's not how our system works.
It's looking increasingly as though the House delegations are going to swing heavily Democrat. No delegation that is currently Democrat is in serious danger of losing that character, whereas Arizona (currently even) and Alaska, Nevada, New Mexico (all currently Republican) all have a very serious possibility of changing. If all four did so, and that is not in the least unlikely, the delegation division for the new USHOR would be 31/18/1. I think the likelihood of one neutral and seven Democrat delegations switching sides is vanishingly remote.
And even if this did happen, the same internal political pressures brought to bear on the Democratic delegations would presumably be brought to bear on some of the Republican ones. I am thinking particularly of the one-person Republican delegation in Delaware, in the person of Congressman Castle.
The odds of all this happening are so close to zero that they can be said not to exist. Obama will have to get 269 votes to win this election, whereas McCain will have to get 270.
Hey, just in case you want to know what happens if a tie would occur. go to:
http://www.electoralcollegetie.com/
What is the SMALLEST number of total votes that need to be switched from one candidate to another, and from which states, for the outcome to be a TIED ELECTION?
https://www.msu.edu/~sheppa28/elections-tied.html
520聊天室
一夜情聊天室
一夜情貼圖區
一夜聊天室
一葉晴貼圖區
一葉晴貼影片區
丁字褲女優
丁字褲美女寫真
丁字褲美女影片
人之初貼圖區
八國聯軍情色網
八國聯軍論壇
十七歲女孩貼影區
又又處女貼影區
下載a片
上班族聊天室
大老婆俱樂部
大波霸美女影片
大眾論壇
女同志聊天室
女郎俱樂部
女郎貼影區
女狼俱樂部
女學生內衣照
女優天堂貼圖
女優王國
女優盒子
女優貼片
女優貼圖
女優電影
女優寫真
女優影片
小老婆俱樂部
小老鼠論壇
小弟弟情色網
小弟弟貼圖區
小弟弟貼影片
小弟弟貼影片區
小弟弟貼影片網
小弟弟貼影區
小弟弟影片
小杜情色網
小妹妹貼影區
小高聊天室
小說論壇
小賤人貼影區
小瓢蟲情色論壇
小瓢蟲論壇
小護士偷拍網
小魔女自拍天堂貼圖區
小魔女自拍貼圖區
小魔女免費影片
小魔女貼圖區
小魔女貼影片
不色不進貼影區
不穿內衣
中部人聊天室
內衣秀
內衣模特兒
內衣模特兒寫真
內衣褲
天天情色
天天幹貼圖區
天天網遊論壇
天天論壇
天生名模貼圖區
天堂私服論壇
天堂情色
天堂情色網
夫妻聯誼俱樂部
少女內衣
手工內衣
日本av女優
日本av女優免費影片區
日本a片
日本女優
日本內衣
日本正妹
日本正妹照片
日本正妹影片
日本美女
日本美女圖庫
日本美女寫真集
日本偷拍
日本情色女優
日本辣美女優
日本模特兒寫真
日本學生妹
月光論壇
月宮俱樂部
月宮貼圖區
比基尼
比基尼女郎
比基尼內衣
比基尼泳裝
比基尼泳裝外拍
比基尼泳裝美女
比基尼泳裝美女的影片
比基尼泳裝美少女圖片
比基尼美女
比基尼美女的奶
比基尼辣妹
比基尼辣妹照片區
比基尼辣妹圖片
比基尼辣妹影片
比基尼線
水美眉
北部人聊天室
卡通aa片
卡通aa片免費看
卡通a片
卡通a片免費看
卡通美女遊戲
卡通貼圖區
可愛美眉
只有貼圖區
台中人聊天室
台中聊天室
台論論壇
台灣 kiss 倩色網貼圖區
台灣 kiss 情網貼圖區
台灣av女優
台灣a片
台灣a片王
台灣kiss情色文學
台灣kiss情色文學區
台灣kiss情色網
台灣女優
台灣自拍偷拍
台灣客棧電影貼圖區
台灣美女
台灣美女 kiss 情網貼圖區
台灣美女貼圖
台灣美女貼圖區
台灣美女電影
台灣美女圖
台灣美女寫真貼圖區
台灣香腸俱樂部
台灣偷拍
台灣情色
台灣情色貼圖
台灣情色網
台灣情色網綜合論壇
台灣情色論壇
台灣無限貼圖區
台灣貼圖區
台灣賓館偷拍
台灣論壇
台灣論壇女生遊戲
台灣論壇好玩遊戲區
台灣論壇遊戲區
巨乳女優
巨乳美女
布蘭妮貼圖區
平面模特兒
打工正妹
本土a片
本土女優
本土偷拍
正妹大學
正妹大學宅男社
正妹日報
正妹地圖
正妹百人斬
正妹自拍
正妹空姐寫真
正妹星球
正妹相簿
正妹美食地圖
正妹無名
正妹無名相簿
正妹無名相簿分享
正妹照片
正妹圖
正妹圖片
正妹圖片或照片
正妹網
正妹裸照
正妹影片
正妹餐廳
正妹牆
交友啦咧聊天室
交友聊天室
交友貼影區
伊莉論壇
同志聊天
同志聊天室
同志貼圖區
名模露點
成人a片
成人偷拍
成人情色
成人情色小說
成人情色文學
成人情色貼圖
成人情色貼圖區
成人聊天室
成人貼圖區
成人影片
成人影城
成人影音
成人影音城
成人論壇
有閒俱樂部
百分百貼圖區
米克情色網
米克綜合論壇
自拍a片
自拍偷拍
自拍偷拍成人影片
自拍偷拍貼圖
自拍偷拍貼圖區
SEO課程課程教你怎麼做我們提供
SEO教學
SEO是一門值得學習的
,我們也提供網站登錄
我們提供婚紗攝影
結婚錄音
台北婚紗攝影
高雄婚紗攝影
台中婚紗攝影
SEO課程課程教你怎麼做我們提供
SEO教學
SEO是一門值得學習的
,我們也提供網站登錄
我們提供婚紗攝影
結婚錄音
台北婚紗攝影
高雄婚紗攝影
台中婚紗攝影
^^ nice blog!! ^@^
徵信, 徵信網, 徵信社, 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,
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,
^^ very nice
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,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,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,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,
Daily Kos +7 for Obama
http://www.eld.com.tr
http://www.aydinisi.com.tr
http://www.ecayetkiliservis.com
http://www.ecayedekparca.com
http://www.iso.gen.tr
http://www.eldemir.gen.tr
ISO 9001 CE GOST QUALITY TSE ELD ECA AYDINISI
ECAyedekparca ECAyetkiliservis
Post a Comment