Dear student leaders:
For some reason, the people protesting with you seem to actually respect you. Validate them.
Two days ago, you accepted the government's overtures and agreed to opening dialogue. Do not use the scuffles with anti-protestors as an excuse to renege on this. The government had nothing to do with that, and you know it. These are people who are frustrated that Hong Kong has been brought to a standstill. And you know what? They, too, have a right to express their opinions.
I know, you believe that you were pushed to these drastic measures because of what the government has allegedly done (or failed to do, it's hard to know with you lot). But now that the government has offered to talk, Hong Kong's continued paralysis is as much your responsibility as the government's. Going back on your word like this is exactly what you have repeatedly accused the government of doing. Nobody likes a hypocrite.
Politics is a game of give and take. It also takes place in the real
world, not whatever fantastical land you seem to think exists, where
everything is exactly as you want. Take what you can get, certainly; otherwise, learn to cut your losses. You may think you're winning the PR battle right now, but dragging this out cannot possibly be in your interests. The frustration of the public will only grow, and at some point, it will become indiscriminate in its target.
You say you're doing this for the future of Hong Kong. You say you
love Hong Kong. Well then, I challenge you this: lift your blockade on
the daily lives of average, honest, hard-working people in Hong Kong. Show some real leadership, and walk up to
the negotiating table.
Yours,
A disgruntled observer
Saturday, October 4, 2014
Sunday, September 28, 2014
The Hong Kong Question
Or, Why the Beijing Proposal is More Practical
Let me say, first of all, that in principle, I am in favour of holding general elections for the Chief Executive.
Let me also say, however, that I am NOT in favour of achieving this by means of Occupy Central, or boycotting school, or striking. Before you bring out the pitchforks, allow me to expound.
The current atmosphere of politics in Hong Kong is best described as fractious. If Beijing allowed open nominations, everybody and his uncle are going to run for office. The result of that will be a campaign of so many contrasting platforms, of such chaos, mudslinging, and extremes that the reputation of any candidate is going to be irreparably tarnished.
At this point, even the eventual winner will be so damaged that he will have lost his mandate to govern before he even takes office. Open nominations for the top job in a city-state is a recipe for perpetual lame duck Chief Executives. Each one will have no political capital to push the often necessary but bitter pills through for the betterment of Hong Kong. What the citizens want and what the citizens need are not always the same things.
What follows is a vicious cycle of incompetency and "quick fix" candidates; winners by virtue of being against the government, and not their own solid plan for the future. Hong Kong will descend into a death spiral, at the end of which lies the cesspool of the failed state.
Occupy Central will not convince Beijing that this will not happen. In fact, it will only strengthen this view, and Beijing's resolve to prevent this fate. If Hong Kong grinds to a halt in protest, it alone will suffer. Its economy will stall, the markets will fall, the entire city will be poorer, and Occupiers will be no closer to their goal.
If they hope to bring Beijing down with them, they are misguided. Hong Kong is but a drop in the bucket to Beijing. They will not be affected, they will not have to back down, and they will not back down, especially with much of the populace also against Occupying. Not only will Occupy Central be ineffective, it will ultimately be self-defeating.
On the topic of police brutality, there were likely faults on both sides. When protestors continue to attempt rushing government buildings and police barriers after repeated warnings, the police are going to react. Do I believe the protestors were mostly peaceful? Yes. But not all of them were, and unfortunately, violence begets violence. It only takes one spark.
At the end of the day, the police are only there to do their jobs. However, they are the easiest to vilify with media, especially social media, for perceived brutality. Were they slightly heavy-handed? Probably. But a violent suppression of the completely innocent? It was not.
Political reform is a complex issue requiring mutual compromise. You wanted the right to choose your own Chief Executive. You were afforded this right. You don't need 5, 6, or 10 candidates. Even the Americans usually only have 2 choices.
Let it not be said that Beijing chooses incompetent people. They may be corrupt, but even democracy is not without corruption. They may be friendlier to Beijing than you like, but do you really think a Chief Executive openly hostile to Beijing can get anything done?
If you grab a handful of cookies, your hand might get caught at the neck of the jar. If you let go of a couple, you might just find you can have your cookie and eat it too.
Let me say, first of all, that in principle, I am in favour of holding general elections for the Chief Executive.
Let me also say, however, that I am NOT in favour of achieving this by means of Occupy Central, or boycotting school, or striking. Before you bring out the pitchforks, allow me to expound.
The current atmosphere of politics in Hong Kong is best described as fractious. If Beijing allowed open nominations, everybody and his uncle are going to run for office. The result of that will be a campaign of so many contrasting platforms, of such chaos, mudslinging, and extremes that the reputation of any candidate is going to be irreparably tarnished.
At this point, even the eventual winner will be so damaged that he will have lost his mandate to govern before he even takes office. Open nominations for the top job in a city-state is a recipe for perpetual lame duck Chief Executives. Each one will have no political capital to push the often necessary but bitter pills through for the betterment of Hong Kong. What the citizens want and what the citizens need are not always the same things.
What follows is a vicious cycle of incompetency and "quick fix" candidates; winners by virtue of being against the government, and not their own solid plan for the future. Hong Kong will descend into a death spiral, at the end of which lies the cesspool of the failed state.
Occupy Central will not convince Beijing that this will not happen. In fact, it will only strengthen this view, and Beijing's resolve to prevent this fate. If Hong Kong grinds to a halt in protest, it alone will suffer. Its economy will stall, the markets will fall, the entire city will be poorer, and Occupiers will be no closer to their goal.
If they hope to bring Beijing down with them, they are misguided. Hong Kong is but a drop in the bucket to Beijing. They will not be affected, they will not have to back down, and they will not back down, especially with much of the populace also against Occupying. Not only will Occupy Central be ineffective, it will ultimately be self-defeating.
On the topic of police brutality, there were likely faults on both sides. When protestors continue to attempt rushing government buildings and police barriers after repeated warnings, the police are going to react. Do I believe the protestors were mostly peaceful? Yes. But not all of them were, and unfortunately, violence begets violence. It only takes one spark.
At the end of the day, the police are only there to do their jobs. However, they are the easiest to vilify with media, especially social media, for perceived brutality. Were they slightly heavy-handed? Probably. But a violent suppression of the completely innocent? It was not.
Political reform is a complex issue requiring mutual compromise. You wanted the right to choose your own Chief Executive. You were afforded this right. You don't need 5, 6, or 10 candidates. Even the Americans usually only have 2 choices.
Let it not be said that Beijing chooses incompetent people. They may be corrupt, but even democracy is not without corruption. They may be friendlier to Beijing than you like, but do you really think a Chief Executive openly hostile to Beijing can get anything done?
If you grab a handful of cookies, your hand might get caught at the neck of the jar. If you let go of a couple, you might just find you can have your cookie and eat it too.
Monday, September 22, 2014
New Brunswick votes
New Brunswick is going to the polls today, and I've been too busy to follow too closely, but I can't resist making a call anyway. Premier David Alward's Progressive Conservatives are the incumbent government, having won the last election in 2010 by a landslide with 49% of the vote and 42/55 seats. They're seeking re-election to avoid being only the second NB government in history to be relegated to a single term. The opposition Liberals, led by rookie leader Brian Gallant, are seeking to redeem themselves. Meanwhile, Dominic Cardy took over an NDP holding 0 seats and are hoping to change that. On the fringe are the Green Party, and the People's Alliance which I've lumped in with the "Others."
For most of the campaign, it looked as though Brian Gallant was cruising to a landslide victory in a new, streamlined legislature of 49 seats. Their poll lead was often 20+ points, and nothing seemed to shake it. In the final week, controversy over shale gas, fracking, and abortion saw the Liberal lead drop to about 10, but it seemed they were on track for victory nonetheless.
As this was happening, however, Brian Gallant gave an interview with the CBC where he fudged the figures to his own party's tax policy. Subsequently, in a disastrous retake of the interview, the CBC (known to be Liberal-friendly) grilled Gallant mercilessly, generating a massive amount of bad press. Forum then released an eleventh hour poll just last night showing a dead tie, and if they are right, this massive blunder could potentially have been the turning point of the entire election.
And so, the raw numbers:
NBPC 38-43% [median 41.0] 20-30 seats [median 26]
NBLP 39-44% [median 41.6] 19-29 seats [median 23]
NBNDP 9-13% [median 10.8] 0- 1 seats [median 0]
Green 4- 7% [median 5.0] 0- 0 seats [median 0]
Other 0- 3% [median 1.6] 0- 0 seats [median 0]
Whatever the result, this promises to be a very interesting night, with both parties able to form government. It really looks like it's too close to call. However, for the sake of integrity...
The Politically Uncorrect final call: PC MAJORITY of 3.
For most of the campaign, it looked as though Brian Gallant was cruising to a landslide victory in a new, streamlined legislature of 49 seats. Their poll lead was often 20+ points, and nothing seemed to shake it. In the final week, controversy over shale gas, fracking, and abortion saw the Liberal lead drop to about 10, but it seemed they were on track for victory nonetheless.
As this was happening, however, Brian Gallant gave an interview with the CBC where he fudged the figures to his own party's tax policy. Subsequently, in a disastrous retake of the interview, the CBC (known to be Liberal-friendly) grilled Gallant mercilessly, generating a massive amount of bad press. Forum then released an eleventh hour poll just last night showing a dead tie, and if they are right, this massive blunder could potentially have been the turning point of the entire election.
And so, the raw numbers:
NBPC 38-43% [median 41.0] 20-30 seats [median 26]
NBLP 39-44% [median 41.6] 19-29 seats [median 23]
NBNDP 9-13% [median 10.8] 0- 1 seats [median 0]
Green 4- 7% [median 5.0] 0- 0 seats [median 0]
Other 0- 3% [median 1.6] 0- 0 seats [median 0]
Whatever the result, this promises to be a very interesting night, with both parties able to form government. It really looks like it's too close to call. However, for the sake of integrity...
The Politically Uncorrect final call: PC MAJORITY of 3.
Wednesday, June 11, 2014
Ontario Final Call
Last update, it looked as though the OLP might have been heading for a bit of a comeback under Kathleen Wynne. Then the debate happened, and Hudak stopped the bleeding. A barrage of polls were released, up until the final hour before the publication ban, and the picture remains as unclear as it was when the election began. The numbers, as they stand:
OLP 34-39% [median 36.6] ( = ) 34-53 seats [median 44] (4)
OPC 35-40% [median 37.8] (0.9) 37-52 seats [median 44] (3)
ONDP 18-22% [median 20.5] (0.3) 15-23 seats [median 19] (1)
Green 2- 5% [median 4.1] (0.2) 0- 0 seats [median 0] (=)
Other 0- 2% [median 1.0] (0.4) 0- 0 seats [median 0] (=)
There are two camps which the polls have split into:
IVR (EKOS and Forum): They have the Liberals ahead by a fair margin, possibly enough to eke out a majority government, and the NDP relatively low (below 20).
Online (Abacus, Angus Reid, Ipsos Reid, Oracle): They have the PCs either tied are slightly ahead, but the NDP rather higher (near 25).
As it stands, I'm going to go with the online firms on the PCs and Liberals, and edge closer to the IVR firms for the NDP score. There are several reasons for this. Having supporters that actually vote is key in elections where turnout is getting lower and lower. The Tories traditionally have that edge here, and I envision it continuing. That said, this effect will be somewhat counteracted by the bonus that incumbent governments usually get, and the PCs will probably just barely edge the Liberals in votes.
Regarding the NDP, they caused an election that nobody wanted, and voters won't take too kindly to that. Add to the fact that Horwath has been criticised for being too right wing, and NDP supporters might not feel inclined to vote. The fly in the ointment is, these NDP supporters may instead vote Liberal to block the PCs. However, in such a close race, I believe the PCs themselves will be motivated to come out and try and win this thing.
As it stands, the ranges for either frontrunners fall just short of a majority, but it's not out of the question (just highly unlikely). Tomorrow evening promises to be extremely interesting.
For the first time since the start of this blog, Politically Uncorrect projects...A TIE?!
OLP 34-39% [median 36.6] ( = ) 34-53 seats [median 44] (4)
OPC 35-40% [median 37.8] (0.9) 37-52 seats [median 44] (3)
ONDP 18-22% [median 20.5] (0.3) 15-23 seats [median 19] (1)
Green 2- 5% [median 4.1] (0.2) 0- 0 seats [median 0] (=)
Other 0- 2% [median 1.0] (0.4) 0- 0 seats [median 0] (=)
There are two camps which the polls have split into:
IVR (EKOS and Forum): They have the Liberals ahead by a fair margin, possibly enough to eke out a majority government, and the NDP relatively low (below 20).
Online (Abacus, Angus Reid, Ipsos Reid, Oracle): They have the PCs either tied are slightly ahead, but the NDP rather higher (near 25).
As it stands, I'm going to go with the online firms on the PCs and Liberals, and edge closer to the IVR firms for the NDP score. There are several reasons for this. Having supporters that actually vote is key in elections where turnout is getting lower and lower. The Tories traditionally have that edge here, and I envision it continuing. That said, this effect will be somewhat counteracted by the bonus that incumbent governments usually get, and the PCs will probably just barely edge the Liberals in votes.
Regarding the NDP, they caused an election that nobody wanted, and voters won't take too kindly to that. Add to the fact that Horwath has been criticised for being too right wing, and NDP supporters might not feel inclined to vote. The fly in the ointment is, these NDP supporters may instead vote Liberal to block the PCs. However, in such a close race, I believe the PCs themselves will be motivated to come out and try and win this thing.
As it stands, the ranges for either frontrunners fall just short of a majority, but it's not out of the question (just highly unlikely). Tomorrow evening promises to be extremely interesting.
For the first time since the start of this blog, Politically Uncorrect projects...A TIE?!
Monday, June 2, 2014
Ontario Liberals may earn 4th term
The polling volatility really hasn't improved much, although the gaps are starting to become tighter for all voters. The glaring difference is still Ipsos Reid, which continues to show large PC leads among likely voters. The end result is a very tight race, vote-wise, but of course the OLP has an advantage with distribution (changes from last projection):
OLP 33-40% [median 36.6] (3.7) 35-59 seats [median 48] (9)
OPC 33-40% [median 36.9] (1.6) 32-53 seats [median 41] (6)
ONDP 18-24% [median 20.8] (2.9) 11-22 seats [median 18] (3)
Green 2- 6% [median 4.3] (0.7) 0- 0 seats [median 0] (=)
Other 0- 2% [median 1.4] (0.1) 0- 0 seats [median 0] (=)
The ranges are still a bit large. They'll contract as the election draws nearer. Looking at broader trends, it looks like momentum was with Premier Wynne for a couple weeks, but recently Hudak seems to have stemmed the tide. Horwath is making no headway at all, and her election gambit is looking increasingly foolish.
Politically Uncorrect projects a LIBERAL MINORITY, short 6.
OLP 33-40% [median 36.6] (3.7) 35-59 seats [median 48] (9)
OPC 33-40% [median 36.9] (1.6) 32-53 seats [median 41] (6)
ONDP 18-24% [median 20.8] (2.9) 11-22 seats [median 18] (3)
Green 2- 6% [median 4.3] (0.7) 0- 0 seats [median 0] (=)
Other 0- 2% [median 1.4] (0.1) 0- 0 seats [median 0] (=)
The ranges are still a bit large. They'll contract as the election draws nearer. Looking at broader trends, it looks like momentum was with Premier Wynne for a couple weeks, but recently Hudak seems to have stemmed the tide. Horwath is making no headway at all, and her election gambit is looking increasingly foolish.
Politically Uncorrect projects a LIBERAL MINORITY, short 6.
Saturday, May 10, 2014
After one week: it's a horserace!
Last week, Andrew Horwath of the NDP looked at the Liberal budget and decided they could not support this government any longer. As Tim Hudak and the PCs have long refused to support the Liberal minority, Premier Kathleen Wynne requested a dissolution, and an election was called.
I've waited a whole week to do this because the pre-campaign polls were giving zero clarity on the picture, and unfortunately, the campaign period polls are all over the place as well. The only thing I can say is this:
The Liberals or the PCs will either place first or second, plus or minus 3.1 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.
With polls either registering anywhere between a 6 point Liberal lead and a 14 point PC lead (although I suspect Ipsos might have put out a bit of an outlier), the best guess right now is the weighted rolling poll average. And so (changes calculated from last election):
OLP 28-38% [median 32.9] (4.8) 22-52 seats [median 39] (14)
OPC 34-43% [median 38.5] (3.0) 35-66 seats [median 47] (10)
ONDP 21-26% [median 23.7] (1.0) 19-27 seats [median 21] ( 4)
Green 2- 6% [median 3.6] (0.7) 0- 1 seats [median 0] ( =)
Other 0- 2% [median 1.3] (0.1) 0- 0 seats [median 0] ( =)
After blowing a wide lead last election, one has to wonder how much good will Tim Hudak has left from his own party. Failure to win this time, with a Liberal government that is widely perceived as old, tired, and corrupt, will be fatal to his leadership. Tim Hudak only has one goal for June 12th: win 54 seats or more. He must convince centrist voters that the PCs are no longer the scary/nasty party.
Andrew Horwath's NDP is performing its best in the polls since the Rae victory, but has actually dropped back from their position last year of second or occasionally first. There is a sense that Ontario voters haven't fully forgiven them for the disastrous Rae government, but are almost ready to do so. Horwath must convince voters that they are a serious party that is ready to govern once again. Short of securing the official opposition, Horwath's tenure as leader may be threatened.
Kathleen Wynne's future is less clear. Since taking office, she has sought to distance herself from the McGuinty years, to mixed success. The lower hanging fruit for her will be to the left, in soft NDP voters. She must present her party as the only viable option for government. In other words, she needs to scare the centre away from the PCs and tell the left that the NDP can't win. If this election results in another hung parliament, she may attempt to hang on as premier as long as the OLP finishes either ahead of or only a couple seats behind the PCs.
For now, Politically Uncorrect projects PC MINORITY, short 7.
I've waited a whole week to do this because the pre-campaign polls were giving zero clarity on the picture, and unfortunately, the campaign period polls are all over the place as well. The only thing I can say is this:
The Liberals or the PCs will either place first or second, plus or minus 3.1 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.
With polls either registering anywhere between a 6 point Liberal lead and a 14 point PC lead (although I suspect Ipsos might have put out a bit of an outlier), the best guess right now is the weighted rolling poll average. And so (changes calculated from last election):
OLP 28-38% [median 32.9] (4.8) 22-52 seats [median 39] (14)
OPC 34-43% [median 38.5] (3.0) 35-66 seats [median 47] (10)
ONDP 21-26% [median 23.7] (1.0) 19-27 seats [median 21] ( 4)
Green 2- 6% [median 3.6] (0.7) 0- 1 seats [median 0] ( =)
Other 0- 2% [median 1.3] (0.1) 0- 0 seats [median 0] ( =)
After blowing a wide lead last election, one has to wonder how much good will Tim Hudak has left from his own party. Failure to win this time, with a Liberal government that is widely perceived as old, tired, and corrupt, will be fatal to his leadership. Tim Hudak only has one goal for June 12th: win 54 seats or more. He must convince centrist voters that the PCs are no longer the scary/nasty party.
Andrew Horwath's NDP is performing its best in the polls since the Rae victory, but has actually dropped back from their position last year of second or occasionally first. There is a sense that Ontario voters haven't fully forgiven them for the disastrous Rae government, but are almost ready to do so. Horwath must convince voters that they are a serious party that is ready to govern once again. Short of securing the official opposition, Horwath's tenure as leader may be threatened.
Kathleen Wynne's future is less clear. Since taking office, she has sought to distance herself from the McGuinty years, to mixed success. The lower hanging fruit for her will be to the left, in soft NDP voters. She must present her party as the only viable option for government. In other words, she needs to scare the centre away from the PCs and tell the left that the NDP can't win. If this election results in another hung parliament, she may attempt to hang on as premier as long as the OLP finishes either ahead of or only a couple seats behind the PCs.
For now, Politically Uncorrect projects PC MINORITY, short 7.
Monday, April 7, 2014
The aftermath: utterly defeated
The election is over, with all ridings declared. Now is a time to take a look at how the projection ranges matched up to actual results:
PQ 25-30% [actual 25.4] (-1.6) 32-50 seats [actual 30] (-10)
PLQ 37-42% [actual 41.5] (+1.5) 60-78 seats [actual 70] ( = )
CAQ 21-25% [actual 23.1] (+0.6) 8-18 seats [actual 22] (+ 9)
QS 7-10% [actual 7.6] (-0.4) 2- 3 seats [actual 3] (+ 1)
ON 0- 1% [actual 0.7] (-0.1) 0- 0 seats [actual 0] ( = )
PVQ 0- 1% [actual 0.6] (+0.1) 0- 0 seats [actual 0] ( = )
Other 0- 2% [actual 1.1] (+0.2) 0- 1 seats [actual 0] ( = )
Black is for within range, red for out of range, differences calculated from median.
As you can see, the polls (and hence, the vote share projection) did extremely well, with everything falling inside the margins. The Liberal majority was also very accurately predicted, with exactly 70 seats. The third QS seat was also within range.
Clearly, however, errors were made with the PQ and CAQ seat projection. Last week I said, "As for the CAQ, incumbency could really be a huge factor for them, especially now that they're on a clear upswing. It's highly likely that the CAQ will save more of their seats than most people expect." It was with this reasoning that I had the CAQ at 13 seats, or between 8 and 18, even as other predictions had them at a maximum of 11. It turns out even that was not enough.
Not only did they save their seats, they actually increased their seat count over last election, even while losing several seats to the Liberals. The size of the PQ collapse allowed Legault to pick up more than enough seats to make up the difference. This is because, even though the CAQ actually dropped 4 points of the popular vote from 2012, the PQ lost nearly 7 points, even worse than expected.
Perhaps, however, the greatest indicator of the magnitude of the PQ defeat was Pauline Marois' loss in her own seat by nearly 800 votes. Her resignation was swift, but notably, Pierre Karl Peladeau was first to make a speech broadcast on television and offer congratulations to Couillard. Words of congratulations to another party leader are normally only spoken by a party leader. Was Couillard signalling his intentions to replace Marois?
There are painful days of soul-searching ahead for the PQ, with a potentially divisive leadership campaign between the traditional unionist wing and the possible "PKP wing" of the party. In this light, I would not be surprised if Legault and the CAQ takes the de facto role of Official Opposition, both in legislature and the eyes of Quebecers, in the following months.
Sovereignty is down, and Canada can breathe a sign of relief. Now the question is, is it out?
PQ 25-30% [actual 25.4] (-1.6) 32-50 seats [actual 30] (-10)
PLQ 37-42% [actual 41.5] (+1.5) 60-78 seats [actual 70] ( = )
CAQ 21-25% [actual 23.1] (+0.6) 8-18 seats [actual 22] (+ 9)
QS 7-10% [actual 7.6] (-0.4) 2- 3 seats [actual 3] (+ 1)
ON 0- 1% [actual 0.7] (-0.1) 0- 0 seats [actual 0] ( = )
PVQ 0- 1% [actual 0.6] (+0.1) 0- 0 seats [actual 0] ( = )
Other 0- 2% [actual 1.1] (+0.2) 0- 1 seats [actual 0] ( = )
Black is for within range, red for out of range, differences calculated from median.
As you can see, the polls (and hence, the vote share projection) did extremely well, with everything falling inside the margins. The Liberal majority was also very accurately predicted, with exactly 70 seats. The third QS seat was also within range.
Clearly, however, errors were made with the PQ and CAQ seat projection. Last week I said, "As for the CAQ, incumbency could really be a huge factor for them, especially now that they're on a clear upswing. It's highly likely that the CAQ will save more of their seats than most people expect." It was with this reasoning that I had the CAQ at 13 seats, or between 8 and 18, even as other predictions had them at a maximum of 11. It turns out even that was not enough.
Not only did they save their seats, they actually increased their seat count over last election, even while losing several seats to the Liberals. The size of the PQ collapse allowed Legault to pick up more than enough seats to make up the difference. This is because, even though the CAQ actually dropped 4 points of the popular vote from 2012, the PQ lost nearly 7 points, even worse than expected.
Perhaps, however, the greatest indicator of the magnitude of the PQ defeat was Pauline Marois' loss in her own seat by nearly 800 votes. Her resignation was swift, but notably, Pierre Karl Peladeau was first to make a speech broadcast on television and offer congratulations to Couillard. Words of congratulations to another party leader are normally only spoken by a party leader. Was Couillard signalling his intentions to replace Marois?
There are painful days of soul-searching ahead for the PQ, with a potentially divisive leadership campaign between the traditional unionist wing and the possible "PKP wing" of the party. In this light, I would not be surprised if Legault and the CAQ takes the de facto role of Official Opposition, both in legislature and the eyes of Quebecers, in the following months.
Sovereignty is down, and Canada can breathe a sign of relief. Now the question is, is it out?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)