And I mean literally.
The Minnesota recount has started, with the results being updated in semi-real time on the Star Tribune's webpage. Thus far, with about 5 percent of the ballots recounted, Coleman has lost 55 votes and Franken has lost 61.
The reason the vote totals are going down when you might intuitively expect them to go up is that either candidate has a right to challenge any ballot for any reason, even if it had been counted as legal originally. When a vote is challenged, it is deducted from the opposing candidate's total. These challenged votes will go before the state canvassing board in December and be debated (and debated and debated) one by one (by one by one). Thus far, Coleman has issued 79 challenges and Franken 61, a rate that puts us on pace for about 2,800 challenges statewide.
It is difficult to say how many votes so far have actually been recharacterized so far as opposed to (or in addition to) those that have been challenged, because the Star-Tribune's website only provides the net totals in each locality, but no detail about how we got there. Nor do we have any information yet on ballots gained or lost by third-party candidates. Keep an eye on the Minnesota Secretary of State's Webpage, which will have an update at 8 PM Central tonight and should hopefully provide for a more thorough accounting. I would be very reluctant to come to much of any conclusion about the recount until we have that additional layer of detail.
EDITED AND REVISED, 6:10 PM Central.
UPDATE #2 (6:15 PM) The totals listed on the Star Tribune's website do not yet reflect a net gain of 28 votes for Franken in portions of St. Louis County (Duluth), a Democratic stronghold that uses older, more error-prone scanning machines.
11.19.2008
[UPDATED] In Minnesota Recount, Both Candidates are Losers Thus Far
@ 6:45 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
73 comments
hmmm.... this recount thing will be interesting.
First?
I'm sure confused and hoping Nate won't be too long with a far-seeing projection based on current information!
Hey Kids! Guess what? Ziegler decided I was worthy of his email attention. Happy reading.
(Read like a forwarded email thread- bottom is earliest):
----------------------------
Nate- this guy is ready to be flagged. I'm about to post this on your site.
Happy reading.
WE LOVE YOU!!
Begin forwarded message:
From: p*******@gmail.com
Date: November 19, 2008 3:46:41 PM PST
To: Talktozig@aol.com
Subject: Re: 538
Um, I suggest you put your ego in check (hard to do for a radio host, I realize), drink some chamomile tea, and go on over to fivethirtyeight.com, where the entire transcript is published, as promised by Nate Silver, and read through the comments, which are numerous and most very well written and very well informed (unlike the right wing media). You might actually learn something about polling. You might actually learn something, if you can get over yourself and stop believing in your stream of lies, about Obama's supporters, Nate Silver, or anyone who you are against, put away the histrionics and the name calling, and realize that we all have a big mess to clean up after this disaster called W. Progressives and liberals and practically everyone this side of Colin Powell are really fed up with the demonizing, the push polling, the bullshit- man-all of it- just a bunch of hate filled greed and fear mongering bullshit that the minions of the Right Wing Echo Chamber just seem to be forever addicted to. John McCain is a good man. We all respect him over here in Liberal Land. Guess what? The opposite is not true. You and your type are going to go to the ends of the earth to try to bring down Obama, and guess what? We're not going to take it, just like we are no longer going to take attacks on our patriotism or this incessant Cold War mentality that labels people "Communist" or "UnAmerican". We're going to use the truth and reality to fight you every step of the way. You are not going to make this a circus like you and your type did with Clinton. We won. We are not vindictive fucktards like the GOP was. We invite you to participate, as would any sane human being. If you and the other bipolar reactionary lunatics like Hannity, Beck, O'Reilly, Limbaugh, etc, etc, etc, etc, keep the same game going, guess what? The rest of the country and the world is MOVING ON.
Good day.
A Liberal Patriot
On Nov 19, 2008, at 3:12 PM, Talktozig@aol.com wrote:
He reveled he didn't know what kind of poll, didn't know what the questions were, didn't know what the definition of a push poll is. And he runs a polling website!!
What did I not know exactly?
JZ
In a message dated 11/19/2008 3:08:29 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, p********@gmail.com writes:
Read a transcript of the entire interview.
You can say the opposite all you want. Ziegler is a moron.
On Nov 19, 2008, at 3:02 PM, Talktozig@aol.com wrote:
not sure what interview you read, but he was the one that revealed he didn't have a clue.
In a message dated 11/19/2008 11:51:31 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, p********@gmail.com writes:
Nate Silver made you look like a jackass and an IDIOT!!! Wait, you
made yourself look that way- and you really thought he wouldn't
publish the interview? Wow.
Haa haa!!!
There's a bit of a puzzle here. It looks like the total new votes found in the recount will be much lower than we'd initially been guessing. It's those new votes which we expected to tilt systematically toward F. (There are also some random changes, which we have no reason to expect to have any particular tilt, but do add some uncertainty to the predictions.) Therefore unless the tilt is way at the high end of what we were guessing, F won't pick up enough votes in the recount. (Possible votes from the rejected absentees is another question, which depends on things like courts we can't really analyze via stats.)
So it looks like people following the audit would be predicting a C win. Yet Intrade has consistently favored F for a few days.
Are the gamblers
1. Not caught up with the audit/recount results?
or
2. Way ahead of us in following precinct-level undervote statistics, of the type Bitwise has calculated but not published in sufficient detail to use?
Anyway, F's chances will be much improved if he can get some of those absentee votes out of the reject pile, so please visit this site:
https://secure.alfranken.com/page/contribute/EMDurbin08
(mbw)
Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but Coleman has challenged 79 votes which resulted (directly or indirectly) in 61 being deducted from Franken's count (77%), whereas Franken's 61 challenges resulted in 55 votes being deducted from Coleman's count (90%).
I have been following the race/recount VERY closely and now I'm completely confused. If possible, can someone clearly and simply explain the whole recount process or direct me to a previous post?
Thank you!
@vumax
My read is that Franken got 18 new votes and Coleman got 6 new votes, but these are in the context of the subtractions because of challenges. The challenges could, conceivably, be restored.
@William Land
The recount is very simple. The election judges will take all the ballots for Coleman and place in one pile. All the ballots for Franken in another pile. Separate piles for the other candidtaes.
Then, after the piles are complete Coleman and Franken will be asked to get on top of their piles and stand tall. Whoever is tallest wins.
(Everything except the last part is correct.)
Right now representatives of each candidate are challenging the placement of some of the ballots into one pile or anotherm for reasons known to them. The election judges will decide later on which challenges are valid. Ultimately the challenges could be decided in court, by a special commission or, under the Constitution, by the US Senate itself.
STapper
After the votes have been seperated in Franken or Coleman or other candidate piles, are these votes then recounted by the hand or by machine?
Has anyone else seen the numbers for Pipestone county, a rural republican stronghold where the numbers of challenged ballot are around 4 times higher than one might expect (22 out of just over 4000 votes), The number of reclassified ballots is around 3 times higher that on might expect, and Coleman has had a net gain of 5 votes? Could this be a statistical blip or is this wort further investigating?
we need nate to project how long this is going to take.
i am thinking one month and sixteen days and four hours and 210 seconds
given what we know so far it seems like coleman is gaining an edge. am i wrong?
Now that the St. Louis votes have been added to the running total Franken trails by a total of 196
L-L CB,
It looks like the partisans were especially nit-picky in Pipestone County. There is a lot of one-ups-manship in these kind of things...
eg. "You're gonna challenge that? fine well then I am challenging these three"
William Land,
Everything is counted by hand. The machines are not used at all in the recount
Did anyone else see Coleman just lose almost 1000 votes in Carver county, with just 40% of the 40000 vote recounted? Guess the Star tribune needs a recount.
StarTribune now has Franken ahead by 570 votes.
% of precincts recounted: 10%
% of votes recounted: 7%
http://ww2.startribune.com/news/metro/elections/returns/2008/recount/msenco.html
The Carver county info is clearly a mistake.
There are only 2 challenged ballots there by each side. How long till its corrected?
I noticed that too---it's also at the "regular" Star Tribune update page:
http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/
But it may be one of these temporary judicial set-asides, as happened a few times during the audit phase too. No one at http://theuptake.org's front page live blog has noted it yet.
WV "brated": if Coleman really lost 1,000 votes in one county, then this is a B-rated movie.
@ Andrew and donz. I believe the difference of 900 Coleman votes being declassified out of around 13000 Coleman votes counted (assuming equal recounting of Franken and Coleman) is too big to be anything other than human error. If it is real expect a major legal challenge from the Coleman camp.
Looks like this is going to go back and forth; with 6% of the votes recounted, Coleman is now ahead by 196 votes.
Andrew,
1. The Carver county results are throwing everything way off right now. Let's see what happens in a while, and if there is any written explanation.
2. It is not safe to assume that one side only challenges votes for the other side. That is most often the case, but they will also challenge votes that they think should be counted for themselves that are not being counted that way.
As of this writing the Numbers for Carver county have been returned to 0 in all categories, suggesting a glitch or human error. Colman's margin is back above 200 votes.
Carver cnty has been wiped clean on the strib's site. Clearly they caught their mistake
Correct me if I'm wrong, but one way to look at it is to assume that all Coleman challenges are Franken votes that Coleman is disputing, and all Franken votes are Coleman votes Franken is disputing.
With 6% in, Franken's change of -29 plus Coleman's challenge of 93 gives Franken a +64.
Coleman's -48 plus Franken's challenge of 77 gives him +29.
That means Franken thus far has gained as much as 35. He needs 215 to tie. If this trend continues, he would gain more than 500 votes.
Nate. Dude. Good job on PBS last night. Moderator said your site was non-partisan and she asked you questions that had to do with politics rather than polls. Congrats. You are officially a political pundit. And 538 got its bona fides.
You keep this up and somebody is liable to give you your own show in the next political cycle.
Matt, thank you. And yes, I caught the error with Carver county, and added an edited message.
If we estimate that Coleman and Franken are challenging votes in roughly the same proportions of non-counted votes and votes for the other guy, then that wouldn't change the margin much. At any rate, Franken is doing well so far and seems on pace to catch up. But it's too early to tell anything, and St. Louis County (where Franken gained the most) may have been an anolmoly.
Andrew,
Again, your assumption about challenged ballots is wrong. A) Not all challenged ballots are for the other side, B) Not all challenged ballots will eventually be considered valid.
Also... It looks like almost all the gains took place in St. Louis County because of a particular kind of old voting machine and that net Franken gain is not going to take place anywhere else
Andrew,
OK, I was writing while you were posting.
Problem here is that if you discount the St. Louis Cnty results which were an anomoly then Franken is actually LOSING votes in the recount relative to Coleman, though the effect is less if you really think all the challenged ballots will work out the way you assume.
The Star-Tribune link has now "fixed" the totals, showing Coleman ahead by 196 votes, with squares with the "theUptake" blog.
However, this STrib story notes that 28 votes net to Franken came from older "Eagle" machines in St. Louis county. Half of the precincts with those machines have now been counted, and a Coleman spokesman is quoted thus: "Knowing the Eagle machines were up here in a Democratic stronghold, we lost significantly less today than we thought we might."
Also, their story Who's winning recount? Watch for these clues" says:
"Another thing to watch is where the recount vote is coming from. All of the heaviest Democratic areas of the state -- Minneapolis, St. Paul and St. Louis County -- began the recount today. That means that the counties that will start Thursday, on Monday or later will be more Republican.
And the last ones to count -- Dodge and Le Sueur on Dec. 1; Rock, Scott, Winona and Wright on Dec. 3 -- all went strongly for Coleman."
And then the wild card:
"Finally, the wild card is the question of absentee ballots. Franken is seeking to have rejected absentee ballots reviewed to see if they were properly or improperly rejected. If he prevails, that could add thousands of potential votes into the mix."
WV "squal": what the storm becomes after "Raisin' 'Ell" in MN.
@Jim:
The point I was trying to make was that Franken appears to have a higher challenge-to-success rate. That is to say, Coleman is less successful with his challenges.
Strib has an issue still with Carver Cnty. There are 4 townships that have been wiped clean. Not back to nuetral but actually back to 0. They are white on the City map rather than the grayish color. Is anyone else annoyed by the changing scale colors. St. Louis is now so far in Frankens advantage that no other colors are even registering.
I vote for a fixed scale.
anyone know why they are doing the last recounts on dec 3?
seems like they could get to them before then
Remember Florida in 2000. The Bush team repeatedly argued that the votes had all been counted once, twice and in some cases three times. The Gore team asked only that every vote be counted at least once.
That was a game.
And so is this one in Minnesota. The goal by both parties here is to DIScount as many of the OTHER candidates already credited votes as possible. They'll seek to create a few hundred vote advantage through this discounting process.
And then they'll hope that the "final" review will go with their challenge rather than restore the ballot to the other party's candidate.
In the end, those "challenged" ballots will have been counted three times.
wv: suppi
OK check out the slideshow!
Some examples of actual challenged ballots.
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/11/19/recountbegins/
I would definitely bet on Coleman at this point.
Come see my new probably awful blog:
http://youngerpolitics.blogspot.com/
Strib's map has not caught up to it's article re St. Louis Cnty.
Map = Franken +23 net
Article = Franken +28 net
mattw-
thanks for the link
just a thought if you were looking at some of the marks on those ballots trying to assess who they voted for for senate wouldnt your eyes go up to see who they voted for for pres?
that might alter who they decide to give the vote to.
@livemild,
Yes, my eye would wander, not just to Pres, but all over to see if they were "party-line", but I do not think that is admissable evidence.
How do you think those ballots will be determined?
My interpretations:
Image 3 will count for Franken
Image 5 will count for Coleman
Image 6 will count for Franken
Image 11 will not count
A. St Louis County is done with its first of 5-6 days worth of recounting.
B. There have literally just been "found" or "lost" votes that have turned up in the recount. No challenge necessary. For both sides.
C. Something like 75% of the "challenged" ballots will break for one candidate or the other. Very few are legitimately "uncountable."
MATT-
that is how i would designate them too.
wonder how that voters thumb got so dirty!
Minnesota Public Radio has images of a nearly a dozen challenged ballots, plus you get to play election judge.
It is a good sign (for Franken) that Coleman is challenging more ballots than Franken so far as final numbers are concerned. Though the difference between Coleman challenges and Franken Challenges will likely need to be 125% to 150% of the difference in the count between them for Franken to end up the winner.
ie. If Franken ends up trailing by 100 votes, but Coleman has challenged 125 to 150 more ballots than Franken then I would feel good about things.
Than,
Great link... I had missed it.
two things so far.
1 I love that MPR lists "lizard people" as a choice for their poll on ballot #5
2 The voter of ballot #6 not only checked, but also circled one of the squares that line up the ballot in the machine
I am loving this excel file the SOS has for the precincts. I have a good feeling about this entire process after how things have gone today. Go Al!
The official numbers are here:
http://electionresults.sos.state.mn.us/20081104/SenateRecount.asp
Mr. Franken is behind by about 15,000 votes.
I come here to find out what all this means.
Strib has changed their scale in the way I had requested!
Wow, the power of the 538 comment board
stacey-
really? i hope you are right i just saw the fifteen hundred votes coleman has over al and am getting nervous.
ROAR! LIZARD PEOPLE!!!
It's great new actually. Franken has made up 53 votes on the original nov. 4th results.
43 my bad
Coleman lost 70 votes today, Franken lost 23.
With Coleman being certified as up 215 when the day began, this should mean he is now effectively up only 168. This does not include challenged ballots.
right now, some moron in Minnesota is saying
Hey, my ballot just got showed on a website. I told you effers I was gonna vote for the Lizard People!!!!!
The official SOS tally seems behind the StarTribune's:
SOS: 15.49% ballots recounted
StarTribune: 17% of votes recounted
StarTribune has Coleman's lead down to 181 votes.
I wonder if that's it for the night.
S-Trib now has 181 vote Coleman lead; 15 vote Franken pickup
bah...Franken lost 27.
Coleman up 172 (If my math is correct)
If tumadre341 is correct, that's decent news.
+28 comes from a special case (old machines) in St.Louis Co. That'll project to around +50 total.
+25 comes from other places which are actually significantly net C. It would be a little higher in a typical sample of the state, which is obviously near tied. These come from 15.5% of the state vote. Scale up to 100% and you pick up a little more than 160 more.
Add those two terms, and you get about +210 plus change, almost an exact tie, with error bars of a few dozen in the prediction.
This really looks 50-50, unless I'm missing something.
Anybody see something else here?
/mbw
From the Minnesota Secretary of State's office, Franken had a good day. With 15.49% of the ballots recounted, he closed the gap by 43 votes even though Coleman won these votes 52-48 on election day.
It's remarkable how some people are either unable to follow instructions or are simply careless about their vote. I wonder, if they drive to the precinct, how they6 can push the right pedals, fasten the seatbelts, and close the doors.
And the US isn't a country that is new to democratic (small c) traditions. We've had the vote for a while.
This is what John Ziegler, failed talk show host, should be covering. Of course, it shows how bad Dems and 'Pubs are.
According to the Star Tribune the 28 gain came from "several" precincts. The old machines were in use in 18 precincts, so there is the potential for a substantial gain.
Updated StarTribune tally:
18% recounted; Coleman up by 174.
The St. Paul returns are looking awesome right now
F +11
C -2
Only 1 challenged (Coleman)
25% reporting
@ michael, I think there are also challenged ballots to take into account. I'm presuming that challenged ballots are not part of the count. But, I'm not sure what we can tell from the number of chllenged ballots because Franken could be challenging (1) ballots that otherwise would go for Coleman and he thinks should not be counted or (2) ballots that otherwise would not be counted and he thinks should go for him. And, vice versa for Coleman challenged ballots. So, just knowing that Franken or Coleman challenged X ballots really doesn't tell us who those ballots may eventually be counted for.
I will do a little projection...
The Secretary of state reports having recounted precints which were worth 195,708 votes for Coleman and 180,950 votes for Franken on election day. 376,658 total Coleman / Franken votes. Total Coleman / Franken votes on election day were 2,422,965, meaning that the recount is 15.54% over. One could get into estimating average bias in these precints vs average bias in other precincts, but since in Florida in 2000 Gore gained more net votes in counties that went for Bush than in counties that went for Gore, I will not try any fancy extrapolations and instead simply use 15.54% complete as a linear scaling factor.
Not counting disputed ballots, Coleman is down 70 at 195,638 and Franken is down 27 at 180,923. Disputed ballots total 106 more potential votes for Coleman and 115 more potential votes for Franken. I don't know how many of these will eventually count, but looking at the pictures on Minnesota Public Radio's page makes me think most of the disputed ballots will be counted as originally intended. Since I don't have a good reason to bias the disputed ballots, I will assume for the time being that the accept rate is equal for both Coleman disputes and Franken disputes (while I might like to think the Franken lawyers are more reasonable in their disputes, that thumb print ballot throws water on that notion).
Franken's net gain not counting disputes = 43. This is on pace for a net gainm of 276.6 votes (using the 15.54% figure from above).
Franken's net gain on disputed ballots was 9 (Coleman challenged 115 votes that would have counted for Franken while Franken only challenged 106 votes that would have counted for Coleman). This is on pace for 57.9.
Therefore Franken's net gain is on pace to be somewhere between 276 votes and 335 votes depending on how many of the disputed ballots end up counting.
Either way, Franken is currently on pace to _barely_ edge past Coleman.
As I said, I think most of the disputed ballots will end up counting. I will estimate (guess) 80%. This gives a net gain of 322 for Franken and a win by 116 votes over Coleman.
Final vote count: Coleman 1,211,768; Franken 1,211,884.
@pulpmonger There's one flaw with your extrapolations. an F gain of 28 came from a known special set of macjines. It will only be approximately doubled in the whole sample, not multiplied by 6.4. That knocks about 120 off the extrapolations, leaving almost an exact tie!
/mbw
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,
^^ 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, 徵信,
^^ 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,
外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇 外遇
外遇 外遇外遇 外遇 外遇
外遇 外遇 外遇
外遇
外遇 外遇
外遇
外遇 外遇外遇
外遇
外遇 外遇外遇 外遇 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 ,
外遇 外遇 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇
艾葳酒店經紀公司提供專業的酒店經紀, 飯局小姐,領檯人員,領台,傳播妹,或者想要到台北酒店、林森北路酒店,私人招待所,或者八大行業當酒店PT,酒店公關,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禮服酒店,鋼琴酒吧當酒店領檯,酒店小姐,公關小姐??,還是想去制服店當上班小姐,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、學生兼差、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和特種行業內容,想找打工、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打工,酒店上班,酒店打工環境、上班條件給水水們。
水水們妳有缺現金、有卡債、缺錢卡奴的煩腦嗎?想到日本留學日本打工嗎?妳是工讀生找工作??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,兼職工作日領假日打工的機會嗎??想實現夢想卻又缺錢沒錢嗎!??整天還在煩腦如何賺錢有什麼賺錢方法,和賺錢最快方法!?,想要打工,日領工作,短期打工,兼差工作,打工兼差工作嗎!?,
請加入我們艾葳酒店經紀公司工作單純輕鬆”高時薪”又可日領徵想要當傳播妹,上班小姐,酒店兼差,酒店兼職,歡迎學生打工,!!!
加入我們實現夢想就從現在開始^__^
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,
菲
梵,
Post a Comment