Gallup Data Says: A Center-Right Nation No More

by: Paul Rosenberg

Sun Feb 01, 2009 at 19:28


This week, Gallup released a report on the partisan makeup of the states, based on all its interviews during 2008.  I diaried about it hurriedly here, and promised a more comprehensive diary on the weekend. Voila!  That promise is hereby kept.

Here's the map that Gallup put out, showing just 5 red states:

I used a more nuanced division, and put it onto a map divided into census regions, producing the following:

The most obvious thing about these results is that they provide yet another form of evidence for a massive realignment-something that Versailles is still massively out of touch with.  In fact, it's still quite a distinct possibility that the current Democratic dominance could fall apart precisely because they fail to give the people what the people are hungering for-a sweeping and fundamental change of direction.  (See David's latest post, for example.)

A table of the underlying state-by-state data kicks off the extended diary.

Paul Rosenberg :: Gallup Data Says: A Center-Right Nation No More
There are 17 entries in each of the columns, (50 states plus DC), so one can see at a glance that Democrats enjoy a margin of 17 points or more in 17 states plus DC, a nice little factoid.  Democrats also enjoy a double-digit advantage in 28 states plus DC, while the states where Republicans hold an edge (including 3 by 2 points or less) make up less than half a column:

If that isn't lopsided, I don't know what is.

To further sharpen the contrast, here's a snapshot of the ten most Democratic, and ten most Republican states:

Note that the #10 Democratic state is more heavily Democratic than the #1 Republican state is Republican.  And, of course, the 9th and 10th most Republican states are Democratic leaning.

And here's a snapshot of the most Democratic and most Republic states in each of the nine census regions:

A majority of the most Republican states in a given census region--five--actually lean Democratic.  And two of them do so by double digits.


The current map is especially striking when juxtaposed with a map from 2002:

Looking at this map, it's really not so surprising that so many political experts thought the Republicans really were establishing themselves in a position of long-term dominance--even though this was actually no more than a momentary peak.  Looked at as a single snap-shot it was fairly impressive.

And the underlying data:

shows a clear predominance of Republican-controlled states.

Again, here's a snapshot of the ten most Democratic, and ten most Republican states:

Which further shows the Republican edge.  All the GOP states are in double digits, with only three of them under 15%.  In contrast, one Democratic state is in single digits, and more than half are under 15%.

And the most Democratic and most Republic states in each of the nine census regions:

This view was more narrowly matched, and actually favored the Democrats by one metric:  one "most Democratic" state leaned Republican, while two "most Republican" states leaned Democratic.

All the above resulted from a significant shift from 1993 to 2002:


Just seven states plus DC became more Democratic during this time.  A whopping 41 states became more Republican, 21 of them by double digits.  Still, this represented a period when the post-Civil Rights Southern defection from the Democratic Party was finally filtering down to the level of party ID.  Ten of the 21 states with double digit GOP shifts were Southern or Border states.  Thus a good chunk of this shift did not represent much of a change in national-level voting behavior, nor did it represent something new, but rather the playing out of an old dynamic.  the only question was, had this dynamic played itself out, or was there more of it to come?  Given that the two parties where still fairly evenly matched after this heroic GOP surge, there was good reason even then to think that those caught up in the narrative of GOP dominance were not taking a long view of things.


In fact, this actually represented the high water mark of GOP popularity since the Great Depression, so it is remarkable how dramatically things have changed in such a short period of time.

This sort of dramatic shift has occurred before however.  In the 1880s, the Democrats seemed to have pulled even or slightly ahead of the Republicans, only be wiped out following the Panic of 1893, first losing their large majorities in the House, then losing the Presidency in 1896.  Similarly, the Democrats enjoyed a landslide victory in 1964, unlike anything they'd seen since FDR more than 20 years earlier, but the next presidential election began a 40-year period dominated by divided government, when three Republican presidents won two terms, and the only Democrat to do so never broke 50%.  Thus, this sort of shift is readily compatible with an end-of-cycle realignment.

This can be seen quite dramatically in the following map that shows shifts in margins from 2002 to 2008:

Just one state became more Republican.  All the rest became more Democratic.

And here's the underlying data:

More than two-thirds became more Democratic by double digits.  The entire middle column--17 states--underwent a shockingly uniform shift, varying less than 3%, from 15.2% to 12.3%.  Just above them, another 12 states shifted within a band of 3.6%, from 16.5% to 20.1%. Together, these two narrow bands accounted for more than half the states.


Stepping back a bit to take in the larger picture, I now want to look at 1993, and how things changed from 1993 to 2008--combining the 1993-2002 period that moved toward the Republicans with the 2002-2008 period that moved toward the Democrats.  First, here's the map showing the combined shifts:

And the underlying data:

The combined data shows more than 2/3rds of the states (33 out of 48 for which we have comparable data, plus DC) became more Democratic, with almost 1/3 (15 states plus DC) shifting Democratic by double digits, compared to just 5 shifting Republican by that much.  This is a decisive shift since 1993, a time period when Democrats were still quite strong across the boards, as can be seen from the following table:

Democrats had double-digit margins in 19 states plus DC.  Republicans had double-digit margins in just four states--none of them Southern, however.

Looking at the top 10 states for both parties:

we see that only the top GOP state, Wyoming, is more Republican than the #10 Democratic state, New York, is Democratic.  More than half the GOP states are in single digist, while more than half the Democratic states were over 20.

And by census region:

Only one "most Democratic" state was in single digits, while three "most Republican" states were actually Democratic leaning, and four others were in single digits.

In short, the dominance of Democratic party identification in 1993 was broad, deep and undeniable.

The fact that the electorate is now significantly more Democratic than it was in 1993 means that the Democrats really are poised for a long period of partisan dominance--if only their national political leadership had the slightest clue that this was the case. Lacking such a clue, there is really no telling how badly they might alienate those who presently identify with the party.

Here's one final way of looking at what's happened over this period of time, a table recording the unweighted averages of party identification in the various regions.  Because it's unweighted, it's not very scientific, but it does give a raw feel that's quite in line with everything else we've seen:

There are just two regions--East South Central and West South Central--that have become more Republican. Even the third Southern region--the South Atlantic, which includes Virginia, Florida and the Carolinas--has become more Democratic, as has every other region.  Furthermore, the Mountain region is now the only region that leans Republican.  Clearly, the notion of a "center-right nation" was at best a reflection of Presidential level politics (which has always been more personality driven than other levels) combined with an historically brief surge in party identification that has now played itself out, and been more than compensated for by a resurgent Democratic Party.

If only someone would tell the party leadership.

If only the party leadership were listening!


Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

sdf (4.00 / 1)
with these stats, it's pretty clear that Democratic politicians are doing something right. I'm not sure why you give them no credit.

Have You Been Watching What They've Been Doing The Last Two Weeks? (4.00 / 5)
And how support for the stimulus has been tanking?

Sure, the Versailles media insists on acting as if the GOP won last November.  That's perfectly predictable, understandable, and normal.  But why does Obama act that way?

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Support tanking? (4.00 / 1)
The only organization I see that has polled this issue twice is Gallup, where support was essentially unchanged, from 53% on 1/6 to 52% on 1/27.  Have you seen something else?  Frankly, I'm pretty surprised Gallup's numbers didn't drop to, say, 35% or something given the press lately.

[ Parent ]
Well Sure (0.00 / 0)
Ideally one always wants apples-to-apples polling data.  But compare that level of support to support for Obama generically, who can't do diddly if he can't pass this, or to other measures of desire for action on behalf of the people in general, and it's quite clear that support for the stimulus does not measure up to where it should be, or where it would have been, had it been successfully defended against GOP attack.  It should be up around 60-70 percent support.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
In the Democracy Corps poll it is at that level... (0.00 / 0)
...and same with the latest Fox News poll that ended Wednesday..  the former is even more recent...

The only polling firm that shows generally weak support for the stimulus is Rasmussen, and if you look at the questions, they are basically push polling.

In the meantime, several polls show republican approval tanking starting about the time they started resisting the stimulus package...

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!


[ Parent ]
Woulda shoulda coulda (0.00 / 0)
Yes, the numbers almost certainly could be better had a better defense been waged.  (Well, that's almost the definition of a better defense, isn't it?  Silly me.)

Thanks for the diary, by the way.


[ Parent ]
Who Said Anything About DEFENSE??? (0.00 / 0)
The GOP should have been lambasted 24/7 for causing this catastrophe in the first place, with all their hare-brained ideological schemes.

But, that wouldn't have been post-partisan.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Support tanking? (0.00 / 0)
Once again you are wrong Paul, don't take your taking points and your strategies from establishment partisans IMO.

60%+ support for Obama's plan (the numbers sharply dive down if you disassociate obama from that question as some other polls do--note to partisan democrats)
http://features.csmonitor.com/...


[ Parent ]
You Make My Point (0.00 / 0)
It shouldn't be possible to drive the numbers down by dissociation.  In fact, if anything, Obama should be using his popularity to push through programs that are then more popular than he is--and thus can be used to keep his popularity up, when, inevitably, he runs into a rough patch over something else.

We only had the beginnings of public polling back during the New Deal, but when Social Security was passed, it was actually more popular than FDR, and polling on that was some the earliest that Gallup ever did.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
dfd (0.00 / 0)
I'm not sure what data you have that suggests that support is "tanking." But the point remains though. You constantly criticize Democrats for being "weak" yet they are wildly popular. Perhaps if they were not as "weak" they would not be as popular. Give props where they are due.

[ Parent ]
I Guess What This Really Means (0.00 / 0)
is that you have no idea what it would mean for Democrats to act strong.  And in that, you are just like the Versailles Dems themselves, as David Kowalski explains below:

Traditionally, very powerful elephants can be held by weak chains because they have "learned" the lesson that when they are chaineed they are helpless.  Democrats have to learn that they are not helpless but in control of the House, the Senate, and the Presidency.  The power of the chains is in the mind, not the material.


"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
your quote (0.00 / 0)
makes no sense; it's a non seqiutur. point remains again: you rip Democrats, but they have the country on lock. Your quote does not defeat that.

[ Parent ]
Your Reading Comprehension Problems Are Your Own (0.00 / 0)
Please go to your local community college, sign up for a class in reading comprehension, and help them help America get the economy back in shape.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Obama's acting that way (0.00 / 0)
because he's Obama.

Unlike many people on openleft, he probably sees the Clinton administration as largely a success.  Clinton secured a second term, and generally respectable approval numbers, by tacking to the center and to the right, triangulating, and playing the bipartisan game.

Regardless of whether he believes it or not, he won the elecction by this post-partisan approach.  He can't change it now.  


[ Parent ]
Watch Closely, Squirrel! (0.00 / 0)
Regardless of whether he believes it or not, he won the elecction by this post-partisan approach.  He can't change it now.  

FDR ran with a pledge to balance the budget.  When he finally felt he could do it in 1937, it produced a disaster, and he returned to massive deficit spending as the only way to keep the economy afloat.  WWII came along to help him, too, of course.

Ronald Reagan ran with a pledge to balance the budget, too.  Unfortunately, he didn't tell us the budget he would balance would be Japan's.  That's a Republican for you.

Thus, for good or ill, even the most basic of substantive promises can easily be broken, if something comes along to make it necessary.  (In Reagan's case, he ran out of fairy dust.  "No one could have foreseen...")

Procedural promises?

You've got to be kidding!

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
I expect that a lot of Dem politicians (4.00 / 2)
would see those maps and have conflicting emotions.

On one hand, it means they are likely to keep committee assignments and enjoy robust fundraising...and who knows, maybe a jump or two up the ladder to a more high-profile office.

On the other hand, it means they have a clear path towards accomplishing BIG, broadly progressive planks when it comes to the economy, foreign policy, and core civil liberties (though not necessarily cultural politics). And I think a lot of them don't want to do that....this map kind of scares them that the opportunity for change is actually there. Instability frightens stability, even when stability is no longer tenable.

Maybe I'm just being overly cynical, but that's my take.


Yeah, I Think That's A Good Part of It (4.00 / 3)
Hence the need for some early retirement programs.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
There are two ways to lose favor with The People (0.00 / 0)
1) Don't do what they want

2) Govern badly

The current Administration is threatening to do both simultaneously.


Not even 2 weeks and already you're saying that Obama = Bush? (4.00 / 1)
Nice.

Even nicer would be some supporting evidence.

"Those who stand for nothing fall for anything...Mankind are forever destined to be the dupes of bold & cunning imposture" -- Alexander Hamilton


[ Parent ]
Well (4.00 / 1)
I believe that Paul is excessively pessimistic.  However, the signs so far have not been encouraging.  And it really does seem like the Dems have completely forgotten--once again--that they won in November.

Now, there's plenty of time for things to change, of course. Which is all the more reason to raise a ruckus now, sooner, rather than later. More opportunity to get back on track.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Both encouraging and discouraging--a mixed bag at best/worst (4.00 / 1)
Some of the appointments, EO's and now legislation have been great. Some not so much. But most of all the politics and messaging have been muddled and often dumb, which I think is the most worrying part, as opposed to the policies and appointments.

But claiming that it's business as usual and already a huge failure is just silly.

"Those who stand for nothing fall for anything...Mankind are forever destined to be the dupes of bold & cunning imposture" -- Alexander Hamilton


[ Parent ]
I'd like to see the evolution of liberal/conservative poll numbers (4.00 / 2)
This is interesting and, on the whole, good news.  But are the people who identifying themselves as Republicans in 2002 and as Democrats today actually changing their outlook on the world to any extent, or are they simply trying a new flavor because the old one has exposed itself as an utter failure?

This data certainly does blow up the Washington media establishment's "center-right nation" myth--if we define Republicans as right and Democrats as left.  Seeing how a lot of congressional Democrats behaved during the Bush years makes me severely doubt those definitions, though.  What I'd like to see is parallel poll data on how conservative vs. liberal/progressive self identification evolved over the same time.  Anyone know where I could find such information?  I could put together a diary to follow this up...


The Problem With That (4.00 / 4)
is that self-identified conservatives are usually pretty liberal when it comes to basic economic issues.  And often enough on social issues as well.  This isn't true of activists, of course.  But the average voter--or potential voter--has a lot less rigid sense of ideologically consistency.  You have to look at actual issue positions to know what people actually believe.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
You're right (0.00 / 0)
and that makes this kind of thing exceedingly difficult to measure in a social science-y kind of way.  You can look at poll data on individual issues (say, percentage supporting universal healthcare, or percentage supporting capital punishment) but the wording, if not the substance, of the questions tends to vary over long spans of time.

On the bright side, certainly more people identifying themselves as Democrats and voting for Democrats--no matter their ideological orientation--opens up concrete opportunities for progressive legislation.  At least that's the assumption that this and a whole lot of other progressive blogs are relying on, and it's quite a reasonable one.  The cynical side of me worries about this, though, given the extremely broad coalition that is the Democratic Party, and the way that the national party's agenda has evolved over the long term, and not just during its spineless years out of power from 2000 to 2008.  Single-payer healthcare used to be plank of the Democratic party, and it isn't today.  Has the party moved this much to the right?

I should probably stop worrying, though it would definitely reassure me to see the Employee Free Choice Act pass...


[ Parent ]
I Use GSS Data Precisely Because It's Long-Term And Wording Doesn't Vary (0.00 / 0)
So you can use it as a baseline for other stuff.  Then look at the work of folks who build on it, such as James Stimson.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
It has NEVER been center-bullshit-right, it is (4.00 / 2)
just that the Dem party has been

stunningly staggeringly politically incompetent, OR
incompetently sold out, OR
a mix of both.

over 80% of the population does NOT want YOUR priest or rabbi or guru or minister in their kids school room or your family's doctor office, they do NOT want people who backstab or steal to be more successful than people who make better mousetraps, they do NOT want their community investment dollars stolen by enron-halliburton-bechtel AND they WANT clean water and hot water and toilets and roads and electricity and cops and libraries and schools, they want innovators rewarded over the paris hiltons, they want the best 'man' to win NOT the best connected, ...

all the spreadsheets PROVE is how goddam incompetent the Dems have been, and how stupid we've been for putting up with their goddam incompetence.

rmm.  

It is too full o' the milk of human kindness To catch the nearest way


One thing to remember about Obama, (4.00 / 3)
I have been very distressed about seeing Obama's unwillingness to push the envelope early on dealing with the economy.  I can't believe that after all we've gone through we still don't have Obama coming right out and backing Claire McCaskill's proposal to limit CEO pay.  Its very frustrating, and I get very scared that Obama has Geithner and Summers whispering neo-liberal bullshit in his ear at a time when neo-liberalism WILL NOT CUT IT.  

My only consolation is this:  Obama tends to move very cautiously whenever he gets into a new situation.  I noticed this quite a bit on the campaign trail.  As he grows more comfortable with the situation he tends seem a lot more aware and a lot less blind.  

Right now he seems very blind, particularly in regards to his handling of the bailout so far.  Hopefully my pop-psych critique of Obama has some truth, and that its not too late if and when he does finally get his footing.


Well, I've Heard It Said (4.00 / 2)
that some fairly saavy economists expect the bailout to fail, precisely due to the extreme caution, and that only after that do they expect Obama to start doing anything useful.

Not a happy thought.  But happier than having him dither on like this indefinitely without ever getting a clue.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
party affiliation versus ideology (0.00 / 0)
the two are not the same....

Except That Increasingly They Are (4.00 / 1)
as Chris pointed out in the aftermath of the 2004 election.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Nicely illustrated (4.00 / 1)
Dicking with Republics now is a little like a cat toying with a mouse before the mouse is dead. Cruel, but what-the-hell. It dies now. It dies later. What's the difference?  

hooray? (0.00 / 0)
Well so what I gather from this is that the Democrats are in the best position they've been in since... the year before the Republicans took control of Congress and proceeded to completely trash the nation for the next 14 years. That's better than not being in that position, obviously, but...

No, It's Better Than That (4.00 / 2)
I just don't have data from earlier than that.  But look at how much better.  As I note, from 1993 to 2008:

The combined data shows more than 2/3rds of the states (33 out of 48 for which we have comparable data, plus DC) became more Democratic, with almost 1/3 (15 states plus DC) shifting Democratic by double digits, compared to just 5 shifting Republican by that much.  

That's significantly more Democratic now than the country was in 1993.  And unlike 1992, our candidate won a clear majority, not a mere plurality in a 3-way race.  We are significantly stronger on all fronts--except, of course, in Versailles, where it's still 2002.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Old habits die hard (4.00 / 4)
Democrats feel less powerful than they are and Republicans feel more powerful because of roles ingrained during the 1995-2009 period.

Republicans have controlled at least one house of Congress or the Presidency since the 1994 elections.  They have controlled at least one house of Congress or the Presidency for all but 2 of the previous 28 years. I know that Republicans in the House are irrelevant but the realization hasn't sunk in with the politicians on either side of the aisle.  Only 25% of House Republicans (44 out of 178) have worked in a Democratic trifecta era (1993-95) and only 30% of Democrats have been around for that long (78 out of a decreasing number).  Only 6 Republicans and 11 Democrats predate Reagan in the House.

Even the two recent years where Democrats controlled the House and Senate were stymied by Bush and faux fillibusters.

To some extent it is like what happens to an elephant who was heavily shacled as a baby.  Traditionally, very powerful elephants can be held by weak chains because they have "learned" the lesson that when they are chaineed they are helpless.  Democrats have to learn that they are not helpless but in control of the House, the Senate, and the Presidency.  The power of the chains is in the mind, not the material.


Quite True (4.00 / 1)
Traditionally, very powerful elephants can be held by weak chains because they have "learned" the lesson that when they are chaineed they are helpless.

Yet another way in which donkeys act like elephants.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Another reason for the fear (0.00 / 0)
is that they can see how quickly they turned things around in 2006 and 2008. The stimulus is the first step and the people are prepared to give Obama some time to do the things he wants. But if that time runs out, the Republicans can come back just as quickly. There may be some governor out there who can reasonably be described as pragmatist who can be put forward for 2012. (It will be interesting if Sarah Palin can learn to talk about national issues and cast herself as that governor. You could make the case that the McCain campaign wanted a caricature out of her and that it was deeply cynical. But she did not know her stuff. People may remember.)  

Darkness has a hunger that's insatiable, and lightness has a call that's hard to hear.  

[ Parent ]
Never mind (0.00 / 0)
Per Eric Kleefeld and Rasmussen, 55% of Republicans say the party should be more like Palin exactly as she is now. Democrats got mind-bogglingly lucky. Not as if there is any data for this, but the Obama of 2004 was someone that most Democrats could say the party should be like.  

Darkness has a hunger that's insatiable, and lightness has a call that's hard to hear.  

[ Parent ]
55% Of Republicans? That Must Be Almost 2 People In Every County! (0.00 / 0)
Okay, make that, maybe 18% of the public.  Right down there in Cheney popularity country.  That's a real winner for them!

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Well, they are working overtime on becoming fewer (0.00 / 0)


Darkness has a hunger that's insatiable, and lightness has a call that's hard to hear.  

[ Parent ]
Better (0.00 / 0)
If the average Republican sticks by Sarah Palin, they are undeterred by their fewness and will wear it as a badge of honor.  

Darkness has a hunger that's insatiable, and lightness has a call that's hard to hear.  

[ Parent ]
Best I can put this (0.00 / 0)
In the states Huckabee won, there are more than two Republicans in every county. Palin can be assumed to get the states that Huckabee won. In the states McCain won to get him the nomination, there will be fewer than two Republicans in every county and their number of delegates will be counted accordingly. Not to say that Palin is a lock but to say that the regional death spiral is proceeding apace.  

Darkness has a hunger that's insatiable, and lightness has a call that's hard to hear.  

[ Parent ]
Needless to say (0.00 / 0)
South Carolina and Oklahoma don't count :)  

Darkness has a hunger that's insatiable, and lightness has a call that's hard to hear.  

[ Parent ]
That 2002-2008 table was the most impressive (0.00 / 0)
When you look at Missouri and how it changed, you can see the Democratic practical landslide at the state level last year and the nail-biting federal elections in 2008 and 2006. This doesn't change that the state adopted a kind of center-left governance. But center-left has a lot of flavors. People could be happy with their state party but the party honchos in Washington would see things only at the federal level and be afraid to show leadership.  

Darkness has a hunger that's insatiable, and lightness has a call that's hard to hear.  

USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox