UPDATE (1 PM CST): As of 1 PM, I'm now projecting a Franken lead of more like 70 votes, which would bring my numbers closely in line with the Star Tribune's estimate.
_____
This is fuzzy, fuzzy math, but with Norm Coleman again converting only a very low percentage of his challenges in counting this morning, I am now projecting a Franken lead of something like 40 votes after all challenged ballots -- including ballot challenges withdrawn by both campaigns, and special circumstances ballots -- have been processed.
Specifically, I have Franken taking a lead of about 430 votes after all challenged ballots are processed this afternoon. This includes "blue folder" ballots flagged (mostly by the Coleman campaign) for special circumstances. The Canvassing Board ruled this morning that they will evaluate blue folder ballots based on the markings on the ballot only, and will not consider the special circumstances behind them, which are outside of its jurisdiction and instead the subject for a court challenge. As such, very few of these types of challenges are likely to be successful, at least in the immediate term. Coleman has significantly more blue folder challenges than Franken, and so this is likely to add to Franken's total.
I then have Franken losing a net of about 385 ballots once withdrawn challenges are processed, as Franken has more withdrawn challenges that Coleman, most of which are Coleman ballots. This would leave him with a small surplus.
These assumptions are calibrated off the Franken campaign's assertion that it was ahead by 4 ballots, assuming that all challenges would be rejected. This implies, for instance, that a slightly higher percentage of withdrawn Coleman challenges will be converted to Franken ballots than the other way around (not all withdrawn challenges will produce a vote for the opponent, since some were made to ballots deemed to be illegal that the campaigns were hoping to get counted for themselves).
If the Franken's campaign assertion is wrong, that will flow through to my assumptions, leading my math to be wrong too.
12.19.2008
Franken Appears Likely to Lead After Challenge Phase
@ 11:53 AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
47 comments
This is such a painful defeat for Coleman. A slow, agonizing process that is compounded by gradual, yet total loss of dignity as Coleman frantically launches wave after wave of legal challenges.
Wow.
THIS IS EXCELLENT NEWS!! FOR MCCAIN!!!
Is anybody in Las Vegas giving odds on this? Or is there a betting market set up somewhere?
Intrade has Franken trading at at 76/100.
Dagger,
Intrade.com takes odds on this race. The odds are 4:1 in favour of Franken at the moment.
Intrade is moving; 80/20 for Franken now. With the Illinois Supreme Court ruling the 1600 improperly rejected ballots must be counted, and with the morning news that Coleman is only ahead by 2 votes, it should probably be 95/5 for Franken, a near certainty. We still have to wait but it is looking pretty darn promising at this point. Go Franken.
This would mean that Nate's earlier estimate of +27 for Franken was very close -- even with all the stochastic elemnents that have arisen since then.
Of course, the "game" of the absentee ballots will be interesting.
@Nate: Have you looked at our analysis from yesterday concerning strategy on the absentee ballots?
Basic premise: Whoever is ahead after today has an incentive to accept no absentee ballots. But since that's an unlikely outcome unless one of the candidates concedes (and they tacitly agree to forego the counting of those absentee ballots), the strategy by the two campaigns differs.
(1) Franken's strategy. If he's ahead after today, Franken should prefer EITHER to accept NO absentee ballots or to accept ALL of them (that is, all of those in the 5th pile).
If he's behind after today, then Franken should prefer to accept ALL 5th pile absentee ballots -- and try not to allow a selective counting or get into a game of devising rules for the counting in precincts that favor some precincts over others.
(2) Coleman's strategy. If he's ahead after today, Coleman should attempt to allow NO 5th pile absentee ballots, or failing that should attempt a SELECTIVE acceptance of the 5th pile ballots, namely in precincts/counties that are likely to favor him.
If he's behind after today then Coleman must allow some absentee ballots if he wants to win (rather than, say, concede) but only if he can do so selectively. The larger the percentage of 5th pile ballots that are included, the less likely Coleman can prevail, whether he's ahead or behind at the end of today's CB session.
For anyone interested, HERE is a live feed with a live vote counter.
Franken's at +183 according to them right now.
From the proceedings, there seem to be 2 classes of withdrawn challenges:
1. Early withdrawn. These were separated out before the board began looking at ballots.
2. Late withdrawn. These were taken out after the board began looking at ballots. When the board gets to one of these, someone says "withdrawn" and the board unanimmously votes to award the ballot to whoever it was originally awarded to.
It seems that the second class of withdrawn ballots should already be reflected in the running tally, since it's clear from the proceedings who these are votes for. Is this taken into account in Nate's analysis?
Well, I'm holding my breath here. I'm too afraid to crow, but I do like the lead Franken's building up so far (223).
On ehopes most of Coleman's challenges were bullshit, and the board will recognize it as such
As I've detailed here, in the previous score-keep thread, one of my presumptions---called "(a)" there---was evidently wrong. Flipping it to be another "equality" presumption puts my figuring in line with Nate's. Since my assumptions were "calibrated" the same way, one can regard my detailed hashing at least as a second-check on his math.
I wonder why Nate isn't commenting on Star Tribunes projection. To me that seems to be the most convincing projection method. They have all originally challenged ballots available to view and lots of people have voted on how each ballot should be allocated. As the challanges has been resolved the have corrected those ballots and based on this estimated how many of the remaining active challenges will differ from the online voters' judging. Then they have assumed that all the withdrawn challenges will give the result that the online voters said since these are most likely quite frivolous.
Now they project a Franken lead by 77 votes.
The only thing that might be a problem with this is if the online voters were wrong on a significant part of the withdrawn challenges. As I went through the 254 challenges resolved during the first day, I noticed that a large part of the ballots that the online voters got wrong were such that you had to download the pdf-version of the ballot to get it right. This was mostly ballots with identifying marks on them. If there are many ballots like those among the withdrawn challenges, that might change things, but that seems unlikely because such ballots would probably not have been seen as lost causes by the candidates before the CB started resolving challenges.
Franken pushes his lead over Coleman past 200
The state Canvassing Board's ballot rulings today in the U.S. Senate race have unofficially put challenger Al Franken in the lead by more than 200.
http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/36438459.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUac8HEaDiaMDCinchO7DU
You could be tempted to use this mess as proof that every vote counts.
Sadly not true. The lazy Barst**ds just sit there. It is the officials & lawyers that end up doing the counting.
wv cyandu - A hiden comunist paradise somewhere in Tibet where Mao is said to be still living. Cyan comunism is more spiritualy uplifting than the red variety. Oficialy twined with Xandu.
Well clearly, every vote does not count, the number of rejected votes is pretty high. Consider the ballot marked "Lizard People" in the write-in section. The voter did not fill in that oval, they clearly filled in the oval by Franken, but the ballot was rejected. This was some college kid's attempt at humor, probably saying they would rather be ruled by aliens than the actual choices, but the intent to vote for Franken was clear and unambiguous, and that vote did not count. The claim that it was intended as an "identifying mark" is ridiculous; a hundred people can claim that ballot without a shred of proof, it is no more "identifying" than drawing a star in the oval.
Juris, the problem with your theory of how Franken should strategically approach the absentee ballot counts is that he simply doesn't have the option to have all ballots accepted. The MNSC ruling stipulates that all parties have to agree on a ballot to accept it, and I think that Coleman has shown that he'd have no problem systematically discounting any and all potential Franken ballots if it means he can claim victory with the count, and take his chances with a court challenge later. Basically, the way I read it, the court ruling guaranteed that whoever is ahead after the recount and the withdrawal of all the challenged ballots will win this thing.
I can't believe that it was this close, but it looks like Franken will end up on top when this thing is done.
I've been watching this feed for about 20 minutes and Coleman has won exactly one challenge (which I thought was actually a clear vote for franken, but I must not have seen something the decision was unanimous). If Nate is baking in a 10-15% challenge success rate for Coleman his numbers will end up being way off for the second day.
Addendum on Coleman strategy for absentee ballots.
Some have said that "Coleman is in the driver's seat" because of the MN SC's ruling that both parties must agree to the procedures for counting each ballot.
As my previous post states, both candidates have an incentive to count no absentee ballots if they're ahead after today's CB work.
But Coleman can only be "in the driver's seat" if he is either behind or ahead today AND can devise a strategy (which Franken must agree to) that allows for a partial and selective counting of those 5th pile absentee ballots -- in which precincts that favor Coleman are somehow given preference.
It is not at all clear at this time how such a partial and selective counting strategy or set of precedures can be devised -- and agreed to by both parties.
Thus, Coleman would probably have to seek to accomplish a partial and incomplete count not by challenging the eligibility of ballots (before they are opened) but instead by challenging the votes on the ballots -- in the same kind of process we're witnessing now. But such an approach, it seems to me, is very unlikely ultimately to give Coleman a victory.
Thus, IMO, Coleman is not at all in the driver's seat with respect to the absentee ballot issue. All he can effecitvely do is do more lawyering -- as he is already doing today on the "duplicate ballot" issue before the MN Supreme Court.
As of the moment, Franken is up +265 votes after they reviewed 1214 ballots.
Coleman: 262
Franken: 715
No-one 237
Franken gain: 453 votes so far today.
God it's tedious!
"The memorandum has been tabled to reopen the East Gull Lake Ballot Challenge #1 for reconsideration and the chair so moves. Is there a second, please signify by saying aye."
"Aye."
"All opposed."
"The motion is carried, and the East Gull Lake Ballot Challenge #1 has been reopened for consideration."
"I move to propose to move this ballot
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!
As a lawyer I can appreciate this, but boy would this get tedious if you had to listen to it for hours and hours. . . .
P.S. (The board was trying to be consistent in either accepting or rejecting all ballots with identifying marks. In the exchange quoted they took one ballot away from Coleman and several from Franken because the voter put identifying marks like their SS # on the ballot.
Agreed on the Lizard People vote. That was specifically decided as an overvote. Identifying characteristic did not factor in. I believe they've set up a standard for that such as 'address, signature, passport number, etc.'
It was not an identifying characteristic so they basically made two suppositions. One: Lizard People is a person. Two: that you do not have to fill in the oval next to a write in ballot in order to indicate intent to vote.
Looks like Coleman just had a vote tossed out that he'd won yesterday. More good news for franken.
What's up with these terms? Blue folder? Fifth Pile?
Who makes this shit up? Is there actually a reason for it?
Juris: This talk of "strategy" is meaningless, there is no "strategy" left other than fight for every vote you have a chance of winning, and don't waste energy on votes you have no chance of winning. There are no real time limits to worry about. At this point all Coleman can do is watch the wreck happen, and perhaps take it up further in court, but Franken isn't going to give an inch and neither is he, and neither has any incentive to do so. Strategy is done.
@Tony: fundamentally I agree with you. All Coleman can do is hand-to-hand combat for each vote. He has no winning rule-driven strategy -- and no advantage under any standard vote counting rules.
Given that it's quite likely that more voters cast legitimate ballots for Franken than for Coleman, all Coleman can hope to do is to stop the process at some point when he has a temporary advantage (this strategy has failed so far), or to change the rules (hasn't worked yet), or to change the venue (intervention by federal courts).
For what its worth, the StarTribune's 'Ballot Challenge' online allowed anyone to evaluate all 6600+ challenged ballots and used these results to project a winner. The final 'consensus' by participants (I believe I read there were some 26,000 participants) was Franken by 40.
They have continued displaying the Challenge results as the canvassing board evaluates ballots, modifying their projection based on ongoing results...currently they have Franken by 75.
From what I saw while participating the vast majority of challenges were no-brainers....the challenges should never have been made and were rejected. This supports Franken's and Nate's assumptions on this point. The only thing the canvassing board seems to be doing compared to the Challenge participants is rejecting more ballots due to 'identifying marks' etc - the Challenge now puts more than 500 in the 'Other/no one' category whereas there were only about 400 there before the canvassing board results were factored in. I expected this since identifying such ballots required inspecting the entire ballot, which was made a bit difficult in the Challenge by the fact one had to load another page...most didn't bother.
I had Franken by 120 until I gave up. A few commenters on the StarTrib site who had evaluated all of the challenged ballots stated they all had Franken by about 80, remarkably close to the current projection of Franken by 75.
With the decision on counting the wrongfully rejected absentee ballots, Franken has this all but wrapped up !
The absentee ballots will not decide this. Yesterday's insipid ruling pretty much gives whomever is in the lead the ability to prevent the counting of those ballots. The early-withdraw challenges will decide this. We should be able to determine the EXACTLY what those will be as they will REVERT to the original LCB ruling, which should be available for anyone to look up. I don't understand why this isn't already floating around. The camps have to know it... If we can get that number we can determine exactly what Franken's magic number is using that number and the ones left to be rule on today. Am I wrong about this?
@ Spectator Consumer
You're right.
And the withdrawn challenges are included in the StarTribs challenge, where, as I stated just above, most were pulled because they were obvious. 99-100% of Challenge participants called those as the original LCB ruled on them. Therefore with those results 'included' in the StarTrib challenge projection, its Franken by 75. Those ballots are still available, searchable by precinct, on the StarTrib site, 'Ballot Tracker', for those interested in slogging through them.
It was not an identifying characteristic so they basically made two suppositions. One: Lizard People is a person. Two: that you do not have to fill in the oval next to a write in ballot in order to indicate intent to vote.
Correct on the first supposition, tho I would have disagreed.
On the second, it's not simply supposition, there's supporting law and precedence that makes a write-in candidate automatically considered, regardless if the bubble is filled or not. So they ruled overvote. Again, I think that's wrong, when examining the entire ballot, it's clear that the guy was emphatically choosing Franken, I believe that was the ONLY filled in oval on the entire ballot, which did have checkmarks.
How does "Franken +70" work? If it was Franken +4 assuming all-challenges-denied, and Franken won 115 challenges (maybe 116 if the board reversed a Coleman vote per Eiseley 12:34) plus 2 "flips", that means Coleman won only 41 challenges. But he was reported midmorning as having won 19 new votes + 44 takeaways = 63, and won a few more after that.
Perhaps Franken has a bunch of likely wins hiding in his 23 "unresolved" challenges, with no matching bundle for Coleman? (I note that 6 Apple Valley ones, one Wilkin-Breckenridge, and maybe 2 more from Ramsey-St. Paul and Stevens-Swan Lake overlap Coleman's challenge list too.) Or some other factor that will summarily grant challenges that haven't been reviewed yet? Or maybe there was yea-amount of uncertainty about election judges' initial rulings, and Franken's "+4" was being conservative?
I do agree that with the STrib filling in resolved challenges, their number should become accurate to within single digits, even in advance of Monday's official entry of all withdrawn challenges.
I wish we could get the skinny from a Franken insider. With all of these ballots out in the open, and with of the early-withdrawns reverting to their original classification, they should be pretty darned confident one way or another.
In absence of word from Franken's camp (and I don't mean public word because they would be sounding optimistic regardless)I think the court filings are the most telling. If Coleman thought he would be ahead after this CB meeting, he wouldn't want yesterday's ruling amended in the slightest.
And, no this won't get a USSC hearing. (Not that Coleman won't try.) Bush v. Gore aside as one of the worst cases in the history of the Court, they really do defer to the States (as they ought to). I can't see the USSC taking this up unless the Senate refuses to seat the certified winner, or if they do seat someone without certification, or if they were to order a run-off.
I managed to keep awake while watching 30 minutes of this during my lunch break. Franken was up to 287 at one point, now down about 10 from that as they consider Franken challenges to Coleman votes.
Coleman's challenges are ALL frivolous -- every one that I saw. Franken wins about 1 in 5 or 6 challenges and those votes go into the "3rd pile" -- counted as undervotes.
At this point, unless there are a lot more Franken challenges to Coleman votes, Franken is going to win handily.
Why is Franken's lead going down so quickly? I thought they were only considering Coleman challenges today.
A few points:
1. If Colman is behind after this stage, he cannot win this election (assuming the absentee ballots go for Franken) no matter how many lawyers and judges get involved. He and only prolonging the inevitable.
2. Are we quite sure Franken will win the absentee ballots? I thought Republicans voted absentee. Or is it where they are from that makes them pro Franken.
3. I think Franken should get the "Lizard People" ballot vote. Clearly the voter wanted the Lizard People to be on the ballot for consideration for various offices. And indeed the Lizard People were deemed qualified for the office of President. However upon careful deliberation Franken was deemed to be more qualified for the Senate than the Lizard People.
4. I love the "5th pile" terminology. It sounds like something you leave on the floor on the fifth day of your stay in a North Korean prison.
The Lizard people ballot looks to me like the voter could have put an X thru Franken's oval in order to write in Lizard People (as a protest).
I was against including it weeks ago, and especially given that the Board generally saw X as meaning obliteration (absent any other evidence), I expected it to go down.
The fact that "Other" went from 198 only to 229 (before they began the second batches of challenges)---instead of the direct 249 extrapolation of Thursday's close---may be evidence that Nate's revision to +70 (the STrib upticked briefly to 82, now back at 74) is right.
I think I've got it!
The Lizard People thing? It was a typo. The voter intended to write "Blizzard People". This being Minnesota, they have more blizzards than lizards. Now, just by looking at him, you can see that Norm Coleman is not a Blizzard Person. This is obvious because of his excessive use of hairspray, which would result in hypothermia were he actually trapped out in a blizzard. Have you noticed that his hair never moves, even when it's windy outside? Clearly he is not adapted to these kind of conditions.
Franken, by contrast, eschews the use of hairspray, and wears glasses, which would be very useful in keeping the snow and wind out of his eyes. I have never seen him without his shirt, so I cannot say if he is or is not a Yeti. Therefore, it is clearly an Al Franken vote.
Great post!
Would you like a Link Exchange with our new blog COMMON CENTS where we blog about the issues of the day??
http://www.commoncts.blogspot.com
Lizard People voter wrote that name in, I think, all the write-in spaces and market the oval with an X.
In the Senate race, he wrote in Lizard People, but he did NOT mark an X. In Franken's oval, he filled it in, AND put the X there.
Obviously, he was being emphatic about his intent to vote for Franken.
I advise people not to go to that Minneapolis Star-Trib site, unless you like battling Java-script crap and fake "NEXT" buttons which loads pop-up garbage. If newspapers are going into the toilet in this country it's not hard to see why--who would go twice to a site that contained such blatant, aggravating irritants? It's like trying to read in a cloud of mosquitoes.
Memo to the Strib: Getting people's attention and getting their attention by pissing them off is not the same thing.
Dear Pragmatus, there is a far more pragmatic approach!
Forsooth: Firefox has extensions that allow you to manage java sripts quite easily and simply.
I have one such an extension on by browser now; when I visit the strib page, it takes merely two mouse clicks to see the streaming video and I get none, zero popups. Further, I can block cookies from the site and even manage what IP address they see me as having. Were they to ask me to register (they don't, but hypothetically speaking), another extension allows me to post a disposable single-use email address with one click of a button.
Firefox is craftier than the website, and far more secure than IE.
Big fan of Lizard People here.
I just received a ballot for the Board of Directors of a conservation org that I belong to. After voting for all the Director candidates, I dutifully wrote "Lizard People" somewhere else on the ballot. It's the right thing to do.
(I'm quite confident that it won't invalidate my vote; even if it did, the BoD candidates always win election, because what the WTF: they're the ones who've volunteered to do the work.)
I encourage everyone to vote Lizard People wherever possible.
wv: viono -- your reaction if it persists for over four hours.
Vote Lizard People for Senate in 2010!
Should I take it as a bad sign for Franken then that, according to the Star Tribune, he was only ahead by 251 at the end of the day? If he loses 385 votes out of the withdrawals (which is an aspect of the process I don't understand very well, admittedly), then he'll lose by 134.
Unless, that is, the rejected absentee ballots can have some major impact. I wouldn't expect a 3 digit swing from those votes, but that's just me throwing a guess out there, based on nothing.
what are the rules?
if difference is ONE vote, winner takes all?
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,潤滑液,自慰套,威而柔,威而柔,威而柔,威而柔,自慰套,跳蛋,按摩棒,充氣娃娃,自慰套,潤滑液,威而柔,FleshLight,跳蛋,按摩棒,充氣娃娃,跳蛋,按摩棒,FleshLight,充氣娃娃,情趣商品,情趣網站,情趣網站,潤滑液,性感內衣,充氣娃娃,按摩棒,情趣精品,跳蛋,情趣網站,情趣商品,跳蛋,FleshLight,充氣娃娃,情趣內衣,情趣精品,按摩棒,威而柔,自慰套,成人玩具,Nexus,lelo,聰明球,後庭,後庭g點,g點,美國fleshlight,STU訓練大師,Fleshgirls,Toys Heart,Tenga,日本 Vibratex,日本Toys Heart ,日本Tenga,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,整型,水噹噹,貸款,貸款,信用貸款,宜蘭民宿,花蓮民宿,未婚聯誼,網路購物,珠海,下川島,常平,珠海,澳門機票,香港機票,婚友,婚友社,未婚聯誼,交友,婚友,婚友社,單身聯誼,未婚聯誼,未婚聯誼,婚友社,婚友,婚友社,單身聯誼,婚友,未婚聯誼,婚友社,未婚聯誼,單身聯誼,單身聯誼,婚友,單身聯誼,未婚聯誼,婚友,交友,交友,婚友社,婚友社,婚友社,大陸新娘,大陸新娘,大陸新娘,越南新娘,越南新娘,外籍新娘,外籍新娘,台中坐月子中心,搬家公司,搬家,搬家,搬家公司,線上客服,網頁設計,線上客服,網頁設計,網頁設計,土地貸款,免費資源,電腦教學,wordpress,人工植牙,關鍵字,關鍵字,seo,seo,網路排名,自然排序,網路排名軟體,
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 , 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 , 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 , 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 , 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 , 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 , 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 , 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 , 外遇劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿喜帖囍帖卡片外遇外遇 外遇 外遇外遇 外遇
外遇 外遇 外遇 外遇剖析 外遇調查 外遇案例 外遇諮詢 偷情 第三者外遇話題 外遇發洩 感情挽回 徵信社 外遇心態 外遇 通姦 通姦罪 外遇徵信社徵信社外遇 外遇 抓姦徵信協會徵信公司 包二奶 徵信社 徵信 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信 婚姻 婚前徵信 前科 個人資料 外遇 第三者 徵信社 偵探社 抓姦 偵探社 偵探社婚 偵探社 偵探社偵探家事服務家事服務家電維修家事服務家事服務家事服務家事服務家事服務持久持久持久持久持久持久持久離婚網頁設計徵信社徵信社徵信徵信社外遇離婚協議書劈腿持久持久持久持久持久劈腿剖析徵信徵信社外遇外遇外遇外遇徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信徵信社徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社
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