30,000 less votes for JLP than 2016

The Jamaica Labour Party scored a convincing victory over the Peoples National Party winning 49 of the 63 seats that were up for grabs and winning 406,764 of the popular votes, to 14 seats from 305,157 for the PNP, in an election, with a fall of 171,000 compared to the 2016 elections.
Three seats were won by less than 25 votes, including one by the JLP by less than 10 votes and one by just 125 votes. Both parties had a lower vote count than in the 2016 general elections. The JLP polled 30,000 votes less than the 2016 results and the PNP dropped 128,500 or by 30 percent. Bill Johnson Polls done in early July had pointed to 30 percent of PNP supporters in the 2016 election stating that they would not vote for the party in 2020, with 22 percent saying the JLP government was doing a very good job of running the country and 45 percent saying they were doing a good job.
The 2016 election the JLP polled 436,972 votes and the PNP 433,735 making for a total of 882,389 votes but in the 2020 election saw only 712,000 votes cast a stunning fall. The spreading of the COVID virus seems to have had a significant effect of voters, with Public opinion polls conducted a week from the elections, indicating a fall in the decision to vote based on the spread.
IC Insider.com had forecasted that the PNP would pick up around 10 seats, with a few seats that would become marginal that they could go either way. The forecast was based on results of the public opinion polls done by the three local pollsters, Johnson, Anderson and Blue Dot that all forecasted voter results of 58 percent or more for the JLP. Preliminary results show the JLP getting 57.1 percent of the votes to the PNP’s 42.9 percent that was within the margin of error of the polls.
No political party in the history of polling in Jamaica, going back to the 1970s, has had such a lead in public opinion polls a few weeks from the actual election and none with a lead over 6 percent a year from the elections, has lost. Those are daunting statistics that confronted the People National Party as they prepared for the national polls.
While the PNP will need to determine why there was a sharp fall in their support over two elections, the JLP seems to have work to do to find out why with an increase in the voters’ list since 2016 they could not pull out more votes.
The results of the election and public opinion polls, clearly indicate that facts are facts and persons making their views known must take trends over many years that have proven to be correct, seriously and not based their views on gut feelings.

10 seats to win for PNP

Public opinion polls are all out and forecasting a massive victory for the JLP over the PNP, when the votes are tallied on September 3. The polls suggest a range of possible voter support, from 60 percent for the JLP and 40 for the PNP to a high of 68 percent for the JLP and a low of 32 percent for the PNP.
When applied against the 2016 results, the data suggests that the PNP can only rely on getting around 10 seats, with a few others ending up in the marginal column. Even some that appear safe could fall with the massive swing the polls suggest. The swing to the JLP started from around 2014 and started to gather- momentum in 2018 and 2019 as shown by the by-elections results in St Mary and Portland. No doubt, there will be a least one more set of polling data on party standings, that will be released before the start of September that will show if they are any shift in the numbers.
No political party in the history of polling in Jamaica going back to the 1970s has had such a lead in public opinion polls a few weeks from the actual election and none with a lead over 6 percent a year from the elections, has lost. Those are daunting statistics confronting the People National Party as they prepare for the national polls.
The JLP is winning the advertising race by several lengths if advertisements in the newspaper are anything to go by. On Sunday, this week, the JLP had seven full page advertisements in the Sunday Gleaner to just one for the PNP.

Dr. Peter Phillips – President of the PNP

That is a sign of the lopsidedness of the money one side has over the other. This election, will need the advertising in getting out the message far more than at any other election, based on the restrictions on physical campaigning as a result of the Coronavirus spread.

Political parties will not say publicly that they are going to lose, but the magnitude of loss that the PNP is facing is unlikely to be surprising to its leaders. Such leads, choke off badly needed financial help and demoralize party workers and supporters.
All three public opinion polls that showed the political party standings ahead of the 2020 general elections were mainly done in July and show different positions for the parties. They differ quite markedly with a variance of 8 percentage points between the highest and lowest support for each party.
The margin of error of the polls ranges between 2.5% to 3%. Making adjustments for the error factor, plus or minus, could put them all in reach of each other.

JLP set to win a massive victory in the 2020 elections

The Blue Dot Polls numbers are the most conservative of the lot, with 52% for the JLP and 34% for the PNP. The poll represents persons who say they will or maybe voting. On a head to head basis, it translates to JLP winning 60.5% of the votes to the PNP 39.5%, but it could go as high as JLP 64% PNP  36% or as low as 57 percent to 43 percent. The Johnson Polls show that the JLP would win 68 percent of the popular votes to the PNP’s 32 percent, with the possibility that it could range between a high of 73 percent for the JLP to a low of 63 percent and a high of 37 percent for the PNP to a low of 27 percent. Anderson Polls numbers put the JLP at 64 percent and the PNP at 36 percent, with a high of 70 percent, to a low of 59 percent for the JLP and a high of 41 percent for the PNP and a low of 30 percent.

6% one year poll lead secures election win

The 2020 general elections are called for Thursday, September 3. All three polling institutions releasing polls show a strong lead for the governing JLP, but the PNP are indicating that they will defy the polls and come out victorious. It is worth looking back at public opinion polls that were released one year before elections and match that against the actual election results.
The going back to 1976 shows no political party in Jamaica losing a general election with a lead of more than six percentage points one year out. That a record that is not about to change any time soon.
Public opinion polls are snapshots of the current views or intentions of voters. That is what many would want to believe, but there is more to them than that. Using the Don Anderson and Carl Stone polls, going way back demonstrates the point vividly.
In Jamaica, data shows general elections are won a year out, unless support for parties is close, leading up to the elections. That was the case in the last three general elections. Even then, the last election had the winning party with an eight-percentage point lead, a year out from the 2016 General elections.
In a recent interview on MSNBC, a political expert makes the following the observation, “the records show that presidential elections are won in the spring and not in the fall”. He pointed to the winning candidates defining the losers in the spring and putting them on the defensive from which they never recovered.
He pointed to several instances going back to several past winners of presidential races to support that view. As it now stands, Trump is set to move out of the White House. He is already defined as a highly incompetent leader, amongst other negatives that he is carrying, that are weighing him down.
The vast majority of voters invest a great deal of emotion into supporting a political party. A lot of it comes from family traditions built up over several years. That emotional attachment takes time to establish and is difficult to erode. It just does not happen during a relatively short election period.

Polling data is taken form Stone and Anderson polls where applicable.

Polling data suggest that voters switching party support amounts to around two to three percentage points a year. When polls show that a ten points lead a year out from the general elections, that is a gap that is almost impossible to close. Data going back in Jamaica’s polling history, show that in no general election has any political party with a lead over six percentage points has gone to lose the election. Some may point to the last three general elections, but polls were showing close races from a year out, except for the 2016 elections. That was not the case in 1972, 1976, or 1989.

Peter Phillips leader of the PNP

The Don Anderson polls in December 2014 had the PNP at 17% and JLP at 25%, an eight points difference. In June 2015, it was neck and neck with the PNP 25%, the JLP 26%, in September 29.6% each. In January 2016, it moved to 27.5% for the PNP and 23.2% for the JLP and in February, the PNP was at 30.8% to the JLP’s 28%. The data except for June 2015 was suggesting a close election and it turned out that way, but it confirms that a large lead one year out is difficult to overcome. The 2016 election saw the parties garnering about 25% of the total electorate at the time, that ties in with the JLP numbers roughly a year out.
The Don Anderson polling data in February 2019, had the PNP support at 18% and the JLP at 29%. In February 2020, the PNP support moved to 22% and the JLP to 30% a difference of 8 percentage points. The lead is not one that can be overcome based on history, bearing in mind that if the last general election had just around 48 percent turnout at the polls while the support using the February 2020 polls adds to 52 percent. The bye-elections held in St Mary saw a three percent swing to the JLP and Portland Eastern in 2019 showed a swing of around 10 percent when adjusted for the low turnout in 2016.
The JLP, 30 percent support, shown in Anderson 2020 polls, is not out of line with a definite swing shown in the two bye-elections. If those numbers were to hold, then voter turnout would have to exceed 60 percent, which would require the PNP to gain a surge of more than eight percentage points in what may turn out to be less than a year and or the JLP support falls.
The polling data shows that governments in power have a bias in their favour. Polls tend to overstate the actual support for a governing party and understate that for the opposition. The data over time shows the bias to be around three percentage points for a PNP government and just under two percentage points for a JLP government. What this means is that the real party support is probably PNP 24 percent and JLP 28 percent based on the 2020 polls, that would translate to a JLP 55 percent and PNP 45 percent at the upcoming election. Other surveys done since then by other pollsters suggest more swing to the governing party, but history suggests that they may be understating the support of the PNP by about four percentage points.

Blue Dot response to IC Insider article

Add your HTML code here...

Mr. Larren Peart of Blue Dot

Mr. Jackson, when you and I spoke yesterday (last Sunday), I told you to send me an email and we would respond officially. I also told you that the poll wasn’t finished and that there was no doubt an explanation to your question, but you have gone ahead and published analysis comparing apples to grapes.
(IC Insider.com had put the following questions to Mr. Larren Peart orally and by Whatsapp, “only approximately 50% persons voted in the 2016 general elections but your polling data says 75% did. How does this affect the poll finding to the questions asked in the polls? What could have caused such a huge variance? In addition, the poll findings suggest that 75 percent of registered voters would vote in the upcoming elections but that is far from what happened in recent elections.)
Mr. Peart continues, I also maintain that you have no grounds to discredit the conduct of our poll if the findings are consistent with other polls conducted by more established practitioners, which you have alluded to in said article. So why then single out Bluedot?
Here is our response. I trust that after reading it you will retract or reword your article. The respondent sample comprised only of persons who indicated that they intend to vote in the next general election or that they are undecided about voting. The results do not reflect the views of persons who reported that they do not intend to vote. The poll therefore only reports the views of persons who are likely or considering showing up at the polls when the next general election is held.

Pollster Bill Johnson

The poll results are not intended to be basis for calculating voter turnout as the sample does not include non-voters. It would, therefore, be incorrect to compare these findings to voter-turnout statistics as the underlying bases cannot be equated. The base for voter turnout statistics is the entire enumerated population. The base for the poll reflects only the enumerated population with the intention to vote.
On the point of focusing only on marginal seats – The sample was stratified, using appropriate quotas, to mirror the constituency distribution of the electorate, such that if a constituency accounts for 3% of the electorate, it also accounted for 3% of the final sample. As such, there is no skew towards any constituency, marginal or otherwise.
And a final point, I also read the articles hyperlinked to Bill Johnson’s and Don Anderson’s names in the article, you also harshly criticize the credibility of those polls and obviously have a bias against the conduct of polls. It is apparent to me, from reading all three articles, that anything short of a complete census of the electorate would leave you convinced.
In other words, to simplify it the first question asks if they intended to vote as a qualifying question or a screener then of those who said yes they intend to vote, we asked if they voted. Therefore, your analysis is flawed sir. It’s two separate bases.
You should have waited for us to respond. Now you have sullied our brand. Please address this soonest. Thanks.

Editor’s comments: Persons are entitled to their opinions, but that does not change the facts. The most critical issue is that if only 25 percent of persons voted for the JLP and PNP at the last election, there should not be a massive difference between persons saying they voted for the JLP compared to the PNP. There is a vast difference between both with the polls saying that the JLP supporters had 15 percentage points more votes or 38 percent more than voted at the last elections and the PNP just six percentage points or a 24 percent difference. Maybe Mr. Peart and staff should read other articles that IC Insider wrote on polls including that of the Trinidad last general elections in 2015 and some of his views may change.

Lying to pollsters or bad sampling

Polls conducted by Blue Dot on behalf of Nationwide, raise questions about its credibility. Poll findings on party standings, by both the Blue Dot and the Bill Johnson’s polls done on behalf of Mello TV, are similar in that they put the JLP and PNP on a head to head race at 63 percent to 37 percent basis.
That is not far from the February polls done by Don Anderson that shows the parties effectively at 58 percent to 43 percent, head to head.
The problem with the Blue Dot poll based on information included in the findings illustrates that persons who they interviewed are lying excessively, or the sample used is not computed correctly or executed, leading to biased responses. Either way, some fundamental errors exist, that leave the poll findings with a big credibility problem.
The only data in the poll findings that can be verified and test the accuracy of conclusions is wanting. The Blue Dot polls asked persons who they voted for in the last general elections, 40.17 percent said they voted for the JLP, 31.26 percent for the PNP and 28 percent said they did not vote. That is an amazing finding. That adds up to 85 percent who claimed that they voted, that contrast, with roughly 50 percent of voters on the electoral list adjusted for the removal of dead persons on the list. The Blue Dot findings should be showing that only 25 percent of the voters supporting each political party at the last election, it does not.
In the past, both the Anderson and Johnson polls showed, upwards of 60 percent persons polled indicated they would turn out at the polls, but the actual numbers have fallen well short. A lot of the difference may be due to surveys concentrating on marginal voting areas than the so-called garrison seats where voter turnout is much lower than the rest of the country.
The big question is whether the significant error in answer to the question of who persons voted for is due to persons lying or sampling errors and whether other findings in the polls were accordingly adjusted. A Blue Dot spokesperson indicates that they have not thoroughly analyzed the data but agreed that the response as to the party voted for suggesting that there may be sampling errors that need reviewing.
Adjusting for the error between the votes in the 2016 election and the poll results, put the support for parties at 39 percent for the JLP and 25 percent for the PNP or on a head-to-head basis, 61 percent for the JLP and the PNP at 39 percent.

PNP polling mirage

Dr. Peter Phillips – former Minister of Finance

The PNP rise united and one PNP team are in a desert and seeing a massive mirage but tell their supporters that the prize is at hand, nothing could be further from the truth, as they can’t tell them of the Tsunami ahead.
According to the Bill Johnson polls, the PNP headed by Peter Phillips will do a better job than Bunting in the next general election. Johnson points to a factor of the majority of persons saying the country is going in the wrong direction, a sure sign the JLP should be concerned. History is not kind to Johnson’s words. In 2016, ahead of the General election, “Certainly, at this stage, it is going to be an orange sky on election night rather than a green sky,” pollster Bill Johnson commented after his recent national poll found the PNP four percentage points ahead of the Jamaica Labour Party, The Gleaner reported. “The movement definitely appears to be an orange movement and not a green movement,” said Johnson. “Everything seems to be pointing in the direction of a strong PNP victory,” he added.
No such development took place, as the election ended with a narrow defeat for the PNP. But Johnson is not alone, poll results posted on February 22 showed, “the party standings in the latest RJR Group/Don Anderson polls show the governing People’s National Party (PNP) still ahead of the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) but by only three percent, as against four percent one month ago.”
Polls taken well ahead of an election is not a very accurate indicator of the outcome. Polls taken when one party is very active and the other is not will be highly biased towards the active one.
Two factors in the Johnson polls that are questionable. Jamaica has not seen a voter turnout close to 70 percent since the 1980s so any poll with that level of likely turnout has several persons lying to the pollsters as the turnout is unlikely to exceed 55 percent. In the last general election, it was under 50 percent. The other error is that the feedback that the country is going in the wrong direction is a variance with several other factors in the country. It does not accord with business and consumer confidence levels that are at record levels. It does not conform to record levels of employment and record low levels of unemployment and most importantly, it is at a huge variable with the best predictor of election a year out, the Jamaica Stock Exchange performance. The latter is calling the next general election with its robust performance.
By the way, with both the Anderson and Johnson polls showing the JLP ahead how will the PNP heal the wound created by the leadership challenge before Prime Minister Holness takes advantage of it?

Election results validate IC Insider report

JLP leaderIC Insider predicted the election outcome in the last general election in Trinidad and Tobago and this week’s Thursday election in Jamaica. In our posting on February 21, the report stated that an analysis of poll numbers since 2014 and the number of eligible voters suggest that Thursday’s general elections in Jamaica could result in a shocker and a major shift in parliament. For the People National Party to win the 2016 elections will require voter turn out to be more than 50 percent.
Jamaica Labour Party polled 436,459 votes or 50.13 percent of the votes cast and the People’s National Party 432,353 votes or 49.66 percent of the total of 870,663 votes just around 2,000 votes more than in 2011. The JLP polled 31,301 more votes than in 2011 while the PNP lost 31,927. Just under 48 percent of the electorate voted. The voter turnout although lower than in 2011 turnout as a percentage of voters list is consist with the level of the population that voted of 32 percent in both elections and better than the participation rate from 1993 to 2007.
IC Insider stated in the article ahead of the elections that “polls done from late 2014 puts the Labour party support consistently at 25 percent except for the temporary decline shown in the Don Anderson polls in January to 23.2 percent when political activity was low keyed. Based on error factors in past polls, the base for the JLP is around 28 percent which is consistent with polls done in 2015 that would give them 510,835 votes. This would be an increase of 105,677 over the 405,000 votes they received in 2011 and well over the 464,280 the PNP got then”.
“It is more difficult to say what the PNP numbers will work out at in the end but it should be at least close to their numbers for the last election. Added to this it is also difficult to see voter turnout of 53 percent in the 2011 being exceeded by much, if at all, which would put the PNP support at 25 percent of the electorate or a few thousand votes less than in 2011”.
Portia“If the PNP does not increase their support by much, they will be relegated to the back benches of Parliament after Thursday’s polls. As it turned out the PNP based on preliminary results suffered a fall in the number of voters casting the ballot for them while the JLP increased theirs, but both parties failed to motivate persons who said they were going to vote to do so hence a fall in the level of participation”.
The results suggest one important factor and seems to explain why the turn out appear low even as the numbers are slightly higher than the tally for the 2011 elections. The elections seemed to have been focused around a third of the seats, maybe even less, some that were marginal and a few others that there was special interest in. Additionally, the infighting over candidates in some of the PNP’s constituencies may have had an overhang effect, thus negatively affecting its support.

Pollsters terribly wrong on turnout

PNP The conventional wisdom, according to political pundits, is that a high turnout for elections favours the challengers and a low one, the government, but they don’t really say what is a low turnout? The latest polls show Anderson projecting 58 percent turnout and Johnson 62 percent.
The big question is that high or low? The answer, it is very high but we are unlikely to see anything that high, but even at 50 percent, it will be the highest number of voters ever with 912,205 or 42,767 more than in 2011, that would mean only 24 percent of the increased numbers on the voters list since 2011 would be voting.
The 2011 election saw the PNP picking up 464,280 votes to the JLP’s 405,158, for the PNP is was 59,000 more than in 2007 while the JLP got 5,000 less than in 2007.
JLP man -2-16Jamaican pollsters have consistently failed to accurately predict the out turn in Jamaican general elections going back for many elections. No one has done a study as to the reasons. In August 2007 Anderson showed an improbable 82% of the voters saying they would vote. Bill Johnson had it at 80 percent. It turned out that 61 percent voted, that is a huge difference. In 2002 Anderson had it at 78 percent, the actual was 59 percent and in 1997 the forecast was 79 percent versus actual of 65 percent. In 2011 the forecast was 78 percent by Anderson and Johnson 74 percent massively off from the actual.
Jamaican pollsters are not the only ones in the Caribbean to get the turnout wrong but those in Trinidad don’t seem as badly off as in Jamaica.
Trinidadians went to the polls in general elections late 2015 and two set of pollster got the outcome wrong. It appears that the main reason is an over estimation of voter turnout. IC Insider projected that the PNM would have won based on the results of one poll finding and plotting the data against the results of the previous election.
UNC crwdThat poll result released on the Sunday ahead of the polls showed a voter turnout of 74 percent, a level that Trinidad and Tobago has not seen since 1961. In the 2010 elections, the turnout was 69.45 percent, 66.03 percent in 2007 and 69.64 percent in 2002, next closet was 1991 with 65.76 percent. IC Insider stated that based on the pattern of recent years it would be surprising if the turnout exceeded 70 percent and that could make a huge difference to the final election results. In the end the turnout fell well below 70 percent, at 66.84.
Turnout at the last elections in Jamaica, was just over 53 percent, based on history that was low compared with previous elections but was it really that low? A look at the number of persons voting tells a different story. Political pundits say that the 2011 election had a low turnout, and if so favoured the government party but they lost. The fact is that the adage the pundits constantly quote is not based on all the facts. They focus on the level of turnout rather than what the overall numbers are saying. As it the 2011 elections had the highest turnout in the history of the country with 869,438 voters going to the polls, 52,878 more than in 2007 while 2007 had 47,802 more voters than 2002. If the election this week has the same level of turnout as in 2011 it would result in a massive 962,486 voters going to the polls or a massive 93,048 more voters.
If Johnson is right, his poll estimate of 62% would result in 1,131,134 voters or 261,696 more voters exercising their rights to determine the government for the next 5 years, a figure that is more than the increase of the voters list. In the case of Anderson it would result in 1,058,158 votes or 188,720 more votes than in 2011 and would in fact be a huge turnout of voters even as the figures on the surface suggest a relatively low turnout. Even the Johnson polls that showed 55 percent of voters indicating that they will definitely vote would result in a massive voter turnout of nearly 1 million votes.

Election 2016 who will win PNP or JLP?

PNP & JLP supportersPolling in Jamaica has gone from an exercise that a vast number of Jamaicans found to be incredible, questioning how a small sample of just 1,000 persons could be used to predict pretty accurately, the views of an entire population? Based on the accuracy over the years in forecasting election results, the vast majority, seem to have put their faith in them.
But when it comes to politics emotions run deep and there are mood swings as well. Take the polls since late 2014, the Don Anderson polls showed the following results:Anderson polls 2014-15
The most recent poll show the PNP at 27.5% and the JLP at 23.2%, effectively the polls show that both parties lost active support since September last year. The PNP lost 2 percentage points and the JLP a much larger 6.4 percentage points, taking the latter below the core position held from 2014 to June of 25%. If the latest polls number were to hold come election day, the PNP would end up with about 54% to 46% for the JLP of the votes, on a head to head race which would put the PNP slightly ahead of the 2011 when they took 53.40% of the votes to the JLP 46.60%.
What is rather interesting is that RJR carried on their website a story of a recent canvass done buy the PNP in which Paul Burke says they are sure to win 32 seats, with 10 of the rest they have in doubt.
“RJR News has obtained a copy of the report which outlines that the Party is sure of winning 32 of the 63 Parliamentary seats. Of the remaining 10 seats from the 42 which were won by the PNP in 2011, two are deemed at risk of being lost and eight have been declared hard to win”. This information does not reflect an outcome as indicated by Anderson polls.
Analysis of the stock market show that it is a good indicator a year out from elections, for the party likely to win, in this case the market is suggesting the PNP. The recent polls are not convincingly showing that.
Eddie Seaga and supportersHistory is a useful guide. There is a tendency for polls to pick up incumbency support and less of opposition support. Carl Stone in an article written in 1981 stated that his polls prior to the 1980 election showed the JLP with 56% of the votes which was 3% points lower than the outcome of 59% of the votes cast that the JLP got compared to 41 % PNP. More importantly, a poll done in the summer months showed the polls narrowing from around 54% for the JLP to about 51% with the PNP seeming to have momentum with 49%. The situation between the two polls was fairly similar to late 2015 onwards where activity by one party seemed to have been more low-keyed, than the other.
A poll released by Anderson in early Oct 2002 showed the PNP with support amongst 54.4% of voters and the JLP with 45.3% but the outcome was PNP 51.5% and the JLP 46.9% a 5% point bias towards the governing party. In the last polls before the election in 2002 had the PNP at 52.3% to the JLP’s 46.9% still a slight bias towards the PNP but only marginally so. Between June 2007 and late July the poll had an incumbency bias of 4.8 percent to a low of 2.68 percent, the polls prior to the actual election ended with only a 0.30 percent bias in favour of the labour party. In the 2011 elections all Anderson polls from May up to the elections had a bias of 1.7% or less in favour of the JLP who were then in government.
What is also of interest, is that the poll numbers showed that the PNP slipped to 17% in the Anderson polls in December 2014 and has made a major recovery since. The JLP had a low of 15.9 % back in May 2011 and recovered much of the lost ground in polls taken after.
PNPManifestoThe 2007 polls make for interesting reading as it is one of the times when a party trailing prior to the election actually end up winning. In February 2007 the PNP trailed the labour party by 1 percentage point at 26% to 27%, in April the PNP pulled ahead with 25% to 23% in May it was 25% each way, by June it showed the PNP with a 4 percentage points lead at 29% to 25%. A second poll in June, showed the PNP moving ahead with 30.70% and the JLP barely keeping up at 25.60%. July saw a change, with the gap closing, but with the PNP ahead with 32.8% and the JLP at 29.3 percent at the end of July the PNP garnered 38.8 percent of voters support and the JLP was at 35.3% and the last one in August placed the PNP at 40.3% and JLP with 41.3%.
Will the 2016 polls closer to the election date narrow? History seems to support that view but time will tell and by how much. What is also of interest will be the turnout of voters. In the 2011 elections, turnout was 52.76 percent, if that were to happen this time it would result in a total of 93,047 votes over the level in 2011, raising the total to 962,485. If the Anderson’s latest polls numbers are close to accurate, there would only be about 2 percentage more points that either party could pick up based on the above, but the latest voters list is 10.7 percent higher than the 2011 one with an additional 176,374 voters or 20 percent of persons who voted in 2011.

Обновили на порносайте pornobolt.tv порно страничку о том как парень выебал пизду мачехи, которая устала от своего муженька Комиксы, Манга читать онлайн на Русском языке

Brand new Partner with our doctors to make you happy is Omtogel RTP

Play Pin-up aviator Slots and e-Diet in Polska.