HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Trump pushes to swap Elec...

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 12:30 PM

Trump pushes to swap Electoral College for popular vote

Source: Politico




By LOUIS NELSON 04/26/2018 10:47 AM EDT

President Donald Trump on Thursday voiced support for doing away with the Electoral College for presidential elections in favor of a popular vote because the latter would be “much easier to win.”

The president’s support for a popular-vote presidential election came as an aside during a freewheeling Thursday morning interview with “Fox & Friends,” the Fox News morning show he is known to watch and from which he receives almost unflinchingly positive coverage. Trump made the remark amid a larger point about public figures who publicly support him in turn benefiting from a boost of popularity from Trump supporters.

“Remember, we won the election. And we won it easily. You know, a lot of people say ‘Oh, it was close.’ And by the way, they also like to always talk about Electoral College. Well, it’s an election based on the Electoral College. I would rather have a popular election, but it’s a totally different campaign,” Trump said. “It’s as though you're running — if you're a runner, you're practicing for the 100-yard dash as opposed to the 1-mile.”

“The Electoral College is different. I would rather have the popular vote because it's, to me, it's much easier to win the popular vote,” he continued.

Read more: https://www.politico.com/story/2018/04/26/trump-electoral-college-popular-vote-555148

62 replies, 7207 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 62 replies Author Time Post
Reply Trump pushes to swap Electoral College for popular vote (Original post)
DonViejo Apr 2018 OP
mahatmakanejeeves Apr 2018 #1
TranssexualKaren Apr 2018 #2
Ferrets are Cool Apr 2018 #3
Dave Starsky Apr 2018 #8
Cha Apr 2018 #47
Liberalagogo Apr 2018 #4
former9thward Apr 2018 #30
Liberalagogo Apr 2018 #34
former9thward Apr 2018 #35
padfun Apr 2018 #55
SergeStorms Apr 2018 #37
former9thward Apr 2018 #40
SergeStorms Apr 2018 #44
former9thward Apr 2018 #46
SergeStorms Apr 2018 #49
ollie10 Apr 2018 #5
BootinUp Apr 2018 #6
RockRaven Apr 2018 #7
lagomorph777 Apr 2018 #15
The Mouth Apr 2018 #9
left-of-center2012 Apr 2018 #10
progree Apr 2018 #17
robbob Apr 2018 #45
groundloop Apr 2018 #20
Spider Jerusalem Apr 2018 #11
niyad Apr 2018 #18
former9thward Apr 2018 #31
ProfessorGAC Apr 2018 #54
tavernier Apr 2018 #57
C_U_L8R Apr 2018 #12
Stonepounder Apr 2018 #13
maddiemom Apr 2018 #22
Massacure Apr 2018 #29
djg21 Apr 2018 #38
Cold War Spook Apr 2018 #41
Massacure Apr 2018 #43
djg21 Apr 2018 #52
Cold War Spook Apr 2018 #58
djg21 Apr 2018 #60
Cold War Spook Apr 2018 #14
djg21 Apr 2018 #39
Cold War Spook Apr 2018 #42
Whiskeytide Apr 2018 #16
niyad Apr 2018 #19
NYC Liberal Apr 2018 #21
MrsCoffee Apr 2018 #23
DFW Apr 2018 #24
dameatball Apr 2018 #27
Cha Apr 2018 #48
ThoughtCriminal Apr 2018 #25
no_hypocrisy Apr 2018 #26
SylviaD Apr 2018 #28
gyroscope Apr 2018 #32
Cold War Spook Apr 2018 #59
Red Mountain Apr 2018 #33
BigOleDummy Apr 2018 #53
truthisfreedom Apr 2018 #36
Rhiannon12866 Apr 2018 #50
still_one Apr 2018 #51
Va Lefty Apr 2018 #61
JustABozoOnThisBus Apr 2018 #56
CrispyQ Apr 2018 #62

Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 12:31 PM

1. There's an app for that. NT

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 12:33 PM

2. Yeah, right...

How many people expect him to follow through on this one?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 12:33 PM

3. Surely this is an Onion piece, right? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferrets are Cool (Reply #3)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 12:49 PM

8. I thought it was a joke, too.

Good Lord, is he a dullard. He honestly doesn't know how anything works on any subject.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferrets are Cool (Reply #3)

Sat Apr 28, 2018, 01:52 AM

47. trump is so fucking dumb.. he thinks

he won thee popular vote.

I can see Hillary right about now..



https://www.democraticunderground.com/100210281468

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 12:34 PM

4. If I recall

 

the Shithole did NOT win the popular vote.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberalagogo (Reply #4)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 05:30 PM

30. His argument is that he concentrated on the electoral vote not the popular vote.

His argument is that if he had been going for the popular vote he would have done the campaign completely differently. No one ever know how that would have turned out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #30)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 09:08 PM

34. Oh please

 

He's a shithole and always been a shithole and you know it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberalagogo (Reply #34)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 09:56 PM

35. So when he was funding Democratic candidates and causes in NY

he was a shithole? When the Clinton's came to his wedding he was a shithole? Why would they do that? Did you know something they didn't?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #35)

Sat Apr 28, 2018, 06:17 AM

55. Yes, he was a shithole back then too.

A shithole can belong to any party. Most are Republicans and a few are green (Jill Stein)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #30)

Fri Apr 27, 2018, 01:17 AM

37. Trump "concentrated".........



The GOP purge of the voting rolls won the electoral college for Trump, certainly not any "concentration" on his part.

What a freaking troglodyte.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SergeStorms (Reply #37)

Fri Apr 27, 2018, 07:22 AM

40. Unfortunately many Democrats did what you just did.

Post substance free stuff on the internet and ignore the upper Midwest. There is zero evidence Trump won because of a "purge of the voting rolls". People like to say that on the internet but they never back it up with any evidence. In 2012 Obama won the black vote with a 88% margin (94 - 6). In 2016 that margin went down to 80% (90-10). That may seem a small difference but it cost Clinton several states in the Midwest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #40)

Fri Apr 27, 2018, 09:40 PM

44. From Wikipedia-

"In Wisconsin, a federal judge found that the state's restrictive voter ID law led to "real incidents of disenfranchisement, which undermine rather than enhance confidence in elections, particularly in minority communities"; and, given that there was no evidence of widespread voter impersonation in Wisconsin, found that the law was "a cure worse than the disease." In addition to imposing strict voter ID requirements, the law cut back on early voting, required people to live in a ward for at least 28 days before voting, and prohibited emailing absentee ballots to voters.[79] A study by Priorities USA, a progressive advocacy group, estimates that strict ID laws in Wisconsin led to a significant decrease in voter turnout in 2016, with a disproportionate effect on African-American and Democratic-leaning voters".

Next.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SergeStorms (Reply #44)

Fri Apr 27, 2018, 11:58 PM

46. How come Clinton never showed up in Wisconsin?

Next. And why aren't you linking to Wiki so people can see the context?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #46)

Sat Apr 28, 2018, 03:31 AM

49. Lazy, much?

If you want to make sure I'm not lying to you just search "voter suppression in 2016 Presidential election".

As far as Clinton not going to Wisconsin, it's well documented that it was a very large mistake on her campaign's part. Ancient history though, and we're all paying for it now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 12:37 PM

5. OK. Can we make that retroactive? Then, deal!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 12:38 PM

6. Its like a Monty Python sketch but the

20 ton weight hasn’t dropped on him yet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 12:42 PM

7. "I would rather have the popular vote because it's, to me, it's much easier to win the popular vote"

But you *didn't* have it, and to you it *wasn't* easier. DOPE!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RockRaven (Reply #7)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 01:28 PM

15. Trade wars are easy to win. Arms races are easy to win.

The popular vote, apparently not so much, not if you're a Republican.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 01:04 PM

9. To give the devil his due, there's a grain of truth there:

you would run a completely different kind of campaign.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 01:06 PM

10. Didn't Trump lose the popular vote?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to left-of-center2012 (Reply #10)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 01:37 PM

17. Yup, and not only that, there's this tidbit from the article that's quite interesting

Only one Republican, George W. Bush in 2004, has won the nationwide popular vote in presidential elections dating back to 1992.


So that's one Republican presidential popular vote victory in 7 elections (1992, 1996, 2000, *2004*, 2008, 2012, 2016)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progree (Reply #17)

Fri Apr 27, 2018, 11:39 PM

45. After he led the country into an illegal war based on provable lies.

Sigh

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to left-of-center2012 (Reply #10)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 01:51 PM

20. Ehhhh...... what's a meager 3 million votes???

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 01:10 PM

11. There really is no bottom to how stupid he is, is there?

Does he know he lost the popular vote by three million?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #11)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 01:45 PM

18. NO--don't forget --ALL those votes were from illegals. he actually won by 5 mil without

the iillegals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #11)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 05:32 PM

31. He said he would have run a completely different campaign.

Whether you believe that or not is another matter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #31)

Sat Apr 28, 2018, 05:54 AM

54. You Seem Convinced

Explain how the campaign would differ.
Then explain how it differs when other candidates are doing the same.
This is an intellectual canard posited by a buffoon and you're defending it as if it has merit and intellectual weight.
Taking a contrary position just to be contrary is easy.
So, your logic is.....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProfessorGAC (Reply #54)

Sat Apr 28, 2018, 06:25 AM

57. I've noticed that the same three or four posters always take a contrary position.

I guess they feel that we need to see the viewpoint from the other side.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 01:13 PM

12. Does this moron know how to count??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 01:22 PM

13. Does he have a single clue about what it takes to pass an Amendment to the Constitution?

Hint: You can't do it with an Executive Order

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stonepounder (Reply #13)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 02:00 PM

22. If he could do it with an executive order, and DID...

It would be a thing of beauty! Actually, Trump has it fixed in his mind that this is why Hillary got nearly three million more popular votes: it was easy! Winning the E.C., as he did, was much harder. It makes as much sense as anything else that he believes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stonepounder (Reply #13)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 05:20 PM

29. Except it doesn't need a constitutional amendment.

States are free to pick electors for President as they see fit. It just so happens that 48 of the 50 states choose to appoint electors who pledge to vote for the winner of the state popular vote. There's nothing that prevents a state from choosing to appoint electors who pledge to vote for the winner of the national popular vote, and it would only take 11 states to do it to put a candidate winning the national popular vote over the 270 threshold they need - California, Texas, Florida, New York, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, and New Jersey.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Massacure (Reply #29)

Fri Apr 27, 2018, 05:53 AM

38. National Popular Vote interstate compact

 

The National Popular Vote interstate compact would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. It will go into effect after it is enacted by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes—that is, enough to elect a President (270 of 538). Under the compact, when the Electoral College meets in mid-December, the candidate who received the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC) will receive all of the electoral votes of the enacting states.

The National Popular Vote bill has been enacted by 11 jurisdictions possessing 165 electoral votes—61% of the 270 electoral votes necessary to activate it, including four small jurisdictions (RI, VT, HI, DC), three medium- size states (MD, MA, WA), and four big states (NJ, IL, NY, CA). The bill has passed a total of 35 legislative chambers in 23 states—most recently by a 40–16 vote in the Arizona House, a 28–18 vote in the Oklahoma Senate, a 57–4 vote in New York Senate, a 37–21 vote in Oregon House, and a 26-16 vote in the New Mexico Senate. A total of 3,055 state legislators have either sponsored or cast a recorded vote for the bill.

https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/written-explanation

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djg21 (Reply #38)

Fri Apr 27, 2018, 10:02 AM

41. unconstitutional

 

Article 1 Section 10.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cold War Spook (Reply #41)

Fri Apr 27, 2018, 06:07 PM

43. Fair enough. But still, states do not need to collude to make it happen.

I have to concede that if the state make their statute conditional on other states doing the same, that would probably run afoul of the Constitution. But a state could decide to pick electors based on the national popular vote regardless of how many other states do the same.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cold War Spook (Reply #41)

Sat Apr 28, 2018, 05:13 AM

52. Not necessarily.

 

here’s a decent discussion. https://www.cga.ct.gov/2008/rpt/2008-R-0221.htm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djg21 (Reply #52)

Sat Apr 28, 2018, 06:33 AM

58. Two thoughts on this.

 

One, I am sure the Supreme Court will rule on this before the first time it is used, for or against. Second, be careful what you wish for, you might just get it. I am all in favor of the popular vote picking the winner, but what if a candidate can not win the popular vote, but can get enough Electoral votes under today's system. Couldn't his/her people try to get those states to back out of the arrangement before the blackout?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cold War Spook (Reply #58)

Sat Apr 28, 2018, 07:25 AM

60. Courts don't give advisory opinions.

 

Art. III, Section 2, Clause 1

There needs to be an actual case or controversy. The litigation likely could come after Congress elects either to approve or disapprove of the compact after the requisite number of states subscribe.

As to your hypothetical, wouldn’t it be difficult to know with any certainty how the candidate would fare so far in advance of a general election?

I also question whether States actually need to enter a compact or agreement to accomplish the goal of the “Compact.” It may be that the initiative just has an unfortunate name.

It’s axiomatic that States have the constitutional right of states to choose their electors: “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors . . . ” (U.S. Const., Article II, Section 1, Clause 2).

This, taken with the Compacts clause, would suggest that so long as each State acts unilaterally (i.e., no express or implied agreement), they may individually adopt legislation to award their electors to the winner of the national popular vote without offending the Compact Clause. The fact that States may be acting in parallel doesn’t necessarily mean that there is an agreement or compact, though it perhaps could be circumstantial evidence of one.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 01:22 PM

14. Doesn't Trump know that would take adding a new Amendment to the Constitution?

 

He will be dead before any new Amendment is made to the Constitution. It would never pass any way. Those states that benefit from the Electoral College would vote against it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cold War Spook (Reply #14)

Fri Apr 27, 2018, 05:54 AM

39. This isnt entirely correct.

 

An amendment could be cleaner, but see post above about the National Popular Vote interstate compact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djg21 (Reply #39)

Fri Apr 27, 2018, 10:03 AM

42. unconstitutional

 

Article 1 Section 10

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 01:30 PM

16. Hmmm. I wonder if ...

... Bannon and Boris have figured out that rigging an election for the popular vote is less trouble than working with and around the EC? If all you're looking at is a grand total, adding in fake votes might be easier. IDK. Maybe all 37m people in Montana will vote in 2020, and we'll all be damned surprised.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whiskeytide (Reply #16)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 01:46 PM

19. something like that was my first thought as well--they figured out how to rig the whole thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whiskeytide (Reply #16)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 01:57 PM

21. This is correct. While I support a popular vote,

the current system is harder to rig because recounts can be limited to a few key states/areas. With a national popular vote, it would be much easier to hide vote padding; you could just add them all over the country. A lot harder to track down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 02:19 PM

23. And let's make it retroactive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrsCoffee (Reply #23)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 03:35 PM

24. That was exactly my reaction

Maybe President Hillary Clinton will even pardon him for some of the crap he has pulled.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DFW (Reply #24)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 03:44 PM

27. Same here

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DFW (Reply #24)

Sat Apr 28, 2018, 01:56 AM

48. trump thinks he won the popular vote..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 03:35 PM

25. Well, if it makes it easier to win...

There are many extremely good reasons to switch from the EC to the popular vote. Leave it to Trump to come up his own reason.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 03:39 PM

26. Don't tease . . . . . .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 03:54 PM

28. I cannot STAND this man

Come *ON* Mueller!!!!!!!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 07:50 PM

32. Which is ironic because Clinton is a supporter of the electoral college

 

...the same EC that handed the election to Trump despite her winning the popular vote by a large margin. Is she still a fan of the EC?

anywho, I definitely agree that the EC is anti-democratic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gyroscope (Reply #32)

Sat Apr 28, 2018, 06:40 AM

59. This is not a democracy.

 

It is a Constitutional Democratic Republic

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Apr 26, 2018, 08:20 PM

33. This is just his ego speaking.....

It still bothers him that he lost the popular vote. He makes that better in his mind by pretending that if only he had been allowed to campaign in all 50 states he would have swung the popular vote his way.

He'd have turned those blue states red and never lost a vote in the swing states that elected him in the process of reallocating his time and money.

Because.....his ego needs that.

Nothing to see here. Same old shit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Red Mountain (Reply #33)

Sat Apr 28, 2018, 05:37 AM

53. I think

you hit the nail on the head here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Fri Apr 27, 2018, 12:00 AM

36. Theres no limit to his delusions. So much winning.

He believes he won the popular vote. He has to. His condition allows no other conclusion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Sat Apr 28, 2018, 04:28 AM

50. Great idea - retroactively!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Sat Apr 28, 2018, 04:52 AM

51. What an idiot. That is the problem with the electoral college, it gives the red states an unfair

advantage.

There is no way the republicans will go for that because they know it would be a disaster for them, and it is highly unlikely that the red states would go for it because they would lose their influence.

It would require a change to the Constitution, and it isn't going to happen


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Reply #51)

Sat Apr 28, 2018, 07:46 AM

61. Best bet would be state legislatures voting to commit EC votes to popular vote winner

"The National Popular Vote interstate compact would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

The National Popular Vote bill has been enacted by 11 jurisdictions possessing 165 electoral votes—61% of the 270 electoral votes necessary to activate it, including four small jurisdictions (RI, VT, HI, DC), three medium- size states (MD, MA, WA), and four big states (NJ, IL, NY, CA). The bill has passed a total of 35 legislative chambers in 23 states—most recently by a 40–16 vote in the Arizona House, a 28–18 vote in the Oklahoma Senate, a 57–4 vote in New York Senate, a 37–21 vote in Oregon House, and a 26-16 vote in the New Mexico Senate. A total of 3,055 state legislators have either sponsored or cast a recorded vote for the bill."

https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/written-explanation

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Sat Apr 28, 2018, 06:24 AM

56. All he has to do is sign an executive order to abolish the Electoral College,

... then, voila, it is done. He's been told he has the power.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Sat Apr 28, 2018, 09:37 AM

62. The puppet honestly believes that millions of illegal votes were cast

& that he truly did win the popular vote. President Moron.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread