The Omaha World-Herald and several other news organizations have called Nebraska's Second Congressional District, which incorporates Omaha and some of its suburbs and exurbs, for President-Elect Barack Obama.
The only outstanding electoral votes are now in Missouri, which some organizations have yet to call for John McCain. It appears to us, however, that there are an insufficient number of provisional ballots to provide Barack Obama with a realistic opportunity to win there, and so we are calling that state for John McCain for the time being.
This brings Obama's haul from Tuesday evening to 365 electoral votes, a similar total to the 370 that Bill Clinton won en route to his first term in 1992. Obama's victory, however, might have more symbolic power than Clinton's because of the success that he has had in flipping formerly ruby-red territories like Indiana, North Carolina and Omaha, Nebraska over to the blue team. Not coincidentally, these are some of the states in which Obama was furthest ahead of McCain in terms of organization and ground game, along with the Mountain West where he won states like Nevada and New Mexico by surprisingly large margins.
11.07.2008
Obama Wins Omaha, NE Electoral Vote; Final Tally Looks to be 365-173
@ 6:25 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
92 comments
365 is a very nice number
Zing!
An electoral vote for every day of the year!!!!!
(To anyone who mentions that 2008 was a 'leap year' - DON'T MAKE ME COME OVER THERE!!!!!!!)
1 EV for each day in the year!
Except this year, of course. This year is a leap year.
Very similar to both Clinton wins in the end. I keep thinking about Hillary's supposed phone call to Richardson in the spring: "He can't win, Bill!"
[ tyler curtain ] said...
365 is a very nice number
I'd have preferred 538.
Why have cnn and cbs news increased McCain's total to 163 EVs? They seem to think McCain has taken the extra EV from Nebraska for some reason. Someone should let them know the correct result.
obamaha!
of course clinton won such ruby-red strongholds as arkansas, mississippi and montana. there's still room on the lifeboat!
[wv clona - we gotta clona obama]
So now that the result is settled, how often did this particular win come up in your final pre-election simulation runs? The histogram is particularly dense around the 365 range, so its hard to see where this one is.
I would love more insight into whats going on in MO. If it was just 7000 provisional ballots left wouldn't all the networks have just called it? I know in 2002 Magical ballots showed up and turned the tide for the dems. Now I am pretty certain we are sunk there, but am I dreaming in thinking maybe theres more than meets the eye?
oh, and i still want missouri. 4000 votes is in simple one-ballot-box election fraud territory.
Great year, Nate.
Can't help but think you are slightly responsible, seeing how you stopped the Drudge Report from controlling the narrative with poll cherry-picking.
I'd also say that Obama won his map in a POST-Rush Limbaugh environment (Rush's influence on politics in 1992 is nothing comapred to what it had become by even 1996!)
We live in a country almost equally divided, so a victory this lopsided today means a lot more than Clinton's 370.
There, I said it!
Obamaha.
It seems that the networks are being slow to pick up the Nebraska vote. Pity because it's so cool (in a pathetically geeky sort of way). This will be the trivia question of the future whenever they talk about splitting EVs--and here it is.
This election has just been too much--mostly good, of course
Nate, I'm wondering if you've got any thoughts about why all the polls underestimated Obama's support by such a wide margin in NV, and underestimated McCain's support in ND, AR, and LA. None of this effected the result since those states remained in their respective columns, but the numbers were consistently far off the mark in those states, by multiple pollsters, while in other states they were dead on.
THIRTEENTH?!
So now that the result is settled, how often did this particular win come up in your final pre-election simulation runs? The histogram is particularly dense around the 365 range, so its hard to see where this one is.
364 is listed as the 3rd most-likely so it's easy to pick out. Squinting I see a slightly shorter line to the right of it before another one goes a bit higher. So I'd hazard a guess it was about 3.7% (370/10000) or so chance.
Although there are other ways for this number to come up, so this exact scenario wouldn't necessarily account for all of those.
I love the banner ad on the top, with "Did Obama buy the election?" And there's the picture of him looking like "aww, you guys got me"
Almost as good as the "Obama finished?" ads were on the 4th.
First.
That is so beautiful! I am happy, really really happy about this little victory!
365?! I can live with that!
That one EV is a big one, isn't this the first time a state (one that has the possiblity of doing so) has done this? And from red Nebraska of all places!
Wonderful.
Still checking here several times a day, wouldn't mind continued insights from the team, Nate and Sean.
WV: ranone, like my sentence
greatnewsinoh:
The problem isn't that CBS News and CNN haven't picked up on what's happened in Nebraska D2. The problem is that they've positively changed their EV totals to reflect a McCain win in Nebraska D2. They did this about an hour ago, the same time people started reporting that Obama had won that extra EV. It's pretty weird that they've got it the wrong way round.
(ABC news still has Obama on 364 and McCain on 162).
So happy. We walked our asses off in west omaha during GOTV. Totally worth it!
WOW! Nebraska!! Lovin it!!
Does this final result mean we don't have to hear how Missouri always picked the winner for the rest of our lives?
http://www.236.com/news/2008/11/07/nate_silver_isnt_breaking_up_w_10120.php
"Obama's victory, however, might have more symbolic power than Clinton's because of the success that he has had in flipping formerly ruby-red territories like Indiana, North Carolina and Omaha, Nebraska over to the blue team."
Because Georgia, Louisiana, Tennessee and Kentucky are easy wins for Democratic Presidents?
It looks like it might have been around 190 out of 10000 for 365 from the chart. I suspect most of those include the Omaha EV, but with MO and IN switched. There aren't any other good ways to get that extra EV without Omaha due to regional correlations (i.e. when Obama wins GA, he'd almost certainly win NC and VA).
This specific result is probably closer to 0.6% (assuming my 365 is 1.9% is correct).
There's a 10,000 "undervote" for Minn. Senate in heavily democratic precincts. A likely explanation - failure to scan. A manual recount will put Franken in the Senate without the Senate having to exercise it's constitutional right to seat him.
Woo-hoo! Obama will now be a trivia question answer. Who was the first president to split Nebraska's EVs?
I don't think I'm duplicating someone else, but isn't Obama's win at least on par with Clinton because the lack of a meaningful 3rd party candidate to sop up some of the Republican vote? I haven't gone back to see what the "science" was on whose ox got gored by Perot and which Perot voters would have just stayed home but I think Obama's totals are somewhat more impressive when viewed in that light.
It's actually WAY bigger than Clinton in either 1992 or 1996. He was only in the low 40s in popular vote in 1992, as Ross Perot handed him the election; and he still didn't even crack 50% the second time despite being the incumbent, and had an artificially inflated electoral vote count, again thanks to Perot.
Given the country's recent political climate, Obama's win is a landslide -- the biggest for a Democrat since 1964.
Until all votes are COUNTED in Missouri, so one should be awarding McCain anything. And I am hearing a majority of absentee and provisional ballots are coming from the St. Louis area. Obama still has an outside shot to win it.
Concur,
One of the most striking aspects of this election was the contest between the beliefs of ground game/political infrastructure vs a static map wherein microtargeting key precincts in Ohio & Florida is the only pathway to victory. I submit that the former has sundered the latter and not a cycle too soon.
I for one hope that this infrastructure is maintained not just for governing, but to lay the groundwork for the all important 2010 cycle and how that election will not only influence the mid term narrative, but the effects upon the state houses as the nation prepares for the redistricting that will follow. Redistricting that will form the basis of congressional power for the next decade.
BTW, I have enjoyed reading your work from the Pobano days and I hope you continue to bring your analytical efforts to the political arena as well as the baseball arena. It would appear as though we are at the beginning of an era in political analysis that resembles the 95-97 era in baseball analysis. If this does develop I believe you have the position as first as well as your track record to have a fine career in front of you.
Best wishes.
Congrats to the great people in Omaha for their terrific victory.
This is likely to be a one-shot deal though. The Republican Governor and Legislature sound like they will revert to winner take all, which is absolutely from a nationalwide Dem point of view vastly preferable.
Nebraska District 2 goes to Obama! Hey Omaha, we got our blue box on the map!!!!!
Nebraska too!!.
I think we must call him Conservative Obama.
Actually, if you leave MO uncalled, it matches the final projection map! (The only states that didn't match the projections are IN and NE-3, I think).
I love this website, and decided to do a somewhat detailed analysis of how Nate did versus two obvious competitors -- RCP and Pollster.
For those interested, here is the post.
http://musefree.wordpress.com/2008/11/07/the-real-winner-contd/
--Spectacle said...
It's actually WAY bigger than Clinton in either 1992 or 1996. He was only in the low 40s in popular vote in 1992, as Ross Perot handed him the election;--
THE STUPID IT BURNSSSSSS -
once again EVERY SINGLE exit poll and post-election survey in both 1992 and 1996 said that Perot took votes away from Clinton and the GOP equally. Perot did NOT hand either election to him.
Had Perot not been a candidate, Clinton would have gotten around 53% in 1992 and 55% in 1996.
Cursory math shows huge gauntlet for GOP to overcome in 2012. Here it is:
American population:
Hispanic 9% 27,000,000 Obama 70%
Jews 2% 6,000,000 Obama 78%
Blacks 11% 33,000,000 Obama 95%
Total 22% 66,000,000
Obama 83.5%
McCain 15%
3rd Party 1.5%
Difference 68.5%
0.685 X 66,000,000 = 45,200,000
Caucasians + other (asians, etc.) = 78% 234,000,000
to make up 45,200,000 in popular vote from remaining 234,000,000 a GOP contender would need to win by 19.5% in that group. Probably about 59%-39% Obama lost among this group, but won 43% of the vote. If his Presidency is 1/2 decent, he should win more of the white vote as they'd give him the benefit of the doubt more than this time. There are a million holes in my explanation I could list, but the meat of it is true. It's a big hurdle for the GOP to beat him in 4 years.
Check these two websites out:
http://election.cbsnews.com/election2008/president.shtml
http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/president/
??????????????????????????????????
What ifs I don't like going by. Clinton never got over 50% end of story. I see McCain is at 46.1 in popular vote. I think he might slide to 45%. Does Obama have a chance to get 70 million votes? I would sure love him to break 70 million.
Hey Nate, when are you gonna have a post-mortem on the final numbers? A few weeks? Reason I ask is I'm planning a stats-heavy blog post myself comparing Obama's performance with a weighted average of past democrats from your history table.
gaticali: Heard in Boston: "Gatacali ya queah"
I'm so happy this worked out. I really wanted to see an EV split, and even more so I wanted Obama to get EVs (or an EV) from a really random (i.e. RED) state. Nebraska fits the bill. It also reminds us that there is no red or blue America. Nebraska obviously has at least one reasonably blue area in it. Lincoln is also blue, but the lines aren't drawn well for a democrat to pick up that district. Also, I met a pro-Obama guy on a plane a month or two ago who was from Omaha and I told him he might win an EV and he was pessimistic about it, though happy that his immediate neighborhood was pro-Obama. Glad he won! (Though now I'm wondering if he was actually from Lincoln...either way, at least his state got an EV!)
If Republicans don't began including minorities in their party the republicans will die off like the whigs, national unity party, federalist and other parties in U.S. history that died off. White population will only decrease as time goes on and it will make it difficult for repubs to operate under its current form.
Adrian said...
Because Georgia, Louisiana, Tennessee and Kentucky are easy wins for Democratic Presidents?
---
Clinton is a Southerner, so the fact that he was able to win certain Southern states is comparatively unremarkable (and in a less polarized political environment, no less). Obama is not only a black man, but he also has urban roots. Urbanites generally don't win elections because they don't have the "populist" cred that is typically necessary to win in regions such as the South. Obama was able to overcome that, breaking what appeared to be an inevitable streak of Southern Republican dominance in the process.
I don't want to diminish Clinton, because he was indeed an great candidate. That said, he did not change the political landscape---he didn't transform the South; rather, he won certain Southern states because of his roots and his personality, not his message. Once 2000 came, the GOP was able to reclaim the South, as Bubba was no longer at the top of the ticket. Obama's victories, however, are purely the result of intense organization. He's built a broad coalition, and this new coalition has the potential to change the electoral map for generations to come.
buckeye:
I reckon Obama has an outside chance of hitting 70 million votes.
There must be a fairly good chance of the final percentages being Obama - 54%, McCain - 45%.
I checked to see which votes are still outstanding in Washington state, and quite a lot of them are from King County (Seattle), where Obama polled 71%. In California there are at least 2.7 million votes waiting to be counted, where Obama polled 61%.
If this were a close election, we'd be preparing for a re-count in Missouri.
Obamaha?
"Because Georgia, Louisiana, Tennessee and Kentucky are easy wins for Democratic Presidents?"
It deflates the myth that only Southern red states can be flipped, and then only by Southern Democrats.
Interesting figures from Minnesota:
MN - Presidential election:
Total - 2,900,759 votes
MN - Senate election:
Total - 2,883,098 votes
That suggests there might be some votes outstanding in the Senate race.
--MN - Presidential election:
Total - 2,900,759 votes
MN - Senate election:
Total - 2,883,098 votes
That suggests there might be some votes outstanding in the Senate race.--
That suggests only one thing - a much higher than normal level of voting in the Senate race.
Nearlyt every race below president has fewer votes than the one listed above. That (by my rough calculations) 599 out of every 600 people who voted for president also voted for senator is an extraordinarily high number.
If it suggested anything, it would be that votes were ADDED, not stolen, to the senate race.
Nate, please tell us your take on Alaska! Are there in fact missing votes?
Nate has a new thread on Alaska up.
sfergus483:
Thanks for putting me straight on that.
alex epstein:
A new thread has just started, giving Nate's take on Alaska.
@sfergus483:
Please be careful who you're calling stupid. Not only is it a bad way to make your point, but chances are the person you're calling stupid is at least as smart as you are.
Secondly, please post the actual data you have next time, instead of relying on assertion, capital letters, and slander. I was there too, and while Perot did likely pull popular votes away from both candidates, Clinton most certainly benefited in the electoral count from Perot. Clinton was going to win all the states he won that we tend to call "blue" states nowadays. But Perot was crucial in helping him win all those southern states that made him look like he was more effective down there than he actually was.
I'm sure the stupid burns, but isn't this attitude precisely the sort of thing so many of us were hoping to get away from by supporting Obama? I know it was for me.
@Boxydancer:
And right on about Clinton's "bubbaness". This worked for a number of voters in the south who still had some real Dixiecrat in them, and weren't all that comfortable with a New England patrician "east coast elite". Combine this with Perot's presence for those who felt similarly but who wouldn't have voted for a liberal, et voila -- you have Clinton winning down there.
What was the eventual Republican solution? Get a new George Bush who people thought was actually from south -- or at least appeared to have some of that bubbaness. And Nader instead of Perot.
Nate, it is much more impressive than Clinton's win due to it was head to head vs. Perot being involved as well as the vote % and of course the highest vote total ever received by any President
@sfergus
Let's look at one example of how YOUR stupid burns.
In 1988, Dukakis lost Montana to G.H.W. Bush 46%-52%.
In 1992, Clinton won Montana over Bush 38%-35%, with Perot pulling in 26%.
So 1992 saw Clinton lose 8% of the Democratic 'margin' to other candidates [namely Perot], Bush lose 17% of the Republican 'margin' to other candidates [ditto], and an object lesson in how you're full of shit.
By the way, Obama lost Montana by half the 6% Dukakis margin, 47%-50%.
I live in Omaha, and I'm proud of that little blue box.
I'm not surprised at the margin in Nevada. I live in California, and in trying to figure out where I could make the most impact, I talked with the local Obama field organizers putting together teams from California for Nevada. They said they actually already had enough people signed up to have at least one contact PER VOTER in Nevada. I ended up going to Pennsylvania for the month instead, where I had roots anyway and knew the ground better, although of course we skunked McCain by an even larger margin there. (Familiarity bred contempt in this case.) We had folks from out of state as well, New York mostly, helping, but the contact rate, while phenomenal, wasn't anything close to what I understood the rate in Nevada.
All politics is local -- those door knocks are a helluva lot better than TV, and it's oddly refreshing to see basic retail playing so big a role once again.
Howcome the AP hasn't called them yet? (either Omaha or Missouri?)
http://hosted.ap.org/specials/election_night_2008/election_map_premium/index.html?SITE=MASPDELN
And does Missouri have a requirement for an automatic runoff if the margin is less than a specific threshold or percentage of the total vote?
I'm not sure which states have those provisions, so any help would be appreciated.
Three days later and no final count... I know, the unassigned EVs won't make a difference, but it'd be nice to have that 100% certainty.
there could be some real importance of that ev, historically... i have to wonder if this will usher back in a vote on the question of eliminating the ec. it wouldn't have to be by national count, and states wouldn't have to do it by count, they could all do it the maine/nebraska way. at least that small thing would be a fairer way. also, i have to wonder if this little ev that could will usher back in a vote on a voting dc congressperson. that narrowly failed not too long back, in a bid to rig up 437 congresspeople, with dc gaining and utah gaining one each. i think it is about time dc had something other than a nonvoting appointee nothinghead 'congressperson'
Nebraska went Purple? Oh my.
Nate sez
------------------
"Obama's victory...might have more symbolic power than Clinton's because of the success that he has had in flipping formerly ruby-red territories..."
------------------
no, actually Obama's victory has more symbolic power because he won a majority of the votes. Clinton, of course, never did. That and this campaign was just (despite McCain's best efforts) conducted on a much more serious and urgent plain -- the stakes were clear, and palpable to all. Nobody's talking about the "End of History" any more. Necessity is the mother of mandate.
That and, you know, the whole 400 year racial history thing...
Sweet!! My city has gone blue!! Congrats Omaha!!
In the Clinton-Obama comparison, you have to remember the Perot factor. Obama actually had to break 50% in every state he won.
To me that makes Obama's victory massively more significant than Clinton's.
Nate: Now that all the fuss is over, do you have any plans to add confidence intervals to the Supertracker? That rolling point estimate is nice, but it would be much more meaningful oif there were some measure of accuracy to go along with it.
David,
I'd love for the presidential election go to a popular vote system, but I worry about a system that uses non-static boundaries to draw districts. Once a party controls the state government they gain some control over the distribution of electoral votes from that state. And it would probably be worse if districts were drawn at a federal level.
Hey Nate, since the Missouri result is only "provisional" (is a recount going to be triggered by the narrow margin?) can't you put it in pink instead of red on the map?
Having had the experience (fortunate or un-) of living through the Clinton era in KY, and of living through Bush in NC, I can assure you that it was much easier to "flip" KY for Clinton in '92 than it was to turn NC blue. In '92, Kentucky hadn't built an entrenched identity as a "red state." While it was "Southern," the cultural identity was more about being "Real Americans" in the working class sense than it was about Christianist "moral issues." The fallout of the culture wars has shifted red states to a very different terrain than they were when Clinton won - and he never won Indiana or North Carolina.
Obama won because he ran against and above those culture war divides, and because he forged a new coalition of Democratic voters. North Carolina is perhaps the clearest example of the diversity of Obama's coalition. His strength here came from African-Americans; students; upper and upper-middle class libs in the tech, banking, and academic sectors around Charlotte and the Research Triangle; "latte libs" in Asheville; military families around Fayetteville; and a wide array of working- and middle-class white voters on the coast and in the mountains. While Obama lost most of the NC mountain counties, his margins in many were remarkably close given the demographic breakdowns and historical voting records of the state.
My first vote was cast for Clinton/Gore - in Kentucky - so I don't want to diminish the difficulty of that campaign. But I do think that it's an apples-to-oranges comparison in the states flipped by C/G and those flipped by O/B. Besides, in '92, in Kentucky at least, we had nothing in terms of "ground game" to even compare to the efforts of the Obama campaign in North Carolina this year. Honestly, I've never seen anything like it.
Let's go for 376 -- recount MO!
How many electoral votes would Obama have won if the entire nation used Nebraska/Maine's system?
What amazes me is that there are still at least 10 million uncounted votes, yet virtually nothing is being said about it in the media. Democrats aren't saying anything, Republicans aren't saying anything.
In California, there were 12 million votes cast in the 2004 presidential election, yet this year they've only reported 10 million and change while at the same time talking about a "record turnout."
No one says anything. Nate, you've mentioned it in passing, but that's all. As far as I'm concerned, the election results aren't in and may never be in.
Look, we saw the elections of 2000 and 2004 stolen by the Republicans. Now, because Obama looks like he won the 2008 election, everyone's going to walk away satisfied even though 10% of the votes aren't counted.
This just blows my mind. When the elections of 2010 and 2012 are stolen, the ones to blame will be ourselves. What a joke.
Thank you, Nate, for continuing to update. Most other news organizations seem to have forgotten about updating their election maps. I am so excited about the Nebraska results. Maybe I'll move back to Nebraska someday after all!
http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/president/map.html
Look at the map by voting shifts.
1. Compare it to the American Factfinder map of "American" ancestry by county.
2. Gore's and Clinton's states (AR & TL) are the worst. What did they do for Obama? The same Nothing that they did for Kerry. The same nothing that Bentson did for Dukakis. The sooner we realize that Clinton was a fluke possible only with Perot, the sooner we can get over any notion that southern Democrats have any importance.
The RFK coalition became the Baroni Urban Ethnics and the Neighborhood Movement of the 70s and their progeny are the Obama coaltion.
The influx of these northerners into VA, NC, CO, NV, and FL is no coincidence. Nor is the high concentrations of Polish Americans and Czech Americans in the flipped NE district.
Several historic factors come into play.
1) Since FDR's win in 1944, the country has seen 60 years of elections pass and only one Northerner has won - and he wasn't permitted to live out his term. Until Obama.
2) The post Civil Rights/Voting Rights Act era shifted the voting power from the Dems to the GOP on the strength on the GOP's Southern Strategy, which was a racial and regional appeal. Only two Democrats won the presidency since (or three, if you count Gore) and all were Southerners until Obama. It was breaking that Southern stranglehold that was significant this time around.
Florida really is a split state because of so many Northern retirees. And Obama would have won without NC or VA, which certainly sends the message that the South's hold on the Oval Office, which had been slipping away, is now gone.
3) Let's also not forget that while Kerry made strategic errors in his campaign that caused his state-by-state performance totals to be weakened, without very thin losses in NM and IA, he would have been 6 EVs from a win. But he -and others, including the GOP - actually did a great job registering new voters and getting them to show up to vote: the total number of votes cast in 2004 exceeded the 1984 total for the first time in 20 years. In fact, I believe the increased number from 2000 to 2004 exceeded the increased number between 2004 and 2008.
Against a wartime President, Kerry deserved some kudos too.
4) Endless speculation about the Perot effect will never answer how Clinton would have performed without him, either in the popular or EV votes.
Similarly, the issues impacting voters in each election cannot be directly compared, so it's futile to argue who did better overall.
What is certain beyond guesswork includes:
a) the voting trends of VA, CO, and NV reached their anticipated culmination in 2008. It's possible that any above average Dem could have won those, but probably not by the margins Obama produced.
b) For a Northern candidate, Obama exceeded the slower Dem-moving trend in NC. He also outperformed expectations in IN, NH and Omaha.
c) In most states, Obama's ground game exceeded any in history by either party.
d) The rise of political blogs, the netroots factor in media critique and fundraising first mined by Howard Dean/Joe Trippi, the Kerry database building, the Dean 50-state strategy, the Team Obama approach to primary caucuses, an unpopular war and a massive economic crisis, plus some missteps by McCain all played a role in this result.
So all the arguments about who was the better campaigner are akin to asking if Muhammed Ali was a better boxer than Joe Louis. The answer to that is yes, no, and nobody will ever know, and it depends on what ruler you're using to measure with.
And ultimately, all that matters is that what did prove effective should be emulated while acknowledging that uncontrollable variables will always exist.
The chief symbolic difference between Clinton and Obama is that Clinton received 39% of the popular vote to Obama's 53%.
I prefer the terms "burgundy" and "indigo" to refer to the "base" states, districts, or cities.
Example: "I grew up in the burgundy state of Nebraska, but currently live in the indigo city of New York City."
With the NE-02 win, I'm hoping the Democrats in Nebraska implement a strategy similar to that seen in Virginia.
Thanks for putting the Blue box on your map! I am getting REALLY frustrated that NONE of the major news companies have updated their maps(CNN/ABC/CBS/NBC...). I agree that our (Nebraska's) uni-cameral will most likely overturn the law allowing for the electoral votes to be split, which is sad... This will probably be the one and ONLY time Nebraska Dems will get out little blue box. =(
Keep up the great work 538!
red_rocka7 points out that Nebraska may switch back to the winner-take-all racket which corrupts the Electoral College. That would be a shame.
To wit, if Florida had Nebraska's vote-by-district system in 2000, then any recount would have had only three electors at stake; the other 22 would have been evenly split by their respective congressional districts. Bush would have won at most 14 of that state's electors when he needed 24 to win. Gore needed four to win but received zero, thanks to winner-take-all.
Think about it.
Yes we are blue!
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, 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,
thanks for all
شات-
منتدى-
يوتيوب-
شات صوتي-
قصص-
العاب:
صور:
دليل مواقع-
دردشة كتابية-
مركز تحميل:
دليل مواقع-
شات سعودي-
شات الشله-
الود-
صور-
افلام-
سيدتي-
توبيكات:
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
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,
forex systems
trading forex
auto forex trading
forex trading system
trade forex system
forex system reviews
forex signal system
automated forex systems
forex profit system
I had never see a blog batter than this blog, I like this blog very very much.By the way, do you like my products: street lights, street lighting, street lamps, ball valves, butterfly valves, butterfly valve handles, check valves, sanitary fittings, butterfly valve handles, butterfly valve handles, solar street lights, street light, valve manufacturer, butterfly valve handles, valve manufacturers, butterfly valve handles, street lamp, solar street light, ball valve, butterfly valve handles, butterfly valve, check valve,valves manufacturers, butterfly valve handles
Post a Comment