Jump to content
270soft Forum

  

24 members have voted

  1. 1. Who will be the Republican Vice Presidential Nominee?

    • Governor Chris Christie
      5
    • Senator Marco Rubio
      2
    • Senator Kelly Ayotte
      1
    • Governor Susana Martinez
      1
    • Governor Brian Sandoval
      0
    • Governor Bob McDonnell
      3
    • Governor Nikki Haley
      0
    • Governor Jon Huntsman Jr.
      1
    • Governor Mike Huckabee
      1
    • Senator Rick Santorum
      0
    • Speaker Newt Gingrich
      2
    • Governor Rick Perry
      1
    • Representative Ron Paul
      0
    • Governor Mitch Daniels
      1
    • Governor Haley Barbour
      0
    • Senator Jim DeMitt
      0
    • Governor Bobby Jindal
      1
    • Senator Rob Portman
      2
    • Representative Paul Ryan
      3
    • Representative Allen West
      0
  2. 2. What Mystery Events in 2012 will have a impact on the 2012 election?

    • The Euro Zone will collapse
      12
    • The China bubble will burst
      7
    • Economy Booms (5% GDP Growth)
      8
    • Economy Crashes (-1% GDP Growth)
      4
    • Economy Struggles (1% GDP Growth)
      8
    • Balanced Budget compromise
      6
    • Government Shutdown
      5
    • Leader Nancy Pelosi steps down
      0
    • Tea Party takes down Speaker John Boehner
      3
    • Governor Gary Johnson steals votes from Governor Mitt Romney, throws election to Obama
      5
    • A Third Party Candidate takes a good portion of the Popular Vote
      5
    • A Third Party Candidate wins Electoral Votes
      2
    • A Third Party Candidate wins a majority of Electoral Votes and plurality of the Popular Vote
      1
    • A Third Party Candidate wins a majority of Electoral Votes and majority of the Popular Vote
      0
    • Election thrown to House of Representives
      0
    • Major Progressive Candidate runs as a third party
      1
    • Major Tea Party Candidate runs as a third party
      1
    • Secretary of State Hillary Clinton runs as a Third Party Candidate
      1
    • Secretary of State Hillary Clinton or Major Progressive challenges Obama in Primary
      0
    • The 99% drafts a candidate for a Third Party Run
      0
  3. 3. Who will win the 2012 election? Governor Mitt Romney, President Obama or someone else?

    • Governor Mitt Romney
      10
    • President Barack Obama
      12
    • Someone else
      2


Recommended Posts

If the economy really begins flailing, and Obama's polls really start collapsing, then I think Obama will get thirdpartied by a progressive or maybe someone in the Occupy Movement.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the economy really begins flailing, and Obama's polls really start collapsing, then I think Obama will get thirdpartied by a progressive or maybe someone in the Occupy Movement.

Dylan Ratigan, host of The Dylan Ratigan Show (MSNBC), Populist, and author of Greedy Bastards: How We Can Stop Corporate Communists, Banksters, and Other Vampires from Sucking America seems to be a good choice for the Occupy Movement.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Van Jones would be an interesting challenger... his whole claim that 9/11 was caused by Bush would limit his chances... but he'd be an interesting challenger...

Bernie Sanders and Russ Feingold are being courted right now... I think Russ would be more likely to jump in than Bernie but unlikely to challenge Obama... still...

My friend gave me an idea of what if Glenn Beck and Chris Matthews third partied so it was a 4 way race... Haha...

Sarah Palin third party bid would be hilariously funny...

Dennis Kucinich should be watched closely... he has given signs of rebellion against the Democratic Party.

Dylan Ratigan, host of The Dylan Ratigan Show (MSNBC), Populist, and author of Greedy @#!*% : How We Can Stop Corporate Communists, Banksters, and Other Vampires from Sucking America seems to be a good choice for the Occupy Movement.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Van Jones would be an interesting challenger... his whole claim that 9/11 was caused by Bush would limit his chances... but he'd be an interesting challenger...

Bernie Sanders and Russ Feingold are being courted right now... I think Russ would be more likely to jump in than Bernie but unlikely to challenge Obama... still...

My friend gave me an idea of what if Glenn Beck and Chris Matthews third partied so it was a 4 way race... Haha...

Sarah Palin third party bid would be hilariously funny...

Dennis Kucinich should be watched closely... he has given signs of rebellion against the Democratic Party.

http://www.270towin.com/2012_election_predictions.php?mapid=fau the economy didn't get much better

http://www.270towin.com/2012_election_predictions.php?mapid=fav if the economy improved somewhat significantly

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if economic conditions do not worsen, but instead just stagnate, voters will still by November be quite angry and have lost their patience. Besides economic issues, there are still many negatives that are waiting to bubble up while we are distracted by the Republican primary. The President's chief of staff abruptly resigned last week after only a year on the job. Obama was reportedly stunned. There has been a lot of turnover inside the Administration with much leaked reports of infighting. There is also a lot of dirt from the first year when all sorts of stimulus and secret federal financing deals were thrown at the wall to try and fix the crisis. A lot of those multi-billion dollar projects are souring. The smell and scandals will be revealed later this year. Solyndra was just the tip of the iceberg.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, the only problem is economic conditions are predicted to worsen. The economist predicts a mere 1.3% increase in GDP Growth in the US. It also predicts we will be pushed to the brink of a recession. It also states that if the Eurozone collapses and/or the China Bubble bursts, investors will pull out of foreign lands and try reinvesting in the US. The problem is the US doesn't have the strength yet to handle such a massive amount of requests from foreign countries. Our markets are fundamentally strong, like the framework of a tower. However, if China and Eurozone flail, we will see millions of people start throwing supplies at our tower and in the end we will end up having to take tons of fraudulent and corrupted loans and investments from foreign countries. That would be like catching a haybail dropped from an airplane. It would be a heavy load. In the long run (4 to 5 years) it would be good for our economy, but it would hurt us really bad in the short term.

I think either one (Eurozone Collapse or China Bubble burst) could occur this year. THe global economy is beginning to slide back to the brink. 2 of the ranking members of the EU have already stated their desires to scrap the Euro and to fall back to their old currencies. Others are suggesting we abandon Greece and Italy. Obama will have to decide whether or not to join in the Eurozone mess.

The China Bubble burst would be more dangerous for the US Economy than the Eurozone collapsing. We have many US Companies (look at Apple) who make their products in China and ship them over here. If the Chinese economy took a massive hit, we would likely see a decrease in productivity in several market sectors and prices would soar.

I don't want either event to happen, but both are dangerous possibilities for this upcoming year. Obama is doomed if either one or both occurs.

Even if economic conditions do not worsen, but instead just stagnate, voters will still by November be quite angry and have lost their patience. Besides economic issues, there are still many negatives that are waiting to bubble up while we are distracted by the Republican primary. The President's chief of staff abruptly resigned last week after only a year on the job. Obama was reportedly stunned. There has been a lot of turnover inside the Administration with much leaked reports of infighting. There is also a lot of dirt from the first year when all sorts of stimulus and secret federal financing deals were thrown at the wall to try and fix the crisis. A lot of those multi-billion dollar projects are souring. The smell and scandals will be revealed later this year. Solyndra was just the tip of the iceberg.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If economic conditions remained how they are right now, Obama wouldn't have much of a shot to be reelected.

If economic conditions worsened slightly as the Economist predicts, Obama would be toast.

If economic conditions worsen tremendously (Eurozone Collapses, China bubble bursts), 21st Century versions of Hoovervilles would spring up... they'd be called "Obamavilles"... basically, Obama would be burned toast

If economic conditions improved slightly, Obama would be the narrow underdog with a just below average of reelection.

If economic conditions improve significantly, Obama would face a tossup reelection.

The economy is Obama's biggest ball and chain, though we can't forget how unpopular Obamacare and other Obama policies are. Obama will need significant economic improvement AND more POPULAR accomplishments. Obamacare, though an accomplishment, is arguably the most unpopular action taken by the government since the Iraq War troop surge by Bush. Obama really has only foreign policy accomplishments on his resume which honestly no one cares about right now.

Obama will need to improve his record, or he will likely be a goner.

Even if economic conditions do not worsen, but instead just stagnate, voters will still by November be quite angry and have lost their patience. Besides economic issues, there are still many negatives that are waiting to bubble up while we are distracted by the Republican primary. The President's chief of staff abruptly resigned last week after only a year on the job. Obama was reportedly stunned. There has been a lot of turnover inside the Administration with much leaked reports of infighting. There is also a lot of dirt from the first year when all sorts of stimulus and secret federal financing deals were thrown at the wall to try and fix the crisis. A lot of those multi-billion dollar projects are souring. The smell and scandals will be revealed later this year. Solyndra was just the tip of the iceberg.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I noticed that the Third Party candidate option was pretty popular... I would love to see a third party candidate run. I am a conservative and I wanted a candidate like Mitch Daniels or Charlie Crist to run...but I also would like to see a progresive like Russ Feingold run.

Right now, I don't think Ron Paul is going to third party. If he third partied, what would RAND Paul say to his Senate colleagues... "Um, hey Mitch... um, I gotta campaign for my dad... so, I was just wondering if I could still be part of...um... the Republican Party anyway?"

No way, Ron Paul wouldn't force his son into that predicament.

Donald Trump isn't going to run because he is just trying to make more money. Trump is a bigoted idiot who is a bigger flipflop than John Kerry. Trump is just one big publicity stunt who loves fooling people. I am not fooled, he isn't running.

I think the Occupy Movement may nominate a candidate like Van Jones...

I don't think the Tea Party will nominate a candidate... they are probably going to simply join the GOP ranks. Also, they shouldn't be offended by Romney's unwillingness to join the tea party... It is actually objectable under Romney's religion Mormonism to drink tea... that explains enough...

I personally want to see more third party options, but I don't think it will happen in 2012. Maybe in 2016 with a Bloomberg or Ventura candidacy, but seems unlikely this time around.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I noticed that the Third Party candidate option was pretty popular... I would love to see a third party candidate run. I am a conservative and I wanted a candidate like Mitch Daniels or Charlie Crist to run...but I also would like to see a progresive like Russ Feingold run.

Right now, I don't think Ron Paul is going to third party. If he third partied, what would RAND Paul say to his Senate colleagues... "Um, hey Mitch... um, I gotta campaign for my dad... so, I was just wondering if I could still be part of...um... the Republican Party anyway?"

No way, Ron Paul wouldn't force his son into that predicament.

Donald Trump isn't going to run because he is just trying to make more money. Trump is a bigoted idiot who is a bigger flipflop than John Kerry. Trump is just one big publicity stunt who loves fooling people. I am not fooled, he isn't running.

I think the Occupy Movement may nominate a candidate like Van Jones...

I don't think the Tea Party will nominate a candidate... they are probably going to simply join the GOP ranks. Also, they shouldn't be offended by Romney's unwillingness to join the tea party... It is actually objectable under Romney's religion Mormonism to drink tea... that explains enough...

I personally want to see more third party options, but I don't think it will happen in 2012. Maybe in 2016 with a Bloomberg or Ventura candidacy, but seems unlikely this time around.

Ron Paul will not go third party, precisely because of his son. He would screw over Rand from rising within the Republican Party as well as mess up Rand's inheritance to continue his presidential campaign in 2016 and beyond. A third party run would hand the election to Obama. Ron and Rand Paul believe that they will be more effective forcing the Republican Party to change from the inside.

Notice that Romney and Paul do not attack each other. Paul avoids it in debates. He even came to Romney's defense a few days ago when Gingrich/Perry were attacking Romney's Bain record. Instead, Paul keeps the conservative opponents weak and fractured, even if benefiting Romney. Paul has admitted that Romney is "more diplomatic" than the other candidates, so he thinks (and I think) they can work out a deal. The platform and a voice at the convention is more important than you think. Imagine Ron Paul (or his son) finally being given a speech slot there. And if he wins 15%-20% of the delegates as he is poised to do, the Party convention would collapse into chaos if Paul decided to walk out with his delegation and vocal supporters. It will be technically impossible for the establishment to ignore Paul this election cycle.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Romney carries every state in the primaries and ends up with more than 60% of the national primary vote, he could (and probably should) choose any Republican he wants to be his running mate. Mitch Daniels is probably the strongest option overall. Conservative without being extreme enough to scare mdoerates away. Plus, he's the Governor of a 2008 Obama state, and if Romney loses, he could well be the GOP frontrunner in 2016.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Romney carries every state in the primaries and ends up with more than 60% of the national primary vote, he could (and probably should) choose any Republican he wants to be his running mate. Mitch Daniels is probably the strongest option overall. Conservative without being extreme enough to scare mdoerates away. Plus, he's the Governor of a 2008 Obama state, and if Romney loses, he could well be the GOP frontrunner in 2016.

Governor Chris Christie is far stronger than Mitch Daniels. Chirstie could have won the the Republican nomination if he entered, Daniels would have been crushed. Daniels wouldn't accept VP because of his wife.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My VP picks for Romney:

- Retired General and current CIA Director David Petraeus

- Governor Bob McDonnell of Virginia

- Governor Mitch Daniels of Indiana

- Rep. Ron Paul / Sen. Rand Paul (long-shot)

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Petraeus would be a good choice, but he wouldn't agree to be VP. First off, Obama appointed him CIA Director. If Petraeus ran as VP, he would be basically spitting in Obama's eye and would in all likelyhood lose his job. It would also sacrifice the integrity that many people see in him.

McDonnell would be an interesting choice, but I think he will be of little consequence in the General Election. Plus, he has remained extremely quiet so far in this campaign.

Mitch Daniels would be an interesting choice for VP. I agree with Elliot that Daniels didn't have much of a chance for the nomination of President. I do think Daniels may be a VP candidate, but is unlikely to be chosen. He is even more unlikely to accept since his wife pretty much has directed his entire political career.

Paul and Paul are extreme longshots. Yes, the GOP Establishment needs to listen to what they are saying, but Romney will certainly try to avoid picking a Paul as his running mate.

My VP picks for Romney:

- Retired General and current CIA Director David Petraeus

- Governor Bob McDonnell of Virginia

- Governor Mitch Daniels of Indiana

- Rep. Ron Paul / Sen. Rand Paul (long-shot)

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too close to call at this point. We don't know where the economy is going. Theres a very good chance it will boom, maybe even to the point where it causes inflation. Too many variables too far out from the election but my guy says Romney will be able to win over the electorate. The longer primary will make a lot of his shortcomings old news by GE time. If the economy is still lagging Obama will have to go devastatingly negative, which of course could always backfire. He'll try to tap into some of that OWS aura by passing himself off as a progressive defender of the middle class, and calling Romney elitist and out of touch. Romney will tout his business experience and management qualities, and he'll remain calm and professional. Overall its going to be a tight one.

As for Romney's VEEP, I'd bet the house on Christie. It just seems right. He's been on the stump for him for a while, he's a charismatic, successful governor who appeals to independents and Conservatives alike. If Christie doesn't want it, Bobby Jindal seems like a solid choice.

As for Third Party alternatives, I doubt it. OWS isn't organized enough to pull it off. The Tea Party WILL get behind Romney, and Paul, who could potentially cause a lot of trouble for Mitt will go all the way to the convention, he'll never outright reject the notion of running, but eventually he'll fade out into the sunset and let Rand carry on his legacy in four years time.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, the race in historical terms is favoring the GOP. Why? Because most incumbents are polling well or leading their opponent by a 8-10% margin...

In 1980, Carter was beating Reagan by almost 30% according to Gallup Poll. What happened to Carter? He lost.

In 1992, GHWB was beating the Democrats easily. He was ahead of Clinton by 20%. He ended up losing.

Historically, the closer the race is a year before the election, the incumbent has a larger chance of being voted out.

Too close to call at this point. We don't know where the economy is going. Theres a very good chance it will boom, maybe even to the point where it causes inflation. Too many variables too far out from the election but my guy says Romney will be able to win over the electorate. The longer primary will make a lot of his shortcomings old news by GE time. If the economy is still lagging Obama will have to go devastatingly negative, which of course could always backfire. He'll try to tap into some of that OWS aura by passing himself off as a progressive defender of the middle class, and calling Romney elitist and out of touch. Romney will tout his business experience and management qualities, and he'll remain calm and professional. Overall its going to be a tight one.

As for Romney's VEEP, I'd bet the house on Christie. It just seems right. He's been on the stump for him for a while, he's a charismatic, successful governor who appeals to independents and Conservatives alike. If Christie doesn't want it, Bobby Jindal seems like a solid choice.

As for Third Party alternatives, I doubt it. OWS isn't organized enough to pull it off. The Tea Party WILL get behind Romney, and Paul, who could potentially cause a lot of trouble for Mitt will go all the way to the convention, he'll never outright reject the notion of running, but eventually he'll fade out into the sunset and let Rand carry on his legacy in four years time.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I generally agree, you're not taking into account is the potential for an economic boom. Its a real possibility, as is another collapse if the Euro-zone fails. I think the role of media in recent years has gone a long way to bring more attention to the primary process, thus making opposing candidates more recognizable. Its arguable that Romney is almost as recognizable as Obama at this point, which is why he's running so close to him. Thats not saying Obama doesn't have a tough reelection on his hands, but so much can happen between now and then making any kind of prediction is silly.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I don't deny the possibility of a economic boom, the odds are extremely unlikely. The Economist, the WSJournal, etc. are all predicting a sluggish economy. We are in likely to get about 1.3% GDP growth in 2012 which is at the brink of a recession. The Economist also says that a recession could happen if the markets worsen even a tiny bit. The Eurozone is sinking. The Chinese bubble is in danger of popping.

The odds of the economy booming are minimally small. Ask anyone on the street today whether or not they think tomorrow will bring a better paycheck, lower healthcare costs, and a stronger economy. What is the answer you'd get? No. Most Americans think we are headed in the wrong direction. The experts say we are. The odds are overwhelmingly in favor of the economy continuing its sluggish movements.

While I generally agree, you're not taking into account is the potential for an economic boom. Its a real possibility, as is another collapse if the Euro-zone fails. I think the role of media in recent years has gone a long way to bring more attention to the primary process, thus making opposing candidates more recognizable. Its arguable that Romney is almost as recognizable as Obama at this point, which is why he's running so close to him. Thats not saying Obama doesn't have a tough reelection on his hands, but so much can happen between now and then making any kind of prediction is silly.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I don't deny the possibility of a economic boom, the odds are extremely unlikely. The Economist, the WSJournal, etc. are all predicting a sluggish economy. We are in likely to get about 1.3% GDP growth in 2012 which is at the brink of a recession. The Economist also says that a recession could happen if the markets worsen even a tiny bit. The Eurozone is sinking. The Chinese bubble is in danger of popping.

The odds of the economy booming are minimally small. Ask anyone on the street today whether or not they think tomorrow will bring a better paycheck, lower healthcare costs, and a stronger economy. What is the answer you'd get? No. Most Americans think we are headed in the wrong direction. The experts say we are. The odds are overwhelmingly in favor of the economy continuing its sluggish movements.

"When asked about a recent CNN/ORC International poll that showed 53% of registered voters thought Romney was best equipped to improve the economy, compared with 40% for Obama"

If this holds Obama will lose. A 13% lead on the number one issues for Americans today is a crushing victory for Governor Mitt Romney.

Bain Capital ia a business mechanical shop that helps tweak and reform businesses. Yes, some people may have been laid off. But in the end, look how many jobs companies like Staples have produced. Bain created a ton of jobs in the end and more effecient and quality driven workers.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/15/axelrod-romney-misses-the-point/

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Romney and Obama are polling even today according to CNN. What does this mean?

For the incumbent to be polling THIS BADLY ONE YEAR BEFORE THE ELECTION means almost certain doom for Obama.

Huntsman's withdrawal paves the way for Romney to win South Carolina. I wouldn't be surprised if Romney wins all the states.

The Vice Presidential Job I think will go to Christie. Then Rubio as the second option. Marco will probably be forced off the bench. Plus, having Rubio run would help out the GOP not only in Presidential election but in the Senate elections where Senator Nelson is in a neck and neck fight with Connie Mack IV.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its bad for Obama, but it isn't "certain doom". Like I said, there are a number of factors that we simply cannot account for in making predictions and I don't think we can rely on historical trends. Its going to be a razor thing race and dismissing the power of the Obama machine is a recipe for disaster for the GOP.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its bad for Obama, but it isn't "certain doom". Like I said, there are a number of factors that we simply cannot account for in making predictions and I don't think we can rely on historical trends. Its going to be a razor thing race and dismissing the power of the Obama machine is a recipe for disaster for the GOP.

People usually only realize trends until long after they happen. The Obama machine was underestimated in 2008. Seeing its overwhelming success, people probably now overestimate it. You're looking at a Democratic Party that lost its supermajorities and Ted Kennedy's Senate seat in 2010. This past quarter's fundraising saw the Obama campaign raise less money that Bush '04 did in the same period.

Of course you can continue to throw your hands in the air and complain about not knowing the future, but who is denying that?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its bad for Obama, but it isn't "certain doom". Like I said, there are a number of factors that we simply cannot account for in making predictions and I don't think we can rely on historical trends. Its going to be a razor thing race and dismissing the power of the Obama machine is a recipe for disaster for the GOP.

The Obama machine is pretty rusty and is not "fired up and ready to go". His supporters are dismoralized. Obama also is scared of the Republicans and never fights back effectively, while Romney will come swinging with a 2X4. Romney will also raise alot more corporate money than Obama, even though Obama raised the most corporate money in history in 2008 (which made up 70% of donations in 2008).

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obama won the 2008 Election because he didn't have to explain anything of his own. He never had anything controversial he had voted for in the Senate so he could immediatly start painting the Republicans as the controversy and point at himself as the clean slate.

Now, Obama has a record with several controversial items on it. Healthcare reform (if that's what you want to call it), a "stimulus" for the economy, record debt, and a struggling market. Obama is now subjected to campaigning on his own record. Obama will have a hard time figuring out how because he has never been forced into a position like this. For his entire life, he never had to run as an unpopular incumbent. It will be completely unnatural for a guy who 4 years ago preached about unity and hope to start going negative. It also signals that President Obama can't challenge Romney or any of the other candidates on their legislative records. He instead must turn to personal attacks which most people prefer to avoid. In the end, if Obama's tactic succeeds, it will be a Republican loss and not an Obama mandate. People will not reject the GOP, they will reject their nominee. That doesn't mean they embrace Obama. It is a desperate move by the president.

Also, the direction Obama's attacks seem to be going are extremely dangerous. Obama and Axelrod are attempting to label Romney as a corporate raider and a fatcat. All Romney has to do is point out that not all businesses succeed, but under Bain many jobs were created. Romney can also point out the facts that most of the bailout money went to the CEOs of Corporations and point Obama out as a friend of the fatcats. Romney also can point out his turnaround of the 2002 Olympics and show how Obama's own record failed miserably in comparison to Romney's.

Obama also must be extremely careful in attacking Romney's personal life. Attacking the personal life could create tremendous backfire if something goes wrong... The only thing I see on Romney's record that Obama may have success exploiting are the tax returns... but we'll have to wait and see

The Obama machine is pretty rusty and is not "fired up and ready to go". His supporters are dismoralized. Obama also is scared of the Republicans and never fights back effectively, while Romney will come swinging with a 2X4. Romney will also raise alot more corporate money than Obama, even though Obama raised the most corporate money in history in 2008 (which made up 70% of donations in 2008).

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...