Democrats & Liberals Archives

Busy Day For Romney, Santorum, and Democrats?

If I had to put down money, I’d say that Romney will win both Arizona and Michigan today and this time tomorrow it will be a much different race. Romney leads both states in polling but it’s a slim lead in Michigan. To complicate matters, there are Democrats in Michigan working to elect Santorum.

I don't really approve of those antics by Democrats. I don't like the idea that if Republicans did it to Democrats then it's fine for us to do it too. That seems to be part of the argument after Limbaugh's "Operation Chaos" in 2008 tried and failed to weaken the Democratic Party. That had no impact on the race and if anything the primary was making the Democrats stronger so you have to question their logic there.

As easy as it seems to be to make this primary weaken the Republican field, this time Democrats need to just stay out of the way. It's one thing to jabber on the sidelines as I prefer to do. It's another to get in there literally trying to muck things up. Just leave it alone. I don't understand why folks are excited about those actions.

Romney will win Nevada for sure. He's leading by 15% in polls and he'll probably take the state by 20% when it's all said and done. For a while Santorum lead big in Michigan but he's got the now familiar problem where a candidate shoots to the top and then fades under the scrutiny. Literally the more people see these candidates speak the less they like them.

If Romney does win both today it should mean the end of the race. I've said that before but Super Tuesday is right around the corner and there will be little to no momentum left to gain by these other candidates if Romney finishes first in both races today.

Santorum needs at least a narrow victory to build momentum again and he could certainly get it. He could also win big. The impact of a Santorum win in Michigan is exactly why Democrats want to help him out but I still can't get behind that. I want Santorum to win of course. I just don't want to see Democrats involved.

Apparently though Santorum is just desperate enough to want Democrats to edge him into a victory. Multiple robocalls have been found from the Santorum camp calling for Democrats to get out the vote. We're living in strange political times. This primary keeps finding new ways to be sad but interesting.

Posted by Adam Ducker at February 28, 2012 9:23 AM
Comments
Comment #337328

“In my state of Massachusetts, you could register as an independent and go vote in which—either primary happens to be very interesting. And any chance I got to vote against Bill Clinton or Ted Kennedy, I took.”

Mitt Romney
1/28/12

“When there was no real contest in the Republican primary, I’d vote in the Democrat [sic] primary, vote for the person who I thought would be the weakest opponent for a Republican. […] I’d go in their primary, just like a lot of other folks, and voted against the person who I thought was the strongest Democrat. […] So, yeah, as an independent, I’ll go in and play in their primary, but I’m a Republican, and have been through my life. […] But a registered independent, so I could vote in either primary.”

Mitt Romney
2/18/07

Personally, I think Limbaugh’s Operation Chaos was inappropriate and disrespectful of the voting process, and I think the same of the current Democratic effort.

Having said that, Romney clearly believed it was just fine, as long as he was not on the receiving end. If a party wishes to prevent this from happening, they can simply close the primary. These are open primaries that permit voting for the weakest opposition opponent. So be it.

Posted by: phx8 at February 28, 2012 11:17 AM
Comment #337332

Adam, as you said, it “should end the race.” But I don’t see any of these guys bowing out gracefully. Class is not in high abundance in this race.

phx8 - I don’t find it surprising that Romney is not entirely consistent on an issue. If he loses he’ll blame it on the Dems voting for Santorum.

This whole Dems voting for Santorum in the primary is childish the kind of 3 year-old stuff you’d expect from Limbaugh and is ilk - but not really befitting our election process.

Posted by: tcsned at February 28, 2012 1:36 PM
Comment #337333

Adam Ducker: “I don’t really approve of those antics by Democrats. I don’t like the idea that if Republicans did it to Democrats then it’s fine for us to do it too. That seems to be part of the argument after Limbaugh’s “Operation Chaos” in 2008 tried and failed to weaken the Democratic Party. That had no impact on the race and if anything the primary was making the Democrats stronger so you have to question their logic there.”

3 points:

1.It is perfectly legal for any voter (in some states) to vote for anyone; if I was a Democrat and I believed it was a given that a Republican was going to win, I would vote, in the primary, for the Republican who best represent my beliefs.

2.Re/ Operation Chaos: it had nothing to do with trying to weakening the Democratic Party. Since you are simply regurgitating the liberal MSM definitions of OC, I will quote straight from the horse’s mouth:

“So Operation Chaos was born primarily for the purpose assuming Obama was going to be the nominee at the get go of this. He needs to be bloodied up politically since McCain is not going to do it. Since the Republican Party is not going to be on the field in this way, somebody’s gotta bloody up Obama. The only person that can do it is Hillary, and she can’t do it if she’s not in the race — and so the purpose was Operation Chaos was to keep her in the race and to have her bloody up Obama in the process of staying in the race. I’m talking about politically.”

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2008/05/06/the_purpose_of_operation_chaos

And of course, Operation Chaos was very successful.

3.Lastly, if Democrats are willing to help Santorum get nominated, they will be successfully accomplishing the same thing OC was meant to do. Romney has already stated he would not go after Obama and attack his many failures; Santorum on the other hand is more than willing to bloody Obama in the presidential campaign. So votes from Democrats will help nominate a man with the balls to go after Obama.

I personally find it interesting that Romney would cry (boo hoo)about this (dirty trick), when Romney’s PAC’s did even worse. This (his reaction) makes Romney look weak.

Posted by: GWS at February 28, 2012 1:41 PM
Comment #337336

GWS-
Let’s begin with your first point: Adam Ducker’s not saying it’s illegal, just distasteful. Me?

The way I see it, there’s not much point in it. When Romney comes to the fore, Republicans realize they want somebody more fundamentally conservative, and they go running for Not Romney to save them. If this month’s Not Romney wins, public scrutiny will come down not merely on them, but on the rather wacky things hardcore conservatives say and do. Santorum, enduring his day in the sun, already’s managed to say some things that have widened eyes, dropped jaws, and focused unwelcome attention on Republican policy and politics.

When that proves less popular, then Republicans will make practical calculations, and move back towards Romney.

Lather, Rinse, Repeat. The word for what the GOP’s doing across the country is “vacillating”. With two or more candidates with serious handicaps in every contest, and Republicans unable to motivate themselves to stick to one guy, much less consistenly vote for him, They’re doing a lot of the work of disrupting their own party for us.

As for your second point?

Republicans have done a lot to bloody Obama, but have you noticed that the guy’s back at 50 or above in many polls, while polls for Congress remain astonishingly low?

I play a lot of Counter-Strike Source these days, a first person shooter centered on matches pitting counterterrorists against terrorists. I choose the first whenever I can. Sometimes the computer switches things on me, but I like being the good guy.

Anyway, I’m new at it, and I don’t do any tricks or cheats, so I get chewed up, often enough. As I’ve expanded my play onto maps where things aren’t in continual deathmatch mode (that is, you come back to life at home base the instant you die), I’ve found myself waiting around for the next match to begin all too often. So, unlike with the continual deathmatches, It’s kind of cold comfort for me to say, “I bloodied that guy good!” It’s more comforting for me to defeat at least one enemy every round I play.

Well, to tie a bow on this digression, let me put things this way: Obama won by ten percent of the vote, and got half again as many electoral college votes as McCain did, and McCain was at least able to establish himself as the front-runner early enough to actually concern people. You bloodied him, but he humiliated you, and now you have to wait until the next match.

Oh, your people were able to come back, as I sometimes do, and pick off a lot of Democrats in a rage of fear and anger at being cast down, but you didn’t learn anything, so now you’re fast approaching Obama being in the same position or better than he was the last time.

Lastly, to your third point, folks on my side looking to mess with your primary are going for Santorum for the same reason why Republicans might like him better than Romney: because he’s a hardcore conservative who appeals to other hardcore conservatives. The Republicans in the party think of that as a strength, the Democrats look at it as a weakness. Given what happened last time with McCain trying to look like a hardcore conservative, I have to wonder why folks like you think we’re wrong.

You don’t need a fellow with the balls to defeat Obama. You won’t defeat the man who took on the Clinton machine by being ballsier than him. You need a man with brains. Unfortunately, the real thinkers tend to have disagreements with others, tend to come up with original ideas that threaten things the way they are, and only a few of them have any idea of how to actually sell this to a broader audience.

You’ve misdiagnosed your problem, and now you will lose an election on that basis.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at February 28, 2012 2:30 PM
Comment #337337

It would be pretty dumb for the Ds to vote for the R candidate that they consider worse, since the worst ones are the ones who actually get elected, while the better R candidates lose because they don’t have the same appeal to the base of bass.

Posted by: ohrealy at February 28, 2012 2:32 PM
Comment #337339

GWS:

“Re/ Operation Chaos: it had nothing to do with trying to weakening the Democratic Party.”

Really? Nothing? I’m having a hard time seeing how keeping Clinton in the race to “bloody Obama politically” means Operation Chaos was not about weakening the Democratic Party. I think you just wanted to accuse me of “regurgitating the liberal MSM” and you weren’t really interested in the context of what I wrote.

“And of course, Operation Chaos was very successful.”

There is no real way to know the impact it had on extending the primary but we know Obama won easily so obviously being “bloodied” had no meaningful impact on his race.

“Lastly, if Democrats are willing to help Santorum get nominated, they will be successfully accomplishing the same thing OC was meant to do.”

I think what the Democrats are doing is like OC in that they want to extend the primary and create chaos but I don’t think you’ll find many Democrats thinking Santorum is going to win the nomination.


Posted by: Adam Ducker at February 28, 2012 2:36 PM
Comment #337340

The Santorum campaign is making robo-calls to Democrats encouraging them to vote for Santorum. Romney is going ballistic.

“Re/ Operation Chaos: it had nothing to do with trying to weakening the Democratic Party.”

That was the ONLY point of Operation Chaos.

Posted by: phx8 at February 28, 2012 3:27 PM
Comment #337342

Popular Vote, 2008 Election:
Obama: 69,456,897 (52.9% of total)
McCain: 59,934,814 (45.7% of total)

Difference: 9,522,083 votes, 7.2% of popular vote. That’s bigger, by the way, than any margin in the forty years that preceded it, besides the 1984 and and 1972 elections, and those were both re-elections of sitting Presidents.

The Electoral College

Obama: 365 (67.8% of total)
McCain: 173 (32.2% of total)

Which is to say that Obama got twice the electoral college votes McCain did. The typical description of either outcome in an election is a landslide.

This is what GWS refers to as bloodying Obama’s nose.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at February 28, 2012 5:42 PM
Comment #337344

Stephen:

I’ve got news for GWS. The true motive behind Operation Chaos was always just to boost Limbaugh’s ego and his ratings and had nothing to do with McCain or Obama. So perhaps it was a success after all? He hasn’t had so many deranged listeners taking part in his slop since President Clinton left town. Limbaugh probably loves a Democrat in the White House. There’s so much to complain about.

Posted by: Adam Ducker at February 28, 2012 6:17 PM
Comment #337345

“I’m not willing to light my hair on fire to try and get support.” “I love my hair. It’s just the right height — just like the trees in Michigan…” Romney announced with an awkward, phony smile. He then added, “But as I’ve mentioned before, I like firing people — so if it was one of my butler’s or servant’s, or one of my chauffeur’s hair? Well, I probably wouldn’t think twice about it. I’d definitely be willing to torch their heads… heh heh, heh…!”

Posted by: Adrienne at February 28, 2012 6:22 PM
Comment #337346

Romney is, on the other hand, perfectly willing to light his pants on fire.

Posted by: phx8 at February 28, 2012 6:53 PM
Comment #337347

phx8,

LOL! Seriously — Romney’s pants are so on fire with that!

Btw, “light my hair on fire” is a weird expression, isn’t it? I thought it was pretty odd when Huntsman previously used that expression, and now Romney used it. Must be a conservative thing?

Posted by: Adrienne at February 28, 2012 7:49 PM
Comment #337351

Stephen Daugherty, I have no idea what you are trying to say and I have no interest in talking to you.

Adam Ducker, you presume to know what Rush Limbaugh was trying to do when he organized Operation Chaos and I gave you Rush Limbaugh’s own words about what he was trying to do. Yet you continue to say you know better about what Rush Limbaugh was doing. What is the purpose of using links and quotes if you know better.

Then we have the liberals on WB who have nothing better to do than personally attack any conservative. Is the purpose of this site to discuss politics or is the purpose to call people names?

Posted by: GWS at February 28, 2012 9:03 PM
Comment #337352

Adam, you don’t do too well when you get out in front of a story. I think the last time was a labor report or something. If you do become a betting man let me know!

Posted by: gwestbury at February 28, 2012 9:13 PM
Comment #337353

GWS:

Your link and quote proves my point not your own. Limbaugh clearly states the point was to keep Hillary in the race to weaken Obama.

Posted by: Adam Ducker at February 28, 2012 9:19 PM
Comment #337354

gwestbury:

I’ve generally been accurate on my labor predictions. I’ve made some pretty bad guesses about this primary though so it’s good that I don’t put real money down.

Posted by: Adam Ducker at February 28, 2012 9:22 PM
Comment #337356

“GWS:

Your link and quote proves my point not your own. Limbaugh clearly states the point was to keep Hillary in the race to weaken Obama.”

Posted by: Adam Ducker at February 28, 2012 9:19 PM

Adam, your original point was that Rush Limbaugh’s Operation Chaos was to “to weaken the Democratic Party” and now you are saying the point was to “weaken Obama”.

You said nothing about weakening Obama, unless you are saying Obama and the Democratic Party are one in the same. My link proves that the purpose of Rush Limbaugh’s Operation Chaos was to weaken and bloody Obama. This it did. The left and the liberal MSM want to deny that OC had any effect on the Obama/Clinton campaign; yet a recent movie “The Ides of March” staring, written, and directed by liberal socialist George Clooney spent the first 45 minutes conducting Operation Chaos in a presidential primary in Ohio. Was this by chance or was the movie the result of a successful ploy by Limbaugh?

Posted by: GWS at February 28, 2012 9:51 PM
Comment #337364

Gosh. I thought Obama wrapped up the Democratic nomination on June 2nd, and went on to win the general election by a large margin, then brought his main competitor, Hillary Clinton, into his cabinet as Secretary of State.

Posted by: phx8 at February 28, 2012 10:15 PM
Comment #337370

GWS: “You said nothing about weakening Obama, unless you are saying Obama and the Democratic Party are one in the same.”

Indeed, I think that goes without saying that Obama’s campaign for the White House was a unified push by the Democratic Party to re-gain power in Washington and not simply the work of one man, Obama himself. Again I have to suggest you were trying more to argue than you were to understand the context of what I was saying.

“The left and the liberal MSM want to deny that OC had any effect on the Obama/Clinton campaign…”

If it had an effect then it wasn’t easy to measure and indeed a longer primary actually strengthened the Democrats, not bloodied them. That is the opposite of what Limbaugh was trying for so I’m not sure why you’re in defense of such a failure.

Posted by: Adam Ducker at February 28, 2012 10:18 PM
Comment #337392

Adam,
I haven’t seen anything to change what I thought all along, namely, that Romney is a lock for the nomination. Tonight involved 29 delegates in AZ, which Romney will win, and 30 in MI, which will be divided among the four candidates. Super Tuesday will be the turning point, with over 400 delegates up for grab.

It still seems possible that a brokered convention could be in the works. Romney may not be able to win enough delegates to win on the first ballot. It would only require Santorum, Gingrich, and Paul to combine for 51% of the total delegates, and that is a very real possibility. However, there aren’t any dark horses that would be viable alternatives to Romney in a brokered convention.

No one has mentioned that Obama’s approval rating went up to 53% in the latest poll. An extended primary will keep letting Romney damage himself.

Too bad Santorum won’t be the nominee. I’d love to see social conservatism deal with a landslide.

Posted by: phx8 at February 28, 2012 10:30 PM
Comment #337430

Romney getting just 41% in his home state is really not too much to brag about. Even if tonight will be spun up as a big win for him in the general sense, Santorum should never have been able to come quite so close. Obviously he’s just not considered an exciting/likeable candidate.

On the other hand, I also get the sense Santorum truly needed to win Michigan tonight, but didn’t. So, I think the going may now be a whole lot harder for him as this primary rolls on. Well, that’s the perception anyway. It is interesting to note however, that Santorum won the blue collar and middle class vote in Michigan — with 1% Romney (surprise, surprise!) winning predominantly amongst the very wealthiest in the state.

Too bad Santorum won’t be the nominee. I’d love to see social conservatism deal with a landslide.

Yeah — looks like only the evangelicals voted for Santorum overwhelmingly, while the Catholics actually decided to vote for Romney. I wonder if this should be considered an official commentary on how Catholics view Santorum’s hardline social conservative stance on the issue of contraception?

It still seems possible that a brokered convention could be in the works.

Maybe you’re right. Yet, if Romney continues to win the next big round of votes, that will seem far less likely.

Posted by: Adrienne at February 29, 2012 1:36 AM
Comment #337440

Even if Romney cannot garner more than half the delegates by the time of the convention, a solid majority will be enough to get the nomination. He’s the establishment candidate, the corporate candidate, and they will be in control of the convention.

Until Super Tuesday, Republicans will continue to run around with their hair on fire. Heh.

It will be interesting to see if Santorum continues to bring the crazy. The GOP base loves all that talk about banning birth control as a matter of religious freedom, and how people who want a college education for their kids are snobs, and how universities are bastions of liberal elitism. That kind of talk absolutely kills the GOP for November, yet that is exactly the kind of talk that propels Santorum’s candidacy. Romney can’t compete with the crazy. He tries, but everyone knows he’s lying. Romney is about money and corporations. The rest is just talk. Sometimes weird talk, but talk nevertheless.

I’m sure the establishment GOP has told him to cool it, that social issues are a big-time losing issue in a general election for the GOP, yet that is what makes Santorum. Will he be a good, obedient boy and step aside for the coronation? What kind of bribe will it take for him to stand down?

Posted by: phx8 at February 29, 2012 11:28 AM
Comment #337443

phx8:

Even if Romney cannot garner more than half the delegates by the time of the convention, a solid majority will be enough to get the nomination. He’s the establishment candidate, the corporate candidate, and they will be in control of the convention.

Agree. Still, the Super Tuesday states are going to be a lot harder for a 1% guy like Romney to win. And now that he’s officially embraced his true Thurston Howell III attitude, this could potentially become a problem for him…

Until Super Tuesday, Republicans will continue to run around with their hair on fire. Heh.

Seems to me that from the very beginning of this GOP primary all of the most popular candidates have had flaming hair, and pants! Because the GOP base now expects that kind of say-anything red-meat rhetoric — it’s why Fox News, Limbaugh, Coulter, Sarah Palin, et al are so popular.

It will be interesting to see if Santorum continues to bring the crazy.

This article claims he’ll be pivoting towards the economy and gas prices leading into Super Tuesday.

The GOP base loves all that talk about banning birth control as a matter of religious freedom, and how people who want a college education for their kids are snobs, and how universities are bastions of liberal elitism.

I don’t expect Santorum will abandon it completely, but he probably will try to lower the tone on it somewhat. Although, I personally think he did hurt himself at least somewhat with the college-snob comment and with the Kennedy-vomit comment — not to mention the scary contraception comments.

That kind of talk absolutely kills the GOP for November, yet that is exactly the kind of talk that propels Santorum’s candidacy.

I find that fact a little bit surprising though — because Santorum lost his Senate seat in Pennsylvania as a result of that stuff, yet decided to come right back with it (indeed he has increased it!) for the primary race.

Romney can’t compete with the crazy. He tries, but everyone knows he’s lying. Romney is about money and corporations. The rest is just talk. Sometimes weird talk, but talk nevertheless.

Yeah, Romney is nothing but a billionaire plutocrat — and in better times he wouldn’t be having so much trouble trying to nail down the GOP primary. But times are really tough for the majority of Americans at the moment, and so Willard and his superpac were just forced to spent TWICE as much as Rick: $4.3 million dollars in Michigan (where his father was once the governor!), only to end up evenly splitting those delegates with an ousted former Senator like Santorum! Romney has been burning through his campaign money like crazy and even if he is a moneybags, that could end up hurting him eventually. He actually started asking for contributions at the end of his win-speech last night.

Wall Street’s 1% (who loves him) will probably have to pony up most of the dough he’ll use however, because I doubt he’ll be collecting much money from small donors going forward. Let’s face it, it’s pretty difficult to feel generous towards the guy who keeps talking about his multiple cars and residences, and keeps mentioning his rich business owner friends, and who doesn’t currently have a job and pays less in taxes than they do, and whose kids have a hundred million-dollar trust fund.
On the other hand, this is what Citizens United was designed for! They’ll give Romney’s Pac whatever they need even if they are wondering after a Michigan 3 point win if Willard really does have what it takes to be a successful general election candidate.

I’m sure the establishment GOP has told him to cool it, that social issues are a big-time losing issue in a general election for the GOP, yet that is what makes Santorum. Will he be a good, obedient boy and step aside for the coronation?

I’ve gotten the sense that when it comes to both Santorum and Gingrich they don’t really give a hoot about what the plutocrat-establishment GOP has been telling them to do. I think of this as The Tea Party Effect — it’s a brand new dance step that has recently replaced their usual old lock-step!

What kind of bribe will it take for him to stand down?

That’s a very good question…

Posted by: Adrienne at February 29, 2012 1:06 PM
Comment #337445

Everything in the press is leading us to believe in a complete democrat victory in November. Not only will Democrats hold the Presdidency and Senate, but will also retake the House. I can’t wait to see the changes in America after November, 2012. The unions are also heading for a great victory against Scott in Wisconsin.

Posted by: gliberal at February 29, 2012 1:53 PM
Comment #337447

Sorry gliberal, but latest polls show Scott doing well in WI. 54% are against the recall. It’s a shame so much union worker’s dues were wasted on recalls in WI. A Scott win will be a great blow to the unions. I love the way you liberals just blab, blab, blab; with no facts.

Posted by: Frank at February 29, 2012 2:08 PM
Comment #337450

Today’s Rasmussen poll shows 52% in WI “somewhat approve” of Walker. Yesterday’s PPP poll shows WI voters dead even on whether to recall, with 47% approving and 52% disapproving. In individual match-ups, Walker shows small leads over various Democrats, with the exception of Feingold, who has not announced he would run.

The various polls have margins of error. The upshot? Too close to call.

Posted by: phx8 at February 29, 2012 3:11 PM
Comment #337451

Why won’t Movable Type let me write in the Body or Extended fields? Anyone?

Posted by: phx8 at February 29, 2012 4:57 PM
Comment #337471

Just ribbing you some Adam. I think the other time was on your first post actually.

Mitt v. Barry this Nov.

Posted by: George at February 29, 2012 9:39 PM
Comment #337472

George:

I still believe I’ve been right more than I’ve been wrong on the economy as far as this site goes.

Posted by: Adam Ducker at February 29, 2012 10:36 PM
Comment #337494

phx8-
have you recently upgraded to IE9? I’ve had to author on Firefox since I made the transition.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at March 1, 2012 11:20 AM
Comment #337497

GWS-
As for your not understanding what I wrote? It’s pretty simple: I’ve been playing a game. In that game, you can wound other players, even if they kill you. Recently, though, I’ve played levels where getting killed means you sit on your ass for the next minute or two, while everybody else gets to run around and actually play.

That’s sort of like an election, right? You win, you get to run around a play for the next few years. You lose it, and you get to watch everybody else play, resenting it all the way.

Just look at how much the Republicans have sulked about losing the White House. Yeah, you bloodied Obama, but he won twice as many electoral votes as his Republican opponent, and his difference in the popular vote is enough that he could have lost the difference of those votes in every election since 1968 besides 1972 and 1984, and still have been on top.

So, if Operation Chaos was intended to improve GOP chances for November 2008, it failed misrerably.

As for the Clooney movie? So, you’re saying that because a liberal filmmaker portrayed a fictional example of the strategy in a fictional film, that means it works?

The trouble is, few people are actually willing to switch, and they must compete with all the real Republicasn Primary voters. Only if one candidate has a particular weak advantage over another are the margins small enough for a group of interlopers to matter.

Also, since Michigan distributes delegates proportionately, It’s not as if you can flip the result drastically, the way a winner-take-all primary might allow you to.

I’m really not sure what we have to gain from such operations, besides a possible Santorum Majority. Short of that, though, it was little more effective than Operation Chaos, which changed nothing at all.

As for the recall election The question is not whether people approve or disapprove of the recal, the question is whether they will show up and vote for him.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at March 1, 2012 11:46 AM
Comment #360049

Cheap Nike NFL Jerseys have always been regarded a well-known outfits product especially these days with more individuals displaying interest and assistance to their preferred groups and gamers. Dressed in these Cheap Nike NFL Green Bay Packers Jersey is a simple way of displaying off your assistance and allegiance for a certain group. People can best display to the world the group they are following by putting on the shades of their preferred Official NFL Jerseys Shop groups.


Nike NFL elite Jerseys On Sale are great presents for individuals of any age, from children to mature. The choices that are available are incredibly stylish and have been regularly modified. Some individuals use these Nike NFL Limited Jerseys Cheap Sale to demonstrate their design and flavor. These Wholesale Nike NFL Game Jerseys stayed to be stylish. In fact, they are also used by superstars who also want to demonstrate their assistance to their most liked group in Green Bay Packers nike football Jerseys.

Posted by: Cheap Nike NFL Jerseys at January 6, 2013 9:56 PM
Post a comment