Patrick.net

President Barack Obama could lose his home state of Illinois in November

By zzyzzx   Follow   Wed, 22 Aug 2012, 9:05am   3,996 views   49 comments
Watch (0)   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)  

http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/20/shock-poll-obama-could-lose-illinois/

Shock poll: Obama could lose Illinois, Romney leads in Chicago suburbs
Published: 1:31 AM 08/20/2012

President Barack Obama could lose his home state of Illinois in November, a new poll shows.

A poll conducted by Illinois-based pollster and political strategist Michael McKeon found Obama leading Republican Mitt Romney by 49 percent to 37 percent in Cook County, the home of Chicago. That puts him ahead by a far thinner margin than expected in a county he should be winning handsomely.

Cook is the most Democratic leaning county in the state. It is also the most populous.

Those numbers do not bode well for the president.

“He has to come out of Cook County with a big lead or he’s gonna have problems downstate,” explained McKeon, who said that based on the numbers he had seen, Obama polled only in the forties in downstate Illinois.

“It’s not like his policies are very popular downstate,” McKeon said. “He’s viewed as more part of Chicago than he is part of Illinois.”

According to the poll, which surveyed 629 registered voters last week, Obama’s problems are not in Chicago proper, but in suburban Cook County.

In the city of Chicago itself, he retains a 60-29 lead over Romney. But the Republican challenger leads 45-38 in the surrounding areas. Across the county as a whole, Romney leads 43-31 among independent voters, a crucial voting bloc. Romney also holds a 44-38 lead among male voters, and a 53-40 lead among white voters.

Illinois is not considered a swing state by any means; it is seen as solidly blue, and has been for the past two election cycles. But McKeon pointed to the 2010 gubernatorial race when Republican Bill Brady came within a single percentage point of now-Gov. Pat Quinn because Brady won most of the downstate counties. That is a feat Romney could repeat this year, leaving Obama vulnerable if he cannot expand his lead in Cook County.

« First     « Previous     Viewing Comments 10-49 of 49     Last »     See most liked comments

1. edvard2 Follow Befriend 38 threads 2,308 comments

   10   10:56am Wed 22 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (1)   CaptainShuddup says These kids sound like 1980 republicans. They are so disillusioned by the new Liberals and OWS distraction, and agenda to create a Stipend Benefit society(for lack of the "Entitlement" word that is used way to much). Generalize much?

2. CaptainShuddup Follow Befriend (1) 300 threads 5,289 comments

   11   11:18am Wed 22 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (2)   Dislike (1)   edvard2 says Generalize much? No not all. I do remember even hinting in 2008 that you voting for anyone other than Obama to the 21-31 crowd you would get jeers and scorn resentment. Especially if you said you would vote independent. That just stealing votes from the Liberals. It was unpopular to say you were voting for anyone other than Obama. It was just uncool. Now the only people that say they are voting for Obama are on the internet. I suspect it's just HRHMedia working over time, burning the midnight oil. Then after those that say they are voting for Romney, there's a just as large segment that claim they aren't voting at all. They drank the Obama cool-aide and are disillusioned with the whole process. They've been lied to and relegated to unemployment and diminished by being lumped in the "99%" lot, where their voice even is even more dimmed by clutter and noise. They don't rate, they don't count, and they don't matter, so they aren't voting. Pay attention much, I mean besides what misinformation you read on the interwebs that HRHMedia wrote.

3. dublin hillz Follow Befriend 13 threads 834 comments Dublin, CA

   12   11:47am Wed 22 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Currently, Barack is favorite by 52.5 electoral votes. He has a 67% chance of winning the election. My prediction that Barack is favorite by 3.5 points in football terms still stands. Some interesting stats - California - Barack has 100% chance to win. Texas - Romney has 99% chance of winning. It's gonna come down to swing states - Colorado - Barack 59% chance. Florida - Romney - 55% chance. Iowa - Barack 64% chance. And yes, Illionois - Barack has 100% chance of winning.

4. errc Follow Befriend (7) 30 threads 1,267 comments 31 male Premium

   13   11:54am Wed 22 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   dublin, i agree with everything except for your football pointspread. 3pts is usually your generic home field advantage, and the money line odds on that can range anywhere from -145 to -165. Obama is -200, which is closer to a 6 pt favorite. Splitting hairs? Maybe, but in order to make money on odds, you better be sharp with your lines Thu 8/30 Winning Party (All in wagering) 05:00 PM 1351 Democrat 1.526 1352 Republican 2.740 as per pinnaclesports.com, the most liquid wagering shop in the world

5. CaptainShuddup Follow Befriend (1) 300 threads 5,289 comments

   14   12:19pm Wed 22 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)   Obama was Jo Jo Dancer your life is calling?

6. edvard2 Follow Befriend 38 threads 2,308 comments

   15   12:23pm Wed 22 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   CaptainShuddup says No not all. I do remember even hinting in 2008 that you voting for anyone other than Obama to the 21-31 crowd you would get jeers and scorn resentment. Especially if you said you would vote independent. That just stealing votes from the Liberals. It was unpopular to say you were voting for anyone other than Obama. It was just uncool. The problem with making generalizations is that they're sweeping in nature and inaccurate. That said, I don't think its unsafe to say that younger people are more likely to vote for more liberal politicians. Its been that way forever. Just as all other things in life, politics "progress". All anyone has to do is crack a history book and see that throughout US history, ultimately many things that those who want to remain the same ( also known as conservatives) have not really succeeded other than slowing down the action of progress. Its less to do with politics and more to do with science. Simply put, it is scientifically impossible to " conserve" anything and that goes for American politics as well. But as time passes, young people continue to vote more progressively, and with each generation the bar of progress is risen ever so slightly upward. The way I look at it is to also compare the musical tastes of various age groups. Not all but a great many older people will often in my opinion stop listening to or trying new music once they pass a certain age. They're then forever stuck in a musical era. For example, a lot of boomers listen to bands from the 60's and 70's. They often don't expand their musical horizons. The same can also be said to some extent with these same people and their political leanings: In an attempt to retain whatever political standards they feel comfortable with- as in what they think to be right- many turn to conservative politics. Perhaps whatever passed for "ok" 30-40 years ago has changed and is no longer viewed as totally acceptable. But just like music, some people are stuck in an era and thus they vote for people who promise to somehow prevent those changes from occurring. Of course saying all old people vote for conservative politicians is a gross generalization. Many others do exactly the opposite. But here is some truth in that as well.

7. CaptainShuddup Follow Befriend (1) 300 threads 5,289 comments

   16   2:14pm Wed 22 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Let's be perfectly clear here. These aren't the Liberals of yester year, hell I was one of them, I ought to know. These liberals have more in common with the GOP of 2003 that were fighting the good fight(in their mind) defending Democracy, for those of us that wanted them too or not. Threat or no Threat. "Remember STFU Liberals we'll defend Democracy" The Liberals today have that same tone, they are creating bad bad legislation giving the farm away to the banks, and wall street, while telling everyone we're to stupid to understand why so don't worry about it. Kids today they are turning around. After they turned Fiddy Cent off, and realized they had to get a real job, they saw just how screwed they really are. I can tell you as a 20 something when Ross Perot was running against Bush and Dukakis as an independent. I liked the fact that Perot had business sense and thought him just the antidote for our ailing economy back then. So no, youngsters don't always vote Democrat, that's just a liberal fantasy. Sure they can be bullshited and fooled once, but Obama wont fool them again.

8. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,648 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

   17   2:16pm Wed 22 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike (1)   Protected   CaptainShuddup says The Liberals today have that same tone, they are creating bad bad legislation giving the farm away to the banks, and wall street, while telling everyone we're to stupid to understand why so don't worry about it. The Democrats haven't passed any legislation since Obama's first term, and they barely got the stimulus and health care reform through before the window closed.. Other than these two well known pieces of legislation, which bills do you consider giving the farm away to the banks and Wall Street?

9. CaptainShuddup Follow Befriend (1) 300 threads 5,289 comments

   18   2:34pm Wed 22 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)   Well oh you're right, he saved the world banking system from collapsing. It's all good carry on then. You've convinced me Iwog, now try explaining that to the 20 somethings, that can't get a job and owe 100's thousands in student loans.

10. edvard2 Follow Befriend 38 threads 2,308 comments

    19   2:57pm Wed 22 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   CaptainShuddup says Let's be perfectly clear here. These aren't the Liberals of yester year, hell I was one of them, I ought to know. These liberals have more in common with the GOP of 2003 that were fighting the good fight(in their mind) defending Democracy, for those of us that wanted them too or not. Threat or no Threat. .... but to turn the coin, the GOP of today isn't the GOP of yesteryear either. If Reagan were to run for President today, he would have not made it past the first round because he would have been deemed to liberal. Looking back even further, famous Republicans of the past, like Lincoln and later Teddy Roosevelt were fairly progressive and perhaps even more so by today's standards. TR was a great conservationist, responsible for much of the national parks we now enjoy. He was an avid reader and wrote profusely. He was also a champion for populist concerns, such as labor rights,and organized labor. Of course none of these would be at all acceptable to today's Republicans. Instead, their view has changed almost 360 degrees. So yes- perhaps the Democratic party has changed. But the Republican party has changed as well. Hence I don't get the counterpoint being made here...

11. dublin hillz Follow Befriend 13 threads 834 comments Dublin, CA

    20   3:47pm Wed 22 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   CaptainShuddup says Well oh you're right, he saved the world banking system from collapsing. It's all good carry on then. You've convinced me Iwog, now try explaining that to the 20 somethings, that can't get a job and owe 100's thousands in student loans. First, why would the blame Barack for this specifically? Second, why would they automatically vote for Romney as if he were gonna fix this issue and their lives? This ain't no pavlov classical conditioning!

12. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,648 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    21   4:42pm Wed 22 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)   Protected   CaptainShuddup says Well oh you're right, he saved the world banking system from collapsing. It's all good carry on then. You've convinced me Iwog, now try explaining that to the 20 somethings, that can't get a job and owe 100's thousands in student loans. So you withdraw your assertion?

13. chris3637 Follow Befriend 2 threads 15 comments Vancouver, WA

    22   10:09am Thu 23 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   iwog says CaptainShuddup says The Liberals today have that same tone, they are creating bad bad legislation giving the farm away to the banks, and wall street, while telling everyone we're to stupid to understand why so don't worry about it. The Democrats haven't passed any legislation since Obama's first term, and they barely got the stimulus and health care reform through before the window closed.. Other than these two well known pieces of legislation, which bills do you consider giving the farm away to the banks and Wall Street? Obama controls Dept of Treasury and Dept of Justice so at any point he could have ordered passive pain against Goldman Sachs, MF Global, Chase, etc.

14. michaelsch Follow Befriend 21 threads 581 comments South Pasadena, CA

    23   11:14am Thu 23 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   I looked at the delegates’ distribution. It looks like: Romney is winning Florida and Virginia on Jewish votes. Romney is likely to get Colorado, Nevada, and Iowa by just outspending Obama there. Assuming Obama holds other Midwestern states (including Pennsylvania) and New Hampshire they both will end up with 269 delegates. What will happen in such a case?

15. thunderlips11 Follow Befriend (13) 61 threads 2,707 comments Premium

    24   11:17am Thu 23 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Protected   While we're posting nude pictures: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_sydA_xCOkr0/TGyTvh_eK2I/AAAAAAAAAlc/HsI5nHS4tlc/s1600/Lara+Baby.jpg Now go take on the day, you shack up sluts. - Dr. Laura She schtupped her way into radio, cheating on her husband with the radio station manager.

16. freak80 Follow Befriend (4) 52 threads 4,416 comments Corning, NY Premium

    25   12:05pm Thu 23 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   michaelsch says What will happen in such a case? Cannibal Anarchy.

17. rootvg Follow Befriend (8) 1 threads 792 comments Danville, CA Premium

    26   1:20pm Thu 23 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   iwog says There is a 0.00000% chance that Obama will lose Illinois. Nominated. There's no way Obama could lose Illinois (even Mondale carried Minnesota) but Wisconsin appears to be seriously in question.

18. rootvg Follow Befriend (8) 1 threads 792 comments Danville, CA Premium

    27   1:23pm Thu 23 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   michaelsch says I looked at the delegates’ distribution. It looks like: Romney is winning Florida and Virginia on Jewish votes. Romney is likely to get Colorado, Nevada, and Iowa by just outspending Obama there. Assuming Obama holds other Midwestern states (including Pennsylvania) and New Hampshire they both will end up with 269 delegates. What will happen in such a case? I understand Pennsylvania is also leaning Romney because of coal country. Pennsylvania + Florida going for Romney would mean he didn't need Ohio. He may win it anyway but technically would not need it.

19. freak80 Follow Befriend (4) 52 threads 4,416 comments Corning, NY Premium

    28   1:30pm Thu 23 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   It won't really matter. There's no real difference between the two candidates. It's just "us vs. them" tribal warfare at this point. It's all about ginning up fear and hatred to get votes.

20. rootvg Follow Befriend (8) 1 threads 792 comments Danville, CA Premium

    29   1:32pm Thu 23 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   michaelsch says I looked at the delegates’ distribution. It looks like: Romney is winning Florida and Virginia on Jewish votes. Romney is likely to get Colorado, Nevada, and Iowa by just outspending Obama there. Assuming Obama holds other Midwestern states (including Pennsylvania) and New Hampshire they both will end up with 269 delegates. What will happen in such a case? Election would be thrown into the House. It won't happen. I don't think it's ever happened before.

21. freak80 Follow Befriend (4) 52 threads 4,416 comments Corning, NY Premium

    30   2:05pm Thu 23 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   Either way it's going to be fun watching Romney gin up the base with anti-Obamacare rhetoric when Romney enacted the same kind of thing as governor of MA.

22. michaelsch Follow Befriend 21 threads 581 comments South Pasadena, CA

    31   2:15pm Thu 23 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   rootvg says It won't happen. I don't think it's ever happened before. Past results do not guarantee future performance.

23. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,648 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    32   2:15pm Thu 23 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   rootvg says I understand Pennsylvania is also leaning Romney because of coal country. Sometimes I think y'all are fucking nuts. Where do you get these beliefs from?

24. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,648 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    33   2:17pm Thu 23 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   freak80 says It won't really matter. There's no real difference between the two candidates. It's just "us vs. them" tribal warfare at this point. It's all about ginning up fear and hatred to get votes. There's a huge difference between the candidates. I can't remember an election where so much was riding on the results.

25. michaelsch Follow Befriend 21 threads 581 comments South Pasadena, CA

    34   2:17pm Thu 23 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   rootvg says I understand Pennsylvania is also leaning Romney because of coal country. I don't think so. Pennsylvania is much bigger than the coal country part of it. But of course, if Romney wins Pennsylvania he will win the elections.

26. michaelsch Follow Befriend 21 threads 581 comments South Pasadena, CA

    35   2:26pm Thu 23 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   iwog says There's a huge difference between the candidates. I can't remember an election where so much was riding on the results. I don't see any significant difference but one, which is hugely important: With Romney we have guaranteed total war in Middle East. With Obama it's less likely. Since Iran is three times Iraq or Afghanistan, and since two previous wars caused a collapse in American influence worldwide, this new war will in no time turn USA into a second class country. Say goodbye to both $USD as the reserve currency and to military superiority (they actually only work together). With Obama this will take much longer. In fact, Romney's selling the war on his recent trip to Israel is nothing but a high treason.

27. rootvg Follow Befriend (8) 1 threads 792 comments Danville, CA Premium

    36   2:27pm Thu 23 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   iwog says rootvg says I understand Pennsylvania is also leaning Romney because of coal country. Sometimes I think y'all are fucking nuts. Where do you get these beliefs from? I got it from people who actually live there.

28. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,648 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    37   2:29pm Thu 23 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Protected   rootvg says I got it from people who actually live there. Okay I'll bet you $1000 that Obama wins Pennsylvania. You can use your insider knowledge to take advantage of me. Patrick can keep the money in escrow. Interested?

29. michaelsch Follow Befriend 21 threads 581 comments South Pasadena, CA

    38   2:33pm Thu 23 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   iwog says Sometimes I think y'all are fucking nuts. Yes, in a way. Also, IWOG, would you please post links rather than just pictures?

30. michaelsch Follow Befriend 21 threads 581 comments South Pasadena, CA

    39   2:46pm Thu 23 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   freak80 says Either way it's going to be fun watching Romney gin up the base with anti-Obamacare rhetoric when Romney enacted the same kind of thing as governor of MA. Well, it isn't the same kind if thing. 1. There was a large difference in uninsurance rate in Mass and nationwide. I do not remember the exact figures but something like 5% vs 12%. It was much easier to finance. 2. Romneycare enjoyed huge support in Mass. Obamacare is extremely unpopular. 3. Romneycare was quickly implemented and it actually increased the total amount of services provided to the public. Unemployed uninsured people now receive a top healthcare in Mass. Obamacare still does not work, but it has already caused huge transfers of money to healthcare corporations and vary painful reduction of services, especially provided to Medicare patients.

31. michaelsch Follow Befriend 21 threads 581 comments South Pasadena, CA

    40   2:49pm Thu 23 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   iwog says Okay I'll bet you $1000 that Obama wins Pennsylvania. Most likely you're right. But I would risk $100 against your $1000. Deal?

32. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,648 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    41   5:50pm Thu 23 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   michaelsch says Also, IWOG, would you please post links rather than just pictures? It's not necessary for me to post links since the polling agency and the date is clearly visible. If you want to reference a given poll, it's a simple google to find it. michaelsch says Most likely you're right. But I would risk $100 against your $1000. Deal? No thanks. Although I'm pretty sure I'd win, there is always some crazy scandal that could change the results. Besides the offer was made to root since he was the one certain PA was trending Romney.

33. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,648 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    42   12:37pm Fri 24 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   Ruki says I remembered fondly another New Dealist Liberal running for president openly stating he'd raise our taxes. Walter Mondale back in 1984. He carried a whopping 2 states in that election, if I recall. I remember fondly another New Dealist Liberal running for president openly stating he'd raise our taxes. He won in a landslide in 2008. As usual, your insight is priceless Shrek.

34. rootvg Follow Befriend (8) 1 threads 792 comments Danville, CA Premium

    43   1:01pm Fri 24 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   iwog says Ruki says I remembered fondly another New Dealist Liberal running for president openly stating he'd raise our taxes. Walter Mondale back in 1984. He carried a whopping 2 states in that election, if I recall. I remember fondly another New Dealist Liberal running for president openly stating he'd raise our taxes. He won in a landslide in 2008. As usual, your insight is priceless Shrek. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/showelection.php?year=1984 Obama won in 2008 because Paulson refused to save Lehman Brothers. McCain had a slight lead in Ohio and Florida before that happened and never recovered afterward. Those black swan economic conditions do not exist this year and that's why some are predicting Romney to win the popular vote by a few points (like Reagan in 1980) and then blow Obama out in the Electoral College with all those states in the south. He will never carry VA and NC again, thanks to his party's support of faggot marriage. OH as expected is hot as a pistol this time around and PA is said to be in play due to the coal issue and Romney polling well in the collar counties around Philadelphia. If those states are called for the Republicans due to exit polls, we'll all be in bed early that night.

35. uomo_senza_nome Follow Befriend (13) 787 threads 1,542 comments

    44   1:02pm Fri 24 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   iwog says your insight is priceless Shrek. I always wondered that Ruki WAS Shrek. The tone, the terms everything resembles Shrek. LOL

36. Bellingham Bill Follow Befriend 31 threads 1,534 comments Bellingham, WA Premium

    45   1:25pm Fri 24 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   iwog says I remember fondly another New Dealist Liberal running for president openly stating he'd raise our taxes. "I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes."

37. Bellingham Bill Follow Befriend 31 threads 1,534 comments Bellingham, WA Premium

    46   1:29pm Fri 24 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   rootvg says Obama won in 2008 because Paulson refused to save Lehman Brothers. The rot was much wider than LEH. They were just the third or fourth cockroach. The cause of the financial collapse was not the financial collapse itself. The cause was the ponzi bubble in housing running its course after prices finally topped in the summer of 2005. After that, everything was in run-off mode and due to the trillions in mortgage fraud allowed to go on 2004-2007 the crash was going to be immense as borrowers defaulted on their loans and the underlying collateral valuations were nowhere near sufficient to save the system.

38. Quigley Follow Befriend (6) 17 threads 575 comments Huntington Beach, CA

    47   2:44pm Fri 24 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   I've a couple friends from my college years who live in IL. Both are homeowners and both are looking at getting out. The problem is taxes. Unlike our mess in California, when the IL legislature was presented with a budget shortfall thu just raised the hell out of taxes. RE tax is twice what it is here, so my one buddy was paying 5k/year in taxes on his 250k house. My other buddy was paying 7k on his 350k house. Plus state income taxes are high, as are state sales taxes. The government is fatter than ever, and Cook county ghetto dwellers are living high on the hog. I wouldn't underestimate the anger of the tax payer base in IL. My one friend (250k house) is moving in November to Montana. The other hasn't yet found a solution, but is considering Denver. Neither has any love in his heart for Obama.

39. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,648 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    48   9:59am Sat 25 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   Cloud says Still wondering when Obama is going to be giving Bill Mahr his 1 million back for calling woman sluts, Tw*ts and c**ts? Some women are twats and cunts (looking at you Coulter) just like some men are pricks and assholes. You want Obama to be as politically correct as you mistakenly believe him to be?

40. thomaswong.1986 Follow Befriend 15 threads 3,093 comments

    49   10:17am Sat 25 Aug 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Chicago will do just fine voting for Obama, once again! gotta show your colors ! Chicago Chaos: Gangland Shootings Claim 19 Victims In One Night Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/311749/chicago-chaos-gangland-shootings-claim-19-victims-in-one-night/#DY08dx8dRGAwwFdd.99

« First     « Previous comments