As controversy swirls around Michael Steele’s drama-laden debut as Republican National Committee Chairman, speculation about whether he’ll remain in the post has blossomed among Democrats and Republicans alike. Steele won the chairmanship in January after a six-ballot marathon that saw the previous Chairman, Mike Duncan, drop out after the third ballot and saw Steele best southerner Katon Dawson 91-77 on the final vote.
According to multiple former high-level RNC staffers familiar with the dynamics involved, Steele is unlikely to survive in the post if favored Republican Jim Tedisco loses his open-seat race to Democrat Scott Murphy. The special election, scheduled for March 31, is to fill a vacancy left when Kirsten Gillibrand took Hillary Clinton’s Senate seat.
If Tedisco loses, the ex-staffers said, “Steele is done.”
Completely, definitively?
“Absolutely.”
By contrast, they said, the recent financial allegations against Steele are unlikely to bring about a resignation unless there’s a serious smoking gun that catches Steele in specific awareness or direction of any shady doings. It’s a mens rea standard.
As for NY-20, Republican registration in the district outnumbers Democratic registration, and Jim Tedisco is a longtime New York State legislator who is extremely well known compared to the younger Murphy. Polling has shown Tedisco comfortably ahead.
However, several factors could lead to an upset here and a Democratic win. First, recent polling has shown Murphy edging closer, and Tedisco under 50%. Second, it appears that, although Republicans will again challenge the validity of signatures, third-party libertarian candidate Eric Sundwall may be poised to get on the ballot, which would likely siphon off some Tedisco votes. Third, Democrats are spending seriously on the race, while Steele’s efforts have been largely cosmetic. Steele campaigned on the idea that as chairman, he would lead the party back to winning races in territory they’ve been ceding. Still, his personal efforts behind fundraising on this race have been terrible, and Republicans watching the internal dynamics know it. If Tedisco wins, Steele won't get any credit behind the scenes. Fourth, Tedisco is struggling with his message on the stimulus package, which is apparently tied to his softening poll numbers.
For those that haven’t followed the story closely, Steele is under attack on many fronts at once, so let’s recap.
The highest profile blunder, fairly unanimously agreed, was his confrontation-and-capitulation to Rush Limbaugh, fueling the Limbaugh Strategy and by most (though by no means unanimous) accounts giving a gift to Barack Obama and Democrats in general.
Steele has had a spate of strange, provocative, on-record statements most reminiscent of the gift-a-thon that marked the Rod Blagojevich scandal. While it should be clear that Steele’s comments are not tethered to a specific ethical controversy like the former Illinois Governor’s were, in terms of their outlandishness and headline-grabbing, it’s a decent parallel. It seems that only a few days go by between Steele talking about wanting to hip-hop-ize the Republican Party, offering Indian-American Bobby Jindal some "slum love," or comparing his party to a bunch of alcoholics who need a 12-step program. Attention-grabbing? "Off the hook?" Yes. But also displeasing from a Republican perspective.
Additionally, Steele has threatened withholding re-election support for Republican moderates like Specter, Snowe and Collins if they vote with Democrats in support of Obama’s agenda, and also managed to seem waffling on this topic in his public statements at the same time. He may see his job as “to tick people off,” and it’s working with a significant number of Republicans.
Perhaps most significantly in the long run, Steele has had several bad stories emerge regarding his 2006 Maryland Senate campaign financial operations. In early February, this Washington Post investigative report disclosed that the finance director of Steele's failed 2006 Senate bid has told federal prosecutors that the campaign had funneled cash to a company run by Steele's sister. Steele strongly denied wrongdoing.
Last week, a WBAL report emerged from reporter Jayne Miller that during their 2006 statewide Maryland campaigns, Steele and Robert Ehrlich funneled $417,000 to a commodities trading firm, Allied Berton, LLC, for "political consulting." Allied Berton, being a commodities trading firm, does not offer political consulting. But apparently they can organize six busloads of homeless black men from Philadelphia to come down and hand out sample ballots labeling Steele and Ehrlich as Democrats. Speculation is mounting that Republicans who have it in for Steele are leaking these stories and potentially might have more.
Yet another major problem is organizational. Steele has no senior staff positions filled at the RNC. On the day FiveThirtyEight spoke to these former RNC staffers, Cyrus Krohn resigned his RNC post as eCampaign Director. Yet, this was one of the few staff positions with anyone in place. With many D.C. Republicans these days still scrambling for work, that Krohn quit in such an environment without another job waiting was significant, the sources said, because it illustrated the profound, rudderless dysfunction going on right now at RNC headquarters.
Finally, Steele, who won the chairmanship after a campaign for the post that provided no clear frontrunners, still has enemies within the Republican Party. Ada Fisher, an RNC member who herself was at the center of shady financial shenanigans during a 2006 run for office, blasted Steele at the end of last week and called on him to resign, is a Dawson backer. Dawson clearly knows that Steele may be vulnerable, and unlike, say, someone like Duncan who has moved on, Dawson may envision a route to winning the chairmanship after all.
However, realizing that there are a number of moving parts in the equation with Steele’s mouth being one of them, the current calculus seems to be that short of two things – (1) a serious smoking gun in the financial scandal, beyond what we’ve seen to date; or (2) a Tedisco loss in NY-20 at the end of this month – Steele would hang on in the post despite his troubles.
The first reason for that is Steele’s personality seems unlikely to lead him to resignation (comma Baby). If Steele won’t resign, the process would then be that RNC members would have to call for a special meeting to depose him. However, another vote would be required to vote Steele out, and then once that happens someone else would have to be elected.
That’s the second main reason Steele might hang on – as of now there’s no clearly supported alternative candidate. You don’t make a move until you know you’ve got the outcome secured, and while proxies for Dawson like Ada Fisher are out after Steele, that’s a long way away from Dawson having an endgame. (Dawson, by the way, has claimed publicly he supports Steele: "He has the promise to be a tremendous chairman.") Keep in mind that if something dramatic were to happen and Steele was ousted, the next race would occur in the spotlight and hindsight of the Limbaugh spectacle. The scrutiny on “who’s really running the Republican Party” and umpteen Limbaugh litmus-test questions would throw a chaotic element into the mix that would make an uncertain situation even less predictable. Someone like Newt Gingrich could probably handle it, but nobody who’s running in 2012 is going to try for the such a post, and Newt is giving indications he’s preparing for a run.
While folks like NRO's Jim Geraghty openly muse about "buyer's remorse," others Republicans seem willing to give Steele more time. Last night, conservative Patrick Ruffini acknowledged that Steele had erred in the Limbaugh firestorm, but reiterated his basic support: “I still want him to be a successful RNC Chairman. Steele was elected Chairman as a fresh face and a reformer, a basic orientation the Republican Party will need to embrace in 2010. He remains one of the most compelling public faces of the party.”
Writing for Politico, Roger Simon categorizes two types of Republicans reacting to Steele: "What the hell is this guy babbling about?" and "I know what the hell this guy is babbling about, and I don’t like it."
What is still likely is, though they are clearly not happy with some of Steele’s shenanigans and organization-building unpreparedness, there are enough Republicans at this point who would rather see Steele succeed than fail.
But God help him if Murphy beats Tedisco in NY-20.
*_*
Quick, off-topic update. Nate didn't mention this, but FiveThirtyEight turns one year old today. What a year.
3.09.2009
Steele’s Fate Likely Hinges on NY-20
by Sean Quinn @ 5:51 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

90 comments
GO SCOTT MURPHY!
Sean: on another thread someone posted a great idea, which I hope you'll consider.
In addition to the idea of your publishing an "On the Road" book from the 2008 election, this person suggested that it might be time to get on the road to look at the current recession/edging into depression.
While you're earlier narrative used Jack Kerouac this one could mirror Studs Terkel's "Hard Times." Take in foreclosures, plant closings, city council meetings, and Congressional hearings. Take in Skid Rows, itinerant labor camps, and unemployment offices -- and former Wall Streeters who are working as $12/hour janitors (you've seen the story).
Get the narrative from the street -- perhaps some of the same places you visited during the 2008 campaign -- and not just from DC.
"Steele's got game" sound familiar 538? I don't think the republicans are the only ones who overestimated Steele.
Why would anyone want God to help Steele keep his job if Tedisco loses? Steele is a scum bag and he deserves whatever lot he has himself sewn.
Still can't believe madman Paterson appointed an upstate wingnut to Hillary's seat, and in return, may have handed the scum a propaganda victory. He is soooo toast.
Ideally, New York would have Caroline Kennedy as it's junior senator and Andrew Cuomo eventualy as Governor.
BTW, Chuck Schumer is friggin' moron.
@ Hellanicus: To be fair to them, the "Steele's got game" post was about Steele's own better-than-expected performance in his failed Senate election. I think that doesn't quite translate into being able to help others' elections, though maybe one would intuitively expect so....
@ Hellanicus: "Steele's got game" sound familiar 538?
Heh. I looked at that post again and Nate's assessment was, by his own admission, pretty superficial (and did not control for jackassery). But this statement is pretty funny in retrospect: But for a very conservative Republican to do this well in Maryland...takes some serious political intangibles.
Like $417K cold cash. Yeah baby.
I just sent Scott Murphy $10 @ http://www.scottmurphy09.com
As long as he's not Louisiana Rep. William J. Jefferson and Jim Tedisco continues to prove himself to be a standard talking-points Republican, then it's worth sending my money to take these bastards done.
He won't even take a position on the stimulus -- you've got to be kidding me -- or any other major recent legislation for that matter. He'll be just another vote for the Republican leadership and needs to be defeated.
Take 'em all down.
Happy blog birthday guys! Thanks for turning political blogging upside down!
Nice post!
Can ?I hope Steele gets turned out just so I can laugh!!!
bbbwwwwaaahahahhahahaHaHahaaaaHHAAHAAA!
Just want to say happy birthday 538.... feeding this political junkie, one blog post at a time...
I hope he fails!
I concur with k. Happy B Day, 538. May you have many more!
Happy Birthday - thank you for sticking with this and continuing to be a well thought-out, informative, researched source of political information. Thanks to you I have become a more knowledgeable citizen and voter.
@ sugerfunk: thanks for the link. Every dollar counts.
What, no analysis on Kim Jong Il's re-election?
Steele's gotta go; it’s only a matter of time. We need a professional RNC Chair who can raise money and administer, including the ability to knock heads behind the scenes.
Steele is too much of a front man and while he has an interesting way about him he is too striking a personage and has become a distraction. Picking a fight with Rush in the middle of a Rahm Emmanuel / Media-inspired War with Rush was a huge bone-headed mistake.
We need a handler as RNC chair, not a person who needs handling.
He will be gone in a year, NY Congressional district be damned! (Which the GOP will win handily).
As always - great post - and
HAPPY EFFIN' BIRTHDAY 538!!!
I HOPE YOU LIVE TO BE 100!!!
Hard to believe that race is the benchmark. Tedisco is a well known Republican and Murphy the new guy on the block. Gillibrant won in what had been a secure Republican area because her Republican opponents were inept.
If Tedisco does not win it will be because he ran a highly negative campaign that does not sit well with people in upstate NY.
I think Tedisco is a better politician but I cannot endorse the way he has conducted his campaign. I voted for John Sweeny when he had the seat, until he got caught with spousal abuse issues.
Bottom line Steele's future should hardly be decided based on this race.
Steele's future could be determined by the fact that:
Obama lied, the ecomomy died..
Obama lied, jobs died....
Obama lied, retirement died....
Happy Birthday 538!
I apologize for being off topic, but a comment about trying to quiet PeteKent...
538 loses credibility by singling out PeteKent and Jack be nimble, but do not mention unnamed posters on the left who constantly engage in name calling, vulgar language, and insults.
I enjoy this website because it's a source of differing opionion from my own. I would get very little out of reading posts on a right wing forum where everyone agrees with me.
I've been called every name in the book by a few minority here. But for the most part, I've had great discussions with folks like markymark and Statler and others.
This site is full of smart people. Trying to shut out certain opionions causes is to lose its luster.
@GROG ...unnamed posters on the left who constantly engage in name calling, vulgar language, and insults.
GROG makes a good point. There is at least one left-leaning pottymouth I considered adding to my personal troll list.
But PeteKent has had hundreds and hundreds of chances to say something useful and hasn't managed to stop fulminating long enough to give it a shot. However, PeteKent is pretty much a one-person special achievement category in that regard. So far, I'm not adding a lot of names to my troll list.
Besides, it's not like this Greasemonkey script keeps you from being able to see PeteKent's posts, only that you won't see them unless you decide to. That's a pretty good match to my desires.
GROG
No need to apologize whenever you want to bring insight to the discussion. There are several people that putatively could be described as being on "my side", as if politics were some sort of sporting league.
While from time to time I like to poke fun at political leaders and candidates, for example, Bible Spice, I realize that extremists on both sides wish to shout people down.
However, if someone is engaging in troll-like behavior, I reserve the right to call them out on it. Usually, from people I have seen posting since August, I do not engage them at all.
wv - shnishle (I guess Snoop Dogg is writing the WV tonight)
Regarding the turmoil on this site, I always avoid the posts of certain posters, on both sides of the spectrum. If you can't make your point without telling somebody else to go fuck themselves, your point probably won't be of much interest to me.
The childish will always be with us. The thing to do is ignore them.
For comedic purposes only, Pragmatus, I am tempted to state the obvious. If only because I am sympathetic to your cause. ;)
Happy Birthday 538. The analysis is wonderful and I love the input. Thanks guys, you do a good job.
> Besides, it's not like this Greasemonkey script keeps you from being able to see PeteKent's posts, only that you won't see them unless you decide to. That's a pretty good match to my desires.
I don't see myself using it but I wouldn't hold it against anyone that did for the convience sake. It is sad but it is quite rare that I read PK's posts. Usually I don't even skim them anymore have become universally disappointed when I do. :(
P.S. It really pisses me off when someone lumps GROG in with PK and Jack-be-numble. :/ Fortunately a good number of people bring up defense against those dissing GROG like that. I probably should mention it more often myself.
Happy birthday FiveThirtyEight! What a year, indeed. You guys have certainly done yourselves proud.
No comment on the article I'm afraid, but I had to post a comment just to say happy birthday. Hard to believe that 538's only been around for a year, actually - feels like you've always been here. Long may it last!
I, for one, have lumped GROG in with PK, j-b-n and others I consider to be trolls.
When he/she/it first started posting, the entirety of his/her/it's talking points were totally discredited GOOPer talking points. In addition, there was no factual basis for many of the points he/she/it was pushing, and on the rare instance that he/she/it posted a citation as 'proof', it almost invariably was from Faux News, Drudge, or other similar clap-trap site.
After I had read GROG's posts for about a week, and seeing no redeeming value in them (as they basically parroted PK, j-b-n, et al), I concluded that I would treat GROG as a troll. Since I usually scroll past posters I consider to be trolls without even skimming them, if GROG has changed to non-parrot posts of the known trolls, I wouldn't know.
Whose fault is that? In my opinion, GROG is the fault. If GROG wanted to present an opposing point of view that I would consider, he/she/it wouldn't have started posting by rote repetition of GOOPer talking points. He/she/it wouldn't have parroted PK, j-b-n et al. He/she/it would have presented valid, factual based contributions.
I will try to read posts by GROG for a while to see if he/she/it has changed it's posting style, and is now presenting factual information, even if it is in opposition to the philosophy of most posters here. I doubt that I will be impressed with any 'gravitas' and/or fact-base in his/her/it's postings, though. If that scenario happens (i.e., a lack of factual information), it won't be long until GROG is back on my personal listing of who is a troll.
I have enjoyed my time here -- I would not come back as much as I do if I did not. I wish the site a Happy Birthday and express my gratitude to our hosts who provide us all with provocative posts and a forum to air our opinions.
I am always amused -- but more often scared by the degree of intolerance and unwillingness to listen to contrary points of view by many on the left. I have called them out as Stalinists and they know who they are.
I enjoy being provocative and more than that enjoy my sense of being right. I was sadly mistken concerning the race bw Obama and McCain, but the dispurtions of September were of a nature that my own power to absorb and predict were overcome by igorance and a heavy dose of wishful thinking.
After nearly 30 years of GOP government, it initially felt liberating to yield power so completely. That sense of liberation has truned to trepedation that occasionally verges on panic when I see the Obama agenda unfolding.
Obama's motives are questionable, but what has become apparent is that he is wrecking this economy and is not moving it at the moment towards lasting recovery (if any). The intital foreign policy moves have been similarly inept and it seems we have indeed elected the talent and telegenic tyro many of us feared to the leadership of the free world.
It makes me want to retch.
Mike in MD also is puke worthy.
I typically ignore such overblown pomposity, but point it out occasionally so that the exception can prove the rule.
For record: I create talking points -- I do not parrot them!
Scott Murphy is a terrific candidate, but I'm doubtful that he can pull off a win in the 20th. This has been a GOP stronghold for a very long time, and we haven't turned blue just yet. Gillibrand won the seat because her first opponent John Sweeney was such a scumbag that eve Republicans voted against him. Her second challenger was a rich heir to a Genera Electric fortune who didn't really run a campaign-- he just threw $7 million into the race in hope of buying the seat. On election eve he had all his troops outfitted with Blackberries so they could report in from the polls-- but most of them were old fart good 'ol boys who couldn't even find the power switch on the device. What a hoot....
Joe: And that'd be that [REDACTED] is the leader of the 538 conservatives? (I believe you guys know who I'm talking about - I suspect he may still be with us, waiting to strike.)
Anyway. First: Happy birthday, 538! I jumped on the wagon fairly late (the summer, I think), but it's been addicting. That said, I kind of want Steele to stay as RNC head - it's been quite amusing.
I don't think that NY-20 will cause him to lose his pants, though - and I'm not too worried about the way it looks like it's going to go. NYS has four R's out of a delegation of 30? Dems go from a 79-seat advantage to a 77-seat advantage? (If I recall. If Tedisco wins, won't it be 256-179?) From a partisan vantage point, I'm not losing sleep over that. Most majorities that the Dems have pulled have been in the range of the 240's anyway.
I don't know. I kind of see this as a no-loss situation for the Democrats, and really a no-win situation for the Republicans. Gillibrand did attract attention (who was it that was flogging her a lot in January? Statler? STepper?) because of her campaigning prowess; her election in the 110th could be taken as exceptionalism. But if Murphy takes it, it'd be a DEFINITE sign that what was considered red territory is turning bluer. Tedisco winning doesn't really d anything practically, and just from his party affiliation he should have the edge.
As a side note: I still don't quite get Porridge's hate-on for Kirsten Gillibrand - she's pretty much been in lock-step with the Democratic party. According to WaPo, she's voted with Dems 98% of the time over 50 votes - meaning she's only split ONCE. Yeah, she's ranked lower than - say - Roland Burris or either of my senators (Lautenberg and Menendez), but that's entirely because she has fewer votes than them. (Burris has 62; Lautenberg and Menendez have 66. They've also strayed off the reservation once each.)
(Also, for the record, she voted AGAINST lifting the gun ban in DC.)
I just want to know how Caroline Kennedy would have legislated ANY differently from Senator Gillibrand thus far, and even on upcoming votes. The only different thing I can see is that the Republicans would be even more outraged (if at all possible).
Thanks for posting this. It's interesting to note that Kristen Gillibrand was losing her election to Sweeney, when a couple weeks before the election, a report came out that the State Police had been called to Sweeney's house regarding possible domestic abuse.
Even then, it wasn't a landslide on Gillibrand's part. This area of the state leans right, HEAVILY. For another Democrat to win, is going to take a lot of luck, or another controversy.
Short version: The Republicans should be doing everything possible to win NY-20. Only a cascade of errors should cost them this election.
Scott.
I am always amused -- but more often scared by the degree of intolerance and unwillingness to listen to contrary points of view by many on the left.
People are intolerant of you PK because you are a moron.
No other reason. Jack and Grog are no better.
There have been intelligent posters from the right. VA Cons was one, Real Joe was another. There were a few others, but their names escape me. Perhaps this is just indicative of the state of the Republican party? Lots of bozos frothing at the mouth have taken over and pushed all reasonable discourse out of the tent.
HFB, 538!!!
Thanks for a year's worth of great analysis and commentary! I know you'll keep up the good work.
Chris
I am saying that there are some posters on BOTH ends of the continuum who either speak to themselves or feel the need to insult their opposition with swears, smears and simplified stereotypes.
I choose not to name them since I do not engage them. I find them to be dogmatic partisans that would rather burn down a library than allow a dissenting opinion.
I would like to hear some conservative voices that actually challenge what I believe from my own experience. Those that yell and insult shall not sway me in the slightest.
FINALLY!!! It took you guys forever to look at us here in the 20th! Albeit veiled in a post about the intricacies of Steele's seemingly short reign as RNC Chair.
I would love it if you guys took some more time to talk about the race. It really is the first test of the Post Obama Republican brand in a district that has a lot of RINOs and has a long tradition of Republicanism and conservatism.
Also, for those activists out there we need volunteers in the 20th!!!! So if you aren't busy the weekend before the 31st or on the 31st I think it might be time for a road trip to the Adirondacks!
Dwight
Thanks for your grease monkey script. I think I may have been the first to suggest that readers be able to select the posts they'd like to delete, and PK is certainly one of them. (If you're PK, maybe you could delete everything except your own posts, if only for your health.)
GROG, despite the fact that I disagree with most of your opinions (and your name and politics seem to come from the B.C. comic strip--are you Johnny Hart?), I wouldn't consider skipping your posts.
I appreciate your willingness to discuss things with the likes of Statler (who has been known to have anger management problems of his own--sorry Stat, but I call 'em like I see 'em, and I still admire your passion).
To me the grease monkey script is a nuclear option, not a tool for narrowing the blog down to people I agree with. It also seems to be a useful and democratic (small d) way of making the site more civil.
Having said that, I reserve the right to continue to occasionally get carried away with my own cleverness or self-righteousness, especially in the face of ignorant dittoheads, troglodytes, and fascist goons.
This is the internet after all, not a Quaker meeting. (And BTW, please google Unitarian Jihad)
Happy Birthday, 538!
As for trolling, Pete Kent and Jack-be-nimble have offered nothing of value (often in bulk, bordering on spam) for months now. GROG, while tripping over the line more than twice, has also presented contrary opinions with a modicum of evidence (even if I disagree with every word of it). Clearly, we're dealing with two different categories of individuals here.
About the Greasemonkey script: some of you guys clearly have already used it. So, comment on it! When I see a script with 54 downloads and no comments, my inner Admiral Ackbar swivels around...
I am confused as to why some of the posters this evening want Steele to go. I understand why Republicans want him out, but as Dems we should be rejoicing in how inept the head of the RNC is. Having someone competent at the helm of the Republicans doesn't help the Dems.
I hope Murphy gets elected and Steele retains his job. That is a win-win in my books.
Oh, and happy webirthday!
Congratulations on your one-year anniversary. The work you do here is awesome. Thank you for what you do.
Scott Murphy looks like the kinda kid I used to beat up in high school. I had a thing for terrorizing preppies back in the day.
Still, he's better than Tedisco. And it would be pretty satisfying to see the GOP ditch Steele after having just elected him what, a month ago? Maybe they can make it official and elect Limbaugh as RNC chair after Steele is gone.
Oh yeah and Grog, just ignore MiM.
PK is a lightning rod and so is Jack. They invite attacks and even seem to enjoy it. They abuse the shit out of anyone that tries to interact with them, so yeah, there's going to be a few bruised egos that will want to take a swipe at them every once in a while. Like I said, they enjoy it, so why stand int he way of their little SM orgy?
So does Mike in MD. I tried being nice to him, and it got me nowhere, He's so anxious to deliver insults he'd eat his own kind. How anyone can respect that' I don't know.
So just iggy their asses, all three of them. Maybe they can just form their own little hate club and trade insults with each other while the rest of us engage in more normal interactions. They get what they want from each other that way, and we get what we need from each other too. Everyone's satisfied, and nobody has to deal with what they don't want. They want to be abused, so let them abuse each other.
Pete Kent wrote:
For record: I create talking points -- I do not parrot them!
Okay, for the record, you were Mr. Fundie for the entire presidential race. Since Palin was a fundie, you jumped to the conclusion that all Christians would vote Republican, and all women, too. This was because Democrats didn't believe in God or something, and some weird stuff about PUMAs.
All of which were complete GOP talking points simply parroted.
After the election, coincidentally after the Republicans started harping on "socialism", you became the voice of John Galt. Weird how that worked out. As soon as the RW blogs started tossing out the idea that Obama was destroying the economy, you also started saying the same thing. And the whole fundie thing just disappeared in the makeover to Randian - eerily like the GOP talking points have.
The only original thing in your entire schtick is the psychotic imagining that you can see into the minds of everyone of America and know what they think, feel, want, and fear. And, oddly, the mind of the nation always seems to be in complete and total harmony with the talking points you parrot.
You once were fairly polite but profoundly crazy. Now you are shrill, hysterical, hyperbolic, rude and profoundly crazy.
For the record, that is.
Joe: Apologies. I got a bit tl;dr with the rest of my post (as I pretty much ALWAYS do when I comment) - I was kind of joking about your post at 8:30:
For comedic purposes only, Pragmatus, I am tempted to state the obvious.
Sorry if that wasn't clear. Believe me, I'm WELL aware that histrionics go on from both sides of the aisle (and hell, even me included to an extent - look at my last post here!)
Anyway. I've found that ignore-listing people doesn't do much of anything - other people react to them, so you're just getting a bunch of screaming from the other side out of context. (The trick I used on Fark was to just gray out people that annoyed me too much to deal and making people that were mildly annoying pink so I felt a bit happier reading their posts.)
Jen re your post about Steele: Perhaps because some of us are conservatives, and others of us bemoan the fact that our brethren on the right side of the aisle cannot remove themselves from the sandbox and have resorted to tactics that were immature back in elementary school?
Seriously. I'm a solid liberal on nearly every damn position, and might go as far as to call myself socialist (in the sense that I'd love to see us move towards European state systems for a lot of things, such as health care). I'm a registered Democrat (though this was partly to vote in my state primaries). I don't think I've voted for anyone other than a Democrat yet (though I've only had a few elections I've voted in). But I also value opposition that doesn't kneecap itself at every opportunity.
As funny as it is to see a 50-year-old balding man trying to act all gangster while discussing God, gays, guns, and gametes, I'd like to see the Republicans get their shit together and make some coherent proposals other than tax cuts for the rich to cure everything from our current recession to the war in Afghanistan to cancer. And stop kissing Limbaugh's ass.
Yes, I am concerned about the Republican party. But that's the honest truth - I'd like to feel like I have a sane alternative.
Statler
I'm fine with ignoring folks who just post something obnoxious from time to time, but once the sheer volume of crap becomes an issue it's like watching network TV with all the commercials.
Personally, I'm amazed there aren't more nut jobs on this site. Present company excepted :-?
Just wanted to thank you for the informative and interesting work you do. I've been coming here for around 8 months and always learn something new or see something old in a different way. My trust in this site got me thru the election without losing my mind. So, happy birthday, fellow Pisces!
I am happy to hear different points of views but I do not and will not bother to read the drivel that dumps out of PeteKent and a few others...I see his name and my brain thinks blah, blah, blah...
I'd love Steele to stick around, even just to see how ridiculous some of the gop can get around him!
Chris wrote:
Yes, I am concerned about the Republican party. But that's the honest truth - I'd like to feel like I have a sane alternative.
I agree with this. There is a place in the political process for honest opposition and rational dissent.
Instead, for the past year the Republicans have jumped from one issue to another, claiming that each new issue is what they always believed in and always will believe in, and turning each issue into some existential, End Of The World crisis that only a Republican majority can save us from.
Why can't Republicans just be against something like a normal person? Why does it always have to be a political Apocalypse with them? How many times can they really cry "wolf" before even they stop believing in it?
For example, they can't just say that Obama isn't a "born-again" Christian; he has to be a secret Muslim terrorist, with a dash of Hinduism on the side, who has an evil plan to make us bow to Allah at gunpoint and round up Christians for death camps. And when people don't buy that stuff, then the media is supposedly biased for not running with it anyway.
Michael Steele is just further proof that the National Republican Party is completely clueless. "I'll see your magic negro and raise you a conservative Republican negro."
Because black people, they're all alike and only voted for Barack because he's black.
I say the Republicans throw their decidedly un-magical negro back and Michael Steele is unemployed by Memorial Day.
@Pete Kent -- If you feel like retching because of Obama's agenda you are starting to understand how I felt during 8 years of Bush's agenda. And it turns out I was right to be sick.
After 8 years of an agenda that makes me happy and you sick, we'll see who was right, eh?
Absolutism has long been a characteristic of so-called conservatives, if not Republicans in general. I guess there's some on the other side as well, but R's are the either/or party while D's tend to be the both/and party.
Conservatives have a low tolerance for ambiguity and nuance, IMHO. Fundamentalism, homophobia, jingoism, racism, sexism, elitism, and authoritarianism (paternalism) are all part of the conservative package. Anything else is too wishy-washy and sissified. If daddy didn't say so, just say no.
To be fair, there are kernels of truth that underlie most of the fanatical positions of the far right, but the fear of uncertainty and chaos keeps them from seeing the other side. You know you're a conservative if, when you see the words "uncertainty" and "chaos", you think "hell".
Unfortunately, if that's what you're thinking, you may already be there in a hell of your own devising.
I like the bumper sticker that says "I love my country, but I think we should start seeing other people."
Well, lets not get too arrogant, there are positions where the left is completely knee jerk in its reactions as well - political correctness and global warming among them. All people have positions that are not wholly based in fact based analysis, it is just that hold yours to be absolute truths! :)
That said, repubs have alot more of them and they are more prevalent in the average mainstream member of their party - at least the social conservatives.
All our big banks as "dead men walking"
Wall Street should be hanged for what they have done, who's effigy do we burn? The Merrill bull?
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/63606.html
Fred
Point taken. The level of knee-jerk leftism on the college campuses I've been to is dismaying, to say the least. Kids seem to need to identify themselves as group members to an extent that makes them hesitant to express contrary opinions--except for the contrarians who may end up as pathetic Ayn Rand types.
Fortunately for Obama, college kids these days can have rebellion and conformism at the same time by supporting Obama in opposition to the vile Dubyistas and their zombie-like heirs.
Re global warming, I'm afraid I don't see the other side of it. You do? I'm not sure which dire scenario to bet on, but I'm a zero CO2 asap guy and then some.
The problem with the Merrill bull is that he's already hung. Maybe an estrogen patch would be fitting.
Hu Chi said:
"Conservatives have a low tolerance for ambiguity and nuance, IMHO. Fundamentalism, homophobia, jingoism, racism, sexism, elitism, and authoritarianism (paternalism) are all part of the conservative package. Anything else is too wishy-washy and sissified. If daddy didn't say so, just say no."
I actually agree with the first sentence, but I think the rest is a gross generalization. By nature, we want everything to black and white. No gray areas. I'm not saying that's a good thing, just the way we're wired.
BTW, I'm not Johnny Hart, but that is where my screen name comes from.
Happy Anniversary guys. I've never seen anyone move to the top so quickly, so peerless. It's been fun and educational.
To GROG above. Wanting everything in black and white is great...for an inquisition or the brain police, or 451F fireman...I think you get the drift.
Befuddled,
VaCon isn't really gone, he's hanging around with about 20 other former 538 regulars who were annoyed by the unmoderated comment threads at a forum with the URL
http://pollwatcher.forumcircle.com
We're a nice little community since August, when we left 538, and welcome any !reasonable! (or as the VP would say, articulate and clean) 538 posters.
WV- gessest.
Thou gessest? An old form of "You guessed"?
Follow Tedisco for Congress on twitter
Tedisco for Congress
If Steele can`t win NY-20 then the gop is in real trouble. This is a very republican area although not of the wingnut variety.
Most of the people up there are probably against all the Obama spending and the only reason Gillibrand won is she was in the right place at the right time and then voted like a republican.
I expect the GOP to win most competitive special elections, that`s just the way it usually goes with the party in opposition.
Steele ran the republican party in Md and managed to lose a seat that was a republican stronghold by allowing a wingnut to primary a popular moderate and give the seat to the democrats. He really has nothing going for him except he is a black republican
Unless the GOP can offer anything except saying no they won`t gain much in 2010 and beyond.
I say we all pump money into Murphy's campaign just to piss Steele off.
We don't need water, let the motherfucker burn! Burn motherfucker, burn!
Happy Birthday, 538! Thanks for an awesome year, and here's to many more!
Hu Chi "Conservatives have a low tolerance for ambiguity and nuance, IMHO. Fundamentalism, homophobia, jingoism, racism, sexism, elitism, and authoritarianism (paternalism) are all part of the conservative package. Anything else is too wishy-washy and sissified. If daddy didn't say so, just say no."
(GROG) > I actually agree with the first sentence, but I think the rest is a gross generalization. By nature, we want everything to black and white. No gray areas. I'm not saying that's a good thing, just the way we're wired.
When the ugly comes out, and then sticks out *cough*Rush*cough*, it can come out as the second list. Thus the stereotype.
I don't agree that it is intractably linked but there is some correlation. Just not necessarily in a given person. When you start trying to divide the whole of 300 million people into 2 teams you are going to inevitably end up with someone on your team you find distasteful if not repugnant. You hold your nose while they help your team.
Just as "Southern Democrat" doesn't have to include racism but there is a very real historical kernel to that. Like Senator Byrd, former KKK recruiter and Democrat from a very different time. Exactly what his views are now I don't purport to say but a fact is a fact, it is something he once engaged in and he wasn't an isolated case.
The term 'Southern Democrat' is a little unfair. It refers to a location rather than a time or position, and therefore it's something that cannot change-I, for example am Southern and a Democrat. I'm also more liberal than Nancy Pelosi,probably closer to Jon Stewart and Bernie Sanders than anybody else. The definition of Southern Democrat is supposed to be a Democrat with conservative principles, and yet I am very liberal.
Therefore, I am a Southern Democrat that is not a Southern Democrat. This is starting to sound like Zen.
Jimmy Carter, a bible clutcher from about as far south as you can get in the US (metaphorically speaking :) ) and holding to some rather liberal ideals.
GROG, Dwight, Moondancer
I'm just talking about generalizations, not individuals, and there are plenty of exceptions on both sides.
The drive to make firm distinctions is presumably innate and hard wired. Light/dark, up/down, left/right are fundamental complementarities of nature, and it's all too tempting to keep going with it until we arrive at us/them, good/evil, right/wrong. To do so is just too easy, though.
Pure relativism gets you into trouble, too. We all know baby boomer parents who can't set limits for their kids because they never got it about what real vs abusive authority is. Righties spend a lot of psychic energy freaking out about overly permissive parents, but they often go too far as well.
The big question would seem to be not who's right but where the balance is, and how not to overreact to the extremes on both sides.
Basically, though, I stick with my point that "conservatives" are a couple of tacos shy of a combination plate.
Are the GOP really in such turmoil that they cannot bare to lose one winnable congressional election? Is Steele just another Palin-a-like? Minority picked for being a minority but woth no substance? Are the GOP panicking about a lack of leadership? Is it really fair to be looking to blame Steele? The whole things looks very screwy to me, and if the GOP is seriously getting jitters about Steele then perhaps all hope is lost for that party in the short term.
My point I guess is that the GOP is not acting like a party ready for government of any sort (at least at the federal level). I mean as a party, not just the leadership but the whole thing. Its a sorry mess, and hopefully, for the good of congressional oversight, I hope its sorted out quickly.
> Minority picked for being a minority but woth no substance?
If, and I stress if, the $417K story is true then I'd say he has some serious Rove/Atwater "substance" to him for winning elections.
P.S. I really, really hope he wasn't picked for the optics of his skin colour. But if there are a good number of Republicans that see Obama's appeal as being only skin deep then I guess that would make sense. Projecting "voting for him cause he's black". :/
I'm totally cynical about the R's willingness to play the race card at every turn. If you watched much campaign coverage, the proportion of Republican AA talking heads was way higher than the proportion of AA's who actually vote R.
The message was "Hey all you AA's, it's cool to be a Republican! Just look at how many other AA's are already on board!" Would that not be Steele's function?
Ann Coulter (yikes!) tried to point out that Republican women are more often "hot" than Democratic women at the recent conservative convention. And though he may not have mentioned it there, Rush describes feminism as a way of helping ugly women feel better about themselves.
So join the GOP and rub shoulders with black hipsters and hot chicks. Pay no attention to the rich white a-holes behind the curtain.
Dwight,
Given that leadership is to a large part the ability to stand up to your allies as well as your foes, and the ability to get everyone to work as a cohesive whole rather than at cross-purposes, I can say from Steele's bungled handling of Limbaugh that they didn't elect him for his leadership skills.
Now, I'm not a Clinton fan, to me he was way too conservative. Still, I have to say I admire his leadership skills. You know what leadership is? It's from during the 1992 primary when Clinton went to a Union gathering at a plant somewhere in the upper Midwest and told them, flat out, that the industry they were working in was becoming obsolete and they needed to get retrained to work in different fields if they wanted to stay employed. He told them exactly what they didn't want to hear-and Labor is a huge part of the Democratic constituency. He risked alot by telling them they couldn't cling to their old way of doing things and had to change, and that they could not expect government to keep their jobs relevant by blunt force.
That took alot of balls. He was an unknown governor running against some very well-liked Democrats.
At the end of his speech, the crowd, whom he'd basically just told, "Your jobs are becoming redundant. If you're smart, you'll go back to school and learn a new trade now before you get laid off" applauded him. You'd think they'd have been out for blood after hearing that, especially the older ones that were just shy of retirement. Instead, they fucking clapped!
That's leadership. Standing up to your enemies, yeah, that takes some nerve. But standing up to your friends takes some serious sack.
Steele couldn't do that to Limbaugh. That,s why Clinton is a leader and Steele is an empty figurehead.
"Opposition is true friendship."--Blake
happy birthday and thanks for your wonderful work - especially in the democratic primary, when so many others didn't have the guts to give the straight stuff.
dumping steele seems like a lot of work for an obscure position. if he's ousted after 1 special, then i will bow to your superior wisdom once again:)
> Steele couldn't do that to Limbaugh. That,s why Clinton is a leader and Steele is an empty figurehead.
Steele hasn't even shown himself a proper figurehead, which is why he got himself into trouble. But I don't think you could mistake Karl Rove for a "leader", or "figurehead" either, so I wasn't really suggesting otherwise. :^)
538 passing its first anniversary is.... GREAT NEWS!!!! FOR JOHN MCCAIN!!!!
@Grog: I hope you stick around. I'm another leftie who likes having some sane righties on the site. PeteKent doesn't cut it (unlike MikeMD, I don't consider you anything at all like Pete).
Long time reader (addict really), second comment and entirely OT. Sorry, but but this seems like the best thread to express my gratitude. I started reading last September... 538 and all the wonderful people who contribute here inoculated me against insanity going into the election.
First, belated Happy Birthday 538!
Nate, Sean, and all: Wonderful work. Thoughtful informative posts, always followed by good spirited discussions. I feel like I learn something valuable here every day. Looking forward to lots more 538 in the future.
And Nick, thanks for the Grease Monkey script. It works perfectly and is quite effective at relieving the near overload from a distracting few. It is nice that Readers can tune the result to reflect personal sensitivities. I thought I'd leave the default entries as long as possible but newcomer Smoking Aces quickly earned himself the number 3 array position with his vitriolic but empty diatribes- the final straw by him was one of the meaningless attacks on Dwight.
The ability to go back & open a redacted comment is very handy. Should someone ignore DNFTT and post what appears to be an intelligent rebuttal I can always go back for context.
Contrary to what some claim I think the capability provided by the script may have a civilizing effect- trolls and overly emotional posters now have incentive to contribute meaningfully and/or tone it down a bit to avoid being effectively tuned out. After all, they crave attention and are now on notice they have to contribute meaningfully and/or just be good "netizens" in order to assure full readership.
Thanks everyone and please keep up the excellent effort!
Great post. Happy Birthday and thanks for the best analyses all year, you guys were my Agent Scully during the campaign. It all comes down to the science...
威創牙醫診所除了提供優質的植牙技術外還提供假牙|矯正|牙周病治療,是值得您信賴的牙醫診所、植牙權威。
獅王紋身工作室提供專業的無痛刺青技術,獅王紋身在世界TATTOO大賽中,獲獎無數,獅王紋身給您最時尚的作品。
陳駿逸皮膚科診所提供了治療痘痘的服務,皮膚雷射權威,包括雷射、脈衝光、除斑等,讓您回復青春蘋果臉。
ck皮件處理棧提供專業洗包包|洗鞋子|各式皮件修理保養疑難雜症都有服務,清洗包包專門店讓您的包包、鞋子、永遠保持最新的況態唷。
杏儒中醫診所提供了糖尿病的治療。
seo大師e王國幫您的網站輕鬆在您的行業裡站上第一頁,e王國的關鍵字行銷是您的好幫手,包括關鍵字、自然排序、都能讓您獲得完美的效果,以目前的網路行銷不外乎是關鍵字、自然排序為主、而關鍵字行銷、seo又是e王國的強項也包括關鍵字廣告的服務,讓e王國幫您征服網海。
Weekfun星期樂優質生活平台-各式美食,精品,住宿,夜店,批發資訊,讓您不用出門也能盡知天下事,好的行銷帶你進墳場,好的行銷讓您上戰場,Weekfun星期樂"激動"行銷團隊將提供您前所未有的網路行銷,seo,關鍵字行銷,關鍵字廣告,關鍵字,自然排序,部落格行銷,等多項網路行銷類型供您挑選適合自已店裡的好行銷,網路爆紅不是夢!!
Bob X,
If you had read what I wrote, when GROG first posted, all he posted was the Freeper and GOOPer talking points, with no linking of his "facts" to legitimate and authoritative sites. After reading some of his BS, I just scrolled by whenever I saw a post of his.
If GROG is now asserting 'facts' that are NOT Freeper and GOOPer talking points, and backing up the 'facts', when appropriate, with links to legitimate sites (even if I don't necessarily agree with his 'facts'), I'll reconsider.
Until I see differently, though, I consider GROG to be akin to PK and the other bottom feeding trolls. Maybe not at the same depth, but definitely not too far up the food chain.
I don't know what his posts were like but I'll vouch for what they have been like recently. He'll becoming from some different base values and priorities so that'll influence the ends. But frankly if you can't find yourself having a discussion with him [as I've seen him posting] I'd suggest you look to yourself to close a lot of that gap.
你 是 我 屋 裡 唯 一 的 音 符 我 拿 起 藏 滿 故 事 的 長 笛
看房子,買房子,建商自售,自售,台北新成屋,台北豪宅,新成屋,豪宅,美髮儀器,美髮,儀器,髮型,EMBA,MBA,學位,EMBA,專業認證,認證課程,博士學位,DBA,PHD,在職進修,碩士學位,推廣教育,DBA,進修課程,碩士學位,網路廣告,關鍵字廣告,關鍵字,廣告,課程介紹,學分班,文憑,牛樟芝,段木,牛樟菇,日式料理, 台北居酒屋,燒肉,結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,台北住宿,國內訂房,台北HOTEL,台北婚宴,飯店優惠,台北結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,住宿,訂房,HOTEL,飯店,造型系列,學位,牛樟芝,腦磷脂,磷脂絲胺酸,SEO,婚宴,捷運,學區,美髮,儀器,髮型,牛樟芝,腦磷脂,磷脂絲胺酸,看房子,買房子,建商自售,自售,房子,捷運,學區,台北新成屋,台北豪宅,新成屋,豪宅,學位,碩士學位,進修,在職進修, 課程,教育,學位,證照,mba,文憑,學分班,網路廣告,關鍵字廣告,關鍵字,SEO,关键词,网络广告,关键词广告,SEO,关键词,网络广告,关键词广告,SEO,台北住宿,國內訂房,台北HOTEL,台北婚宴,飯店優惠,住宿,訂房,HOTEL,飯店,婚宴,台北住宿,國內訂房,台北HOTEL,台北婚宴,飯店優惠,住宿,訂房,HOTEL,飯店,婚宴,台北住宿,國內訂房,台北HOTEL,台北婚宴,飯店優惠,住宿,訂房,HOTEL,飯店,婚宴,結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,台北結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,台北結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,台北結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,居酒屋,燒烤,美髮,儀器,髮型,美髮,儀器,髮型,美髮,儀器,髮型,美髮,儀器,髮型,小套房,小套房,進修,在職進修,留學,證照,MBA,EMBA,留學,MBA,EMBA,留學,進修,在職進修,牛樟芝,段木,牛樟菇,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,美容,美髮,整形,造型,美容,美髮,整形,造型,美容,美髮,整形,造型,美容,美髮,整形,造型,美容,美髮,整形,造型,美容,美髮,整形,造型,美容,美髮,整形,造型,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,住宿,民宿,飯店,旅遊,美容,美髮,整形,造型,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,關鍵字排名,網路行銷,关键词排名,网络营销,網路行銷,關鍵字排名,关键词排名,网络营销,羅志祥,周杰倫,五月天,蔡依林,林志玲,羅志祥,周杰倫,五月天,蔡依林,林志玲,PMP,在職專班,研究所在職專班,碩士在職專班,PMP,證照,在職專班,研究所在職專班,碩士在職專班,網頁設計,網站設計,網頁設計,網站設計,网页设计,网站设计,网站设计,网页设计
The reality is our party needs strong conservatives who care more about their message than what they think the polls are telling them to say. The American public is done with that kind of nonsense.
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,
By comparing the traditional Internet users, Internet users to iResearch found that the traditional white-collar-based, cell phones wholesale, corporate general staff accounted for 18.9%, higher than the 5.6% of the wholesale cell phones users accounting; and discount cell phones users in the years students and blue-collar workers accounted for significantly more than the traditional Internet users, respectively, accounting for 19.5% and 18.9%, higher than the traditional Internet users Students and blue-collar workers accounted for 7.8% and 5.1% respectively.
The survey found that consumer 3G wholesale china from the crowd of view, the buyer 25 to 40 years old mainly white-collar workers, accounting for about 40%, followed by consumer groups of students, accounting for about three into. According to statistics, 3G wholesale products in sales, compared with a 2G mobile phone sales are still a wide gap between, but since June has been, 3G mobile phones increase in the average monthly buy products for more than 50%, "11" period due to holiday business, the increase of more than 150%. Pk that the "11" after the peak sales of 3G handsets likely to usher in more stable growth.
From cell phones users to see the specific situation of occupational segmentation in 2009, accounting for 19.5% of students dropped 21.2 percent over last year, other types of occupations than those last year, the proportion of Internet users cheap cell phones increase. White collar crowd from last year's 29.2% increase to 38.9% this year, accounting for 9.7 percentage points up to replace the student groups cellphone users as one of the biggest occupational hierarchy; blue-collar crowd from last year's 13.9% to 18.9% this year, accounting for rose by 5.0 percentage points, showing that mobile phones users by a group of students to the occupational groups a significant trend in the development. Ereli advice that, cheap cell phones and mobile phone users Internet users monthly income distribution of age, education, occupational distribution has strong correlation with high spending capacity of white-collar workers and some students in the crowd will be a huge cell phone china online potential consumer groups.
Post a Comment