Minnesota continues to make news this week. Following word from Ohio that Barack Obama's approval numbers have edged down into mere mortal range, a new survey from Public Policy Polling of Minnesotans--those lucky souls now boasting a full contingent of two US senators--shows Obama beating Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty in a potential head-to-head presidential matchup, 51 percent to 40 percent. Obama beat John McCain in Minnesota last year by 10 points, carrying 45 counties.
Speaking of governors in the news, in the same poll Obama bests soon-to-be-former Gov. Sarah Palin in a hypothetical 2012 presidential matchup by an even wider margin, 56 percent to 35 percent. The fuller poll results show that Palin receives lower net approval from Minnesota women (34 percent approving, 56 percent disapproving) than men (44 percent, 49 percent).
The bad news for Obama is that his overall approval in the state has dipped; in fact, his approval/disapproval margin in Minnesota is just half (54 percent to 39 percent, net 15) what it was in April (60 percent to 30 percent). Independents approve of the president by just an 8-point margin, 49 percent to 41 percent. Like many Americans, Minnesotans are growing impatient.
PPP also polled respondents on Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar. She has a solid approval/disapproval margin of 26 points (56 percent approving, 30 disapproving), on the strength of 68 percent to 18 percent edge among self-described moderates.
UPDATE: Our own Ed Kilgore posted some thoughts of his own about this poll over at his home site, The Democratic Strategist. Worth a look.
7.10.2009
Obama Leading Pawlenty by 11 Points in His Own Back Yard
@ 7:15 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
45 comments
Count me unimpressed. The headline number, for me, is the mere 51% for Obama. Presumably that means a lot of undecided vote. Pawlenty has done better than most, but Govs aren't exactly popular right now. With a mild swing to the GOP, he would be competitive with Obama in MN which, though his "backyard", is in fact a bluish state that the Dems MUST win.
This is reassuring.
But of course Obama's 2012 reelection will come down how things are going in 2012... So we'll have to wait and see.
I do think that Palin is such a weak candidate that Obama could probably beat her even if we're mired in Great Depression #2.
This is refreshing to hear. My biggest Republican fear is the Tim Pawlenty wild card. He is the only Republican that sounds reasonable when he speaks and that makes me very nervous.
A huge marital scandal or financial scandal involving Tim in the next year or so would really make my day. Please put my mind at ease and get your peeps on that right away so we have that can of worms ready when we need to open it....? Thanks. Whew!
The REAL news is that there are 35% of MNs who actually think Palin could do a better job than Obama. I mean, how many "Ya betcha's" does it take to fix an economy???
So What???? Obama and the Dems were elected to get to the White House, fix the economy, and deliver the goods, relative to Healthcare, Climate Change, ending the war in Iraq, and Stem Cell research. Oh. And protect the nation as well.
If they deliver, their fine. If not, the Republicans are back in, and that's that.
What is so hard for everyone to understand about ANY of that???
Its beyond me.
Scott
Given the recent news about Bush doing more fabrication and fraud so he can spy on the country, and the fact that nearly every single major problem we faced was caused by Bush and the GOP, who in the hell would vote GOP just because things aren't completely back to normal by 2012?
It won't be Pawlenty in 2012, he hasn't paid his dues. If he manages 2nd place he'll be a shoo-in for the 2016 nom (unless the GOP decides to try another Bush restoration with Jeb). The GOP nominee will be Romney. With McCain out of the picture all the large, winner-take-all non-evangelical states are his (CA, FL, NY, NJ, etc.) - more than enough to get him the nom.
In any case, Pawlenty's a fluke. He won back-to-back squeakers thanks entirely to the Minnesota Independence Party's spoiler effect. In National elections those Venturocrats break for the Dem (compare Obama vs. McCain's numbers in Minn to Franken vs. Coleman vs. Barkley's numbers).
What is so hard for everyone to understand about ANY of that???
1) The better his numbers the better he is able to work on that list.
2) This is horseshoes. There are degrees of success on that list of woes. It isn't binary "yes" or "no".
3) The GOP is going to scream about the half empty glass and claim that it's bone dry. *shrug* Having good numbers is directly related to being believed.
4) If the GOP members of Congress manage to keep up the appearance of being obstructionist out of self interest of causing failure, whether that is an accurate perception or not, Obama could get some credit for effort and/or back into re-election
This is a great interview about health care: http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07102009/watch2.html
"PPP also polled respondents on Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar. She has a solid approval/disapproval margin of 26 points (56 percent approving, 30 disapproving), on the strength of 68 percent to 18 percent edge among self-described moderates."
Are Democratic women basically unbeatable? They seem to do much better on average than Republican men, Republican women, and Democratic men.
Has anyone looked into this trend? Or am I just imagining things?
In any case, Pawlenty's a fluke. He won back-to-back squeakers thanks entirely to the Minnesota Independence Party's spoiler effect. In National elections those Venturocrats break for the Dem (compare Obama vs. McCain's numbers in Minn to Franken vs. Coleman vs. Barkley's numbers
FWIW exit polls showed Coleman would have won a 2 way race vs Franken.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#val=MNS01p2
Coleman 46%, Franken 43%, would not have voted 9%
Now I don't believe for a second that all 9% who said they would not have voted would really skip the race but there is no guarantee that they would have voted for Franken.
Honestly I think the Independence party draws about equally from the Dems and Reps so I think it is unfair to say they are soley responsible for Pawlenty winning twice.
Are Democratic women basically unbeatable? They seem to do much better on average than Republican men, Republican women, and Democratic men.
Who was the last Democratic woman incumbant to lose a re-election race?
Who was the last Democratic woman incumbant to lose a re-election race?
The first one to come to mind is the late Ann Richards, Governor of Texas. She lost re-election to a young George W. Bush in 1994.
@Jamison - Venturacrats? A man who spoke and voted like the second-coming of Goldwater?
I think that really is an indicator of how radically to the right the country has shifted in the last 40 years when the politics of Goldwater and those like him are now considered to be "liberal."
@Scott:
Who was the last Democratic woman incumbant to lose a re-election race?
The first one to come to mind is the late Ann Richards, Governor of Texas. She lost re-election to a young George W. Bush in 1994.
Let's not forget Jean Carnahan (D-MO), who lost re-election in 2002. True, she hadn't actually been elected; she'd been appointed after her husband Mel had beaten John Ashcroft posthumously. But I still think it counts.
Oh, hey: didn't Carol Mosely Braun (D-IL) and Cynthia McKinney (D-GA) lose re-election battles?
I think dem women (and to a lesser degree, republcian women) have to try harder and be better to rise to office so they tend to be cleaner in every since of the word.
"Obama Leading Pawlenty "
not only guys,
Obama leading worldwide,after successfully leading the G8,right now africans are acclaiming Him in droves.
(despite PK)
take a look:
"God bless America,God bless Obama"
http://www.repubblica.it/2006/05/gallerie/esteri/folla-ghana/1.html
ciao.
:)
I think the poll numbers about a Obama v Palin matchup should prove to the Republicans that Democrats don't hate Quiter...I meant Soon To Be Ex-Governor Sarah Palin. In fact we Democrats would love for her to run. I've heard it quiped in the White House that political operatives want to give the maximum amount to Palin's campaign just so she can get the nomination.
J. Scott -
If they deliver, their fine. If not, the Republicans are back in, and that's that.
Absolutely flat out, point blank, dead wrong. This is not guaranteed.
If the Republicans were an "automatic default", then approval or support for Republicans would be a function of approval or support for Democrats, and vice versa. One would go up as the other went down, as they would sum to 100% (minus undecided and third party support).
What we see these days is that approval of Democrats goes up and down, but loss of approval by Democrats does not translate into gain of approval by Republicans.
At least for the time being, Republicans do not appear to be the default.
The logical reason is exceptionally simple to grasp. Republicans are so strongly disapproved of that they are still less popular than even relatively unpopular Democrats.
The presence of Sara Palin as a major party figure is illustrative. Most people will NOT ever vote for Palin for president. The Democrat who could lose to Palin is hard to imagine. Barney Frank is openly gay and Jewish, but could probably run successfully against Palin.
Of course Palin won't be the presidential nominee and likely won't even be on the ticket in '12, but it's still illustrtive.
@Harold - It is ultimately ironic that J. Scott made that comment in a Minnesota gubernatorial posting...the only state which actually DID elect a third-party candidate as governor in living memory.
In 1994- Democratic female US House members like
Karan English(AZ-6)
Lynn Schenk(CA-49)
Jill Long Thompson
Leslie Byrne(VA-11
regarding the US Senate. before the 1992 Year of Women. We had two female US Senators. Nancy Kassebaum-KS- a moderate Republican from a red state Barbara Mikulski-MD a liberal Democrat from a blue state. Kassebaum-KS was elected in 1978,re-elected in 1984 and 1990- retired in 1996. Mikulski-D was elected in 1986 by a landslide margin against Linda Chavez.,re-elected in 1992 against Alan Keyes by a landslide margin,in 1998 and 2004.
In 1992- Boxer and Fienstien(CA),Moseley Braun(IL)and Patty Murray(WA)got elected.
Boxer won an open seat election(the retirement of Alan Cranston. Fienstien ran against an appointed GOP US Senator in a special election. Fienstien ran again in 1994- narrowly defeated the former Mr. Arianna Huffington. She won re-election in 2000 by a landslide margin against Tom Campbell and in 2006. Boxer won re-election in 1998 against State Treasurer Matt Fong by a 10 point margin and in 2004 against Former Sect of State Bill Jones by a 20 point margin. Mosely Braun narrowly defeated an Incumbent Democratic Senator in the primary and won in the general election against a weak GOP opponent. Murray-WA was elected in a open seat election against a sitting US House Member(Rod Chandler).won re-election in 1998 against Linda Smith(a sitting US House Member. and in 2004 (George Nethercutt)-a sitting US House Member.- Fienstien,Boxer,and Murray are safe bets in their re-election campaigns.
Kay Bailey Hutchison-TX win a 1993 Special Election by a landslide margin against an appointed Democratic US Senator. Wins re-election in 1994,2000,and 2006 by a landslide margin.
Olympia Snowe-ME gets elected in 1994 in a open seat Election(Mitchell Seat)by a landslide margin against a sitting liberal US House Member from Portland-ME(Tom Andrews).
Olympia Snowe's fellow collegue- Susan Collins-ME- got elected in 1996 defeating a former Democratic Governor- Joe Brennan. She won re-election in 2002 and 2006 by a landslide margin.
Mary Landrieu-LA narrowly won election in a open seat(Johnston seat) in 1996, narrow won re-election in a 2002 runnoff against a Sitting Statewide Elected official-(Suzanne Hark Terrell)and in 2008 against a former Democrat- John Kennedy.
Blanche Lincoln-AR got elected in 1998- (OPEN Seat Election-Bumpers Seat)- won re-election in 2004 by a double digit margin.
In 2000- Debbie Stabenow-MI and Maria Cantwell-WA narrowly got elected unseating weak Republican incumbents. Both won re-election in 2006 by a landslide margin. Hillary Clinton-NY won in a open seat election(Moynihan seat).Hillary won re-election by a landslide margin in 2006.
In 2002- Liddy Dole -NC was elected in a open seat election(Helms Seat). Lost re-election in 2008 to Kay Hagan. Lisa Murkowski-AK appointed by her father to her father's old seat. won re-lection in 2004 against a former Democratic Governor.
In 2006- Amy Klobuchar-MN won an open seat election(Dayton)by a landslide margin.
Claire McCaskill-MO narrowly unseated a weak GOP incumbent.
In 2008- Jeanne Shaheen-NH and Kay Hagan-NC defeated a weak GOP incumbents.
Klobuchar-MN is a safe bet in her 2012 re-election bid based on Obama's coattails. McCaskill-MO will benifit from Democratic Governor Jay Nixon's coattails.
Shaheen-NH is going to get re-elected being a former 3 term Governor.
Kay Hagan-NC is the only female Democratic official that is vulnerable to defeat. 2014 is an off year election year in a purple state. The Republicans will field a much stronger candidate than Liddy Dole.
harold wrote:
"What we see these days is that approval of Democrats goes up and down, but loss of approval by Democrats does not translate into gain of approval by Republicans.
At least for the time being, Republicans do not appear to be the default."
Spot on.
And R2K proves this.
House Republicans now have a 12% favourable rating with 71% unfavourable.
The GOP itself shows 22% favourable, 72% unfavourable in polling.
Meanwhile, PK talks about Obama's numbers "falling off a cliff". Republicans are less popular now than Bush was when he left office.
Which Party's numbers are really "falling off a cliff" here?
And if Obama's numbers are so low, as the wingnuts maintain, then where is the commensurate rise in Republican popularity?
Pawlenty's star is only beginning to decline. The negative effect of his "unallotment" tactic, in which he has assumed dictatorial control of the State budget, has yet to be felt. It is all on Pawlenty, and the MN Republican Party has tied their fate to his.
Take a look at that map of MN counties in the post. The majority of the State's population is in two counties, which are blue. The striking thing to me, as a MN political observer, is that the SE and West are turning blue. These have always been Republican strongholds, and their numbers are now concentrated in suburban and exurban counties.
I am shocked that Pete Kent's prediction of Palin's accent winning over MN is not borne out by the polls. It's almost as if the man spouts worthless idiocy based on boundless optimism for his Party.
Sarah Palin is simply a direct leading indicator of how pathetic of a state the Republican party is in and how pathetic the mass media and American hunger for gossip and BS work together for an atrocious synergy of muck. She is nothing, but that. She has no experience and could not beat any candidate with 50% +1 of the vote, running for any office anywhere in the country at this point. The fact that we keep talking about her is not shame on her, but shame on us. She has nothing to offer. The fact that 30% of the country loves her does not mitigate the fact that 50%+ are polarized against her. Perhaps she's good for raising money from Evangelicals in specific parts of the country, selling an autobiography, and giving speeches to select crowds, preaching to the choir, that's about all. She galvanizes the opposition almost as much or maybe more than Obama does for his own party. Good luck Sarah and GOPers.
That Obama's numbers are dipping has long been expected. Back in January Nate was writing about how popularity peaks around the inauguration, and extended economic difficulties of the sort we are facing would bring down the popularity of any sitting president.
In a year when the economy is back on stable footing Obama's popularity will rise again.
Todji -
That Obama's numbers are dipping has long been expected.
They've always been lower on Rasmussen than anywhere else (that's a constant, not "dipping"), and on pollingreport.com they're virtually unchanging - a constant job approval rating in the high 50's to low 60's, with about a 35% or so disapproval.
I haven't seen a lot of prior polls specifically about Ohio, but given that Obama barely won that state, and that it is being creamed economically, the performance reported doesn't seem very bad.
I certainly don't disagree with the general gist of your comment, nor that this trend may soon change, but I actually don't really see much "drop".
Every random fluctuation from poll to poll will be touted as a "drop" by wingnuts, of course.
harold said:
I certainly don't disagree with the general gist of your comment, nor that this trend may soon change, but I actually don't really see much "drop".
Beyond Rasmussen, there has been a slight decline in Obama's approval ratings overall- from the low 60s to the high 50s- and I'd expect the trend to continue.
My point was in response to several posters here and on other sites who've been talking about Obamas "sinking" popularity.
I don't think we are disagreeing much, which makes arguing less fun.
The cliche all politics are local.
Lets call the Franken - Coleman race 50/50. Franken campaigns with Obama is it likely Pawlenty wins, I don't think so.
A Minnesota Republican selling down South, not easy. Mitt Rommey had a big problem and that is not going to change by 2012.. The other potential moderate Republicans need to have a centrist to win and that is fact and the herd has been thinned.
Newt, Rudi, Huckabee will run because being a Presidential candidate is a great part time job. If the GOP had any leadership, I would promote Kay Balley Hutchison who I think would be the most competitive against Obama.
I do suffer from logic and never in my wildest dreams thought McCain would be taken in by Palin but that just goes to show you.
Todd,
The GOP numbers are bad, but they aren't as significant as you supposed (just as it is not all that significant that figures like Pelosi and Reid are unpopular). For instance, party numbers that abysmal aren't preventing the GOP from advancing toward likely wins in the biggest elections of the year (the VA and NJ gov races - which are currently being studiously ignored on 538).
PS - add this to the list of Dem screw ups. Holder is leaning toward a special prosectuor on interrogation techniques. !!! There is a reason that Obama wants nothing to do with this. It's a serious political looser (and perhaps political suicide - if, god forbid, there is a terrorist strike on this country while the Dems are busy tearing down our security apparatus and prosecuting their political enemies).
Jeffy said...
For instance, party numbers that abysmal aren't preventing the GOP from advancing toward likely wins in the biggest elections of the year (the VA and NJ gov races - which are currently being studiously ignored on 538).
Jeffy?
Oh, Jeffy?
Again doing what Jen said? Talking out of the nether regions of your body?
According to the current GOOPer favored pollster, "The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in the state shows Christie with a seven-point lead over Corzine, 46% to 39%." That 7 point difference is down from a 13 point lead immediately following the primary. (July 8, 2009)
Rasmussen also reports, "New Jersey polls often show Republican candidates doing better early in the campaign with Democrats coming back in the fall."
Gee, that took me all of a couple of minutes to find, much less time than it took to type in my comments here on this thread.
And did it occur to you that maybe the reason why 538.com is 'ignoring' the polls in the two races is because of a paucity of data? You know, the raw material which is used to make legitimate analysis (as Nate tries to do), not comments from a person's nether regions (as you always and consistently do)?
Mike in Maryland
My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965
Mike in Maryland,
Corzine is in serious trouble. Doesn't mean he may not win, but he's exceptionally vulnerable, because he's a bad governor. I'm not sure anyone else is overly excited about a sitting Dem gov in NJ pulling to within 7 points.
"Paucity of data" - bull. There have been three or four polls in Virginia at least in the last week or two. There will not be serious analysis of these races UNLESS there is movement for the Dems, in which case we'll hear about nothing else.
Still, I'm touched by your affection for Corzine. Seriously, is there a corrupt Dem-machine hack or self-funded plutocrat that the denizens of this site WON'T support? It doesn't matter how low these state parties go (check out the news from MA and IL), you people line up like lemmings. The voters won't prove as accomodating. Early prediction: Duval Patrick is toast in MA.
PS I thought we we're all supposed to ignore Rasmussen polls. Is that rule suspended. I guess that means that the GOP leads the Dems in the generic party vote, as he's been reporting for months.
Jeff wrote:
"The GOP numbers are bad, but they aren't as significant as you supposed (just as it is not all that significant that figures like Pelosi and Reid are unpopular)."
You are comparing apples to oranges, groups to individuals, national numbers to state races.
The point is that the wingnuts claim that Obama's approval numbers and Republican approval numbers are an inverse relationship. The implicit idea is that, as Obama's approval drops, the Republican positions become more acceptable.
This is the crux of the issue for wingnuts, because there is no upside for Obama's decline unless it means a greater probability of success for Republicans.
Indeed, we have routinely seen comments here along the lines of, "once the voters find out Obama has failed/is a Muslim/socialist/terrorist, then the Democrats will be booted from the White House".
Recall that the House Republicans (all 178 of them) voted as one against the stimulus package. This was held up as a great victory by the wingnuts, and America was supposed to see these 178 'brave souls' as some kind of heroes.
Well, currently, only 12% approves of them and 71% disapproves, so this isn't really a ringing endorsement of the Republican 'position'. That is strange, since Obama's decline in popularity was supposed to make the Republican 'position' look more appealing.
And the Republican Party, which one would expect to benefit from the Wingnut Law of Inverse Popularity, is at 72% unfavourable. Curiouser and curiouser...
Now, does this mean that no Republican can ever win in purple States, or against a damaged incumbent? No. But it does mean that harold was correct when he said that "loss of approval by Democrats does not translate into gain of approval by Republicans".
The public is not embracing the Republican Party positions. The GOP is not an attractive alternative for voters disaffected with Obama. Obama's loss is not the Republicans' gain.
In fact, a considerable amount of Obama's decline in popularity has come from Republicans turning against him
Jeff wrote:
"PS I thought we're all supposed to ignore Rasmussen polls. Is that rule suspended?"
I think MiM's point was that, since conservatives think Rasmussen is the "real deal", then they would have to accept Rasmussen's insight into the NJ race.
In the same way, since conservatives routinely dismiss PPP as "liberal", it's odd that they feel comfortable invoking PPP's work on the VA and NJ races.
It's even stranger, considering that the wingnut opinion here in late October was that all polling is worthless and "the only poll that matters is the one on Election Day", but consistency never was the wingnut's strong suit.
But you keep on patting yourself on the back for knocking down that straw man, Jeff. Good job.
Pawlenty would lose by more than 11 points to Obama in Minnesota.
I did some good research on this topic. Medicare overhead is far more than 3%. Claim fraud itself is like 15% of medicare spend. Then the billing cost is handled by SSA. There is structural bias againts reducing claim fraud and improving service as that would be counted against overhead. Also overhead per person of CMS which administers Medicare is huge. 4500 employees putting overhead of $14billion is rather large.
Not taking any sides here but numbers should not be misused.
@CVik - No, numbers should not be misused. Could you please tell us what sources you used for yours as well as the other assertions in your statement? Nate is usually pretty good about identifying his source material so that it can be independently confirmed by the reader. That would be a good example for all of us to follow, you included.
CVik said...
4500 employees putting overhead of $14billion is rather large.
Yep.
Sure is.
That comes to just over $3,111,111 per employee.
And here I thought that only DoD contractors could pull that average rate per employee in a contract with the federal government. Guess I was wrong on that!
By the way, CVik, got a site that you could cite for that bit of data? Since you've done 'some good research' on this, I'm sure you can give us the source for your 'data'.
Mike in Maryland
My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965
Jeffy?
Jeffy?
Over here, Jeffy.
Got reading comprehension problems again?
Didn't take your meds for that nagging attention deficit disorder?
Did you absolutely, totally ignore the words I wrote prior to the word "Rasmussen"?
The words you apparently didn't read were:
According to the current GOOPer favored pollster. . . .
The meds really do work, Jeffy, if properly taken as the doctor prescribed.
Mike in Maryland
My Blogger ID is http://www.blogger.com/profile/02848893412251095965
The GOP thinks of MN as gravy. the fact that Pawlenty made is this far is a bonus.
petekent01 (on twitter)
I make it a general rule not to engage people who refer to me as a wingnut, or who seem to suffer from arrested development, but I will nevertheless stipulate to Todd and Mike in Maryland that I am fully willing to accept Rasmussen's finding that the sitting Dem gov of the deep blue state of NJ is only trailing by 7 points.
What an achievement.
PS The Qunnipiac poll, more recent, has Corzine down by 12. Somehow the GOP's low "popularity" doesn't seem to be a millstone around Christie's neck. Nor does Obama's popularity seem to be helping Corzine. But by all means keep sputtering about "wingnuts" gentlemen. They seem to be your expertise.
A片下載|成人影片下載|免費A片下載|日本A片|情色A片|免費A片|成人影城|成人電影|線上A片|A片免費看
米蘭情趣用品|情趣用品|情趣|飛機杯|自慰套|充氣娃娃|AV女優.按摩棒|跳蛋|潤滑液|角色扮演|情趣內衣|自慰器|穿戴蝴蝶|變頻跳蛋|無線跳蛋|電動按摩棒|情趣按摩棒|
自慰套,自慰套,自慰器,情趣,情趣,視訊交友,充氣娃娃,AV,按摩棒,電動按摩棒,情趣按摩棒,按摩棒,跳蛋,跳蛋,跳蛋,男女,潤滑液,SM,情趣內衣,內衣,性感內衣,角色扮演,角色扮演服,吊帶襪,丁字褲,情趣用品,情趣用品,飛機杯,自慰套
艾葳酒店經紀公司提供專業的酒店經紀, 飯局小姐,領檯人員,領台,傳播妹,或者想要到台北酒店、林森北路酒店,私人招待所,或者八大行業當酒店PT,酒店公關,酒店兼職,想去酒店上班, 日式酒店,制服酒店,ktv酒店,禮服店,整天穿得水水漂漂的禮服酒店,鋼琴酒吧當酒店領檯,酒店小姐,公關小姐??,還是想去制服店當上班小姐,水水們如果想要擁有打工工作、晚上兼差工作、兼差打工、假日兼職、兼職工作、學生兼差、兼差、打工兼差、日領工作、晚上兼差工作、酒店工作、酒店上班、酒店打工、兼職、兼差、兼差工作、酒店上班等,想了解酒店相關工作和特種行業內容,想找打工、假日兼職、兼差打工、或晚班兼職想擁有快速賺錢又有保障的工作嗎???又可以現領請找專業又有保障的艾葳酒店經紀公司!
艾葳酒店經紀是合法的公司工作環境高雅時尚，無業績壓力，無脫秀無喝酒壓力，高層次會員制客源，工作輕鬆，可日領、現領。
一般的酒店經紀只會在水水們第一次上班和領薪水時出現而已，對水水們的上班安全一點保障都沒有！艾葳酒店經紀公司的水水們上班時全程媽咪作陪，不需擔心！只提供最優質的酒店打工,酒店上班,酒店打工環境、上班條件給水水們。
水水們妳有缺現金、有卡債、缺錢卡奴的煩腦嗎?想到日本留學日本打工嗎?妳是工讀生找工作??想要擁有高時薪又輕鬆的夜間兼職工作,打工機會和,假日打工,兼職工作日領假日打工的機會嗎??想實現夢想卻又缺錢沒錢嗎!??整天還在煩腦如何賺錢有什麼賺錢方法,和賺錢最快方法!?,想要打工,日領工作,短期打工,兼差工作,打工兼差工作嗎!?,
請加入我們艾葳酒店經紀公司工作單純輕鬆”高時薪”又可日領徵想要當傳播妹,上班小姐,酒店兼差,酒店兼職,歡迎學生打工,!!!
加入我們實現夢想就從現在開始^__^
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,
Post a Comment