September 30, 2008

Electoral Vote Master Thread

OK, I'm gonna perma-link this post and subsequent would-be posts will be added as comments to this thread.

Also, pictures that go with the posts will just have to go here, because I don't think I can include them as comments.

Pictures:
EVs, 09/11
Colorado, 09/25
Posted by at
Labels: ,

16 comments:

  1. ChrisSeptember 30, 2008 11:04 AM

    Electoral Votes, 09/05
    Alright, so I know there isn't anything new here between us, but I just wanted to get a test post in here.

    Obama Strong or better: 264 EVs
    McCain Strong or better: 221 EVs

    Remaining states (53 EVs):
    Colorado (9)
    Montana (3)
    Nevada (5)
    Virginia (13)
    Ohio (20)
    North Dakota (3)

    ReplyDelete
  2. ChrisSeptember 30, 2008 11:06 AM

    September 09, 2008
    The Changing Electoral Map and the Biden Gamble
    Since the Palin pick and the RNC, the electoral map is quickly shifting in one very significant way. Barack Obama has been an interesting candidate in state-by-state polling. In states that Kerry lost by 20-30 points, Obama has been trailing by 8-15 points (Examples below). However, he hasn't enjoyed the same lead the Kerry had in blue states. In Massachusetts, for example, Kerry actually won the state by fewer points (25) than Gore did in 2000 (27), but Obama's lead is only 13 points, and was only at 5 points when he clinched the nomination.

    With the Palin pick, however, the red states are getting redder. But the swing states aren't moving (and there's some evidence that they've even moved left, though telling anything from polling coming just after the convention is difficult). So here's the important takeaway: Barack Obama is now much more strongly poised to win the Electoral College while losing the popular vote. Even with the convention bounce factored in, McCain hasn't been making much ground in crucial battleground states, even though his popular vote totals have been rising.

    Which brings us to the next point. This is conjecture, and I'm not sure the reasons, but I feel confident in saying that by choosing Biden (and implicitly, by not choosing many of his other options) Obama decreased his chances of winning Ohio. However, Biden is very popular in Florida. So here's an interesting gamble, and I'm sort of making up numbers: Obama passed on an opportunity to have a 20% chance at winning Florida and a 60% chance at winning Ohio to go for an opportunity to have a 40% chance at winning Florida and a 30% chance at winning Ohio.

    Whether this is a good gamble or not I'm not sure. I gave up on Florida a while back but it has ever so slowly creeped toward the blue. Ohio, I must say, feels as though it's starting to turn red. Obama hasn't put much out there about how he'll help people find work, just that those lucky enough to have found it won't be paying as much taxes. Not too helpful if you're unemployed. But seeing some state-by-state numbers today, I must say that I am cautiously excited about the way the situation is looking.

    (From above)
    Obama not feeling too blue about the red state situation:
    AK: Kerry (-26), Obama (-6 before Palin)
    IN: Kerry (-20), Obama (-4)
    MT: Kerry (-21), Obama (Even)
    ND: Kerry (-27), Obama (Even)
    SD: Kerry (-21), Obama (-4)
    TX: Kerry (-23), Obama (-9)
    VA: Kerry (-9), Obama (Even)

    ReplyDelete
  3. ChrisSeptember 30, 2008 11:13 AM

    September 11, 2008
    Colorado, Colorado, Colorado
    In 2004, all speculation and eyes fell on Florida, and with good reason. It was by far the closest state in 2000, won by less than 0.1%, and whoever won Florida won the election.

    However, I'd been shouting at TV for weeks that Kerry had overlooked a different state entirely: Ohio. Now, Ohio wasn't the closest state in 2004 - four were closer, but no combination of them had the power to flip the election either way. Ultimately, of course, Ohio did decide the election, amidst voter fraud and all. And Bush's margin of victory of about 100,000 votes is not that large, even though Florida had been decided by 537 in the prior election.

    In 2008, I believe this state will be Colorado. Now, even on election day, there will be more potential tipping point states than there were in 2000 or 2004. However, this year Colorado in particular stands out.

    Below I have posted a screenshot (actually, I had to paste three screenshots together) of one tab in my election spreadsheet. I have done everything I can to rule out every possible safe state, and keep every possible state still in play listed that way as well. (The lead each candidate has in a state is listed on the right) Now, I think NM is safe, but I wanted to be cautious as a poll yesterday had McCain ahead by 2, but this is an outlier during a convention bounce period - my weighted average still puts Obama up by nearly 5 points. So Obama has a base of 243 EVs. I don't think MI or NH are anything to worry about, especially as polls yesterday during the Republican bounce still show Obama leading those states. That puts Obama at 264 EVs.

    McCain has secured far fewer EVs, but is ahead in most swing states. His pick of Palin has shored up red states, with Montana and North Dakota going from pure tossup to Safe McCain. Even Alaska had been polling at McCain +6, but his post-Palin average is +25, leading to the model giving him a +18. So he's only got 200 for sure, but he's got significant leads in FL (27), VA (13), and OH (20). It is not unreasonable to assume he will win all of these states (I actually think Ohio will be toughest for Obama). This gives him an additonal 60, bringing McCain to 260 EVs.

    We've only got two states left: Nevada and Colorado. So why whittle it down to just Colorado? Well, CO (9 EVs) and NV (5) are nearly next door and their demographics are very similar, meaning that when a shift occurs, it's likely they will both move in very similar ways. Nevada is about 1-3 pts more red than Colorado, however, so it would be very difficult for Obama to win Nevada and not win Colorado. (Note that with all other assumptions in place, this effectively brings McCain up to 265 EVs). So the winner of Colorado is the winner of the election. And thus, this election is about one state more than any other: Colorado, Colorado, Colorado.

    Finally, some trivia. Two things:
    (1) In the unlikely event that Obama in fact wins Nevada without winning Colorado, you may have noticed this brings the total to 269-269. As I've mentioned before, a tie in the electoral college is broken by a one-vote-per-state vote in the House (for President) and separately in the Senate (for Vice President). This would very probably make Obama the president and would absolutely make Biden the vice president. (In the event of a tie in the House, apparently, the winner in the Senate - Biden - becomes president)
    (2) In 2004, the state legislature in Colorado had a measure (it was the only one) that would have split its EVs proportionately to the winner of the state. Effectively, that means that winner would get 5 EVs and the loser would get 4, which even more interestingly, would still create a tie in the college if Obama won Colorado and lost Nevada - a pair of results I would place my money on if I had to bet today.

    If the picture doesn't load well, here's a summary:

    Obama
    Safe:
    238 EVs
    Strong:
    NM, 5 EVs, Obama +4.8
    NH, 4 EVs, Obama +3.3
    MI, 17 EVs, Obama + 3.1

    Swing
    CO, 9 EVs, Obama +1.3
    NV, 5 EVs, Obama +0.8
    OH, 20 EVs, McCain +0.1
    VA, 13 EVs, McCain +1.4

    McCain
    Safe:
    200 EVs
    Strong:
    FL, 27 EVs, McCain + 2.4




    And finally, Carly, your sarcastic enthusiasm is not appreciated.

    Update: I wanted to say, too, that I really do think Obama's 264 EVs are safe. While it's certainly conceivable that McCain will win Colorado and Nevada and Ohio and Virginia and Florida, the worry that Obama supporters are feeling results from the fact that he has not clinched the election, not that he's behind. The current Intrade quotes showing McCain with an ever-so-slight edge (and Hillary at 3.5%) are totally bogus. I'd say it's been about 80-20 up until now (the markets have had Obama at 55 or 60) and that now it's dropped to maybe about 70-30. But Obama is still the clear favorite, even if he loses the popular vote.

    Another Update: I swear I read this reassurance after my last update.

    ReplyDelete
  4. ChrisSeptember 30, 2008 11:13 AM

    Electoral Vote Update, 09/15
    Not a lot to report. Obama has taken a hit in today's update, but I suspect there's a good chance we're looking at a bottoming-out of his numbers. The question is how much will Obama improve? My guess is he will improve steadily, but slowly, and that it won't be a done deal until the votes are counted.

    ReplyDelete
  5. ChrisSeptember 30, 2008 11:15 AM

    September 15, 2008
    The Palin Bounce
    Disclaimer: This is wildly unscientific, but was easy to produce and provides an interesting look if caution is taken.

    Basically, my model uses an average of state polls, weighted by the age of the poll and quality of the pollster. I compared the current averages for each state (which includes all polls taken in the state) and the data I had on Aug 29, which is the day the Palin was announced. Roughly speaking, the difference indicates a Palin bump.

    Again, this is very unscientific. As a quick example. Take two states where McCain was up by 10 before Sarah was announced, and both went to McCain +20 afterward, and every poll perfectly captured that fact. Now say State A has been polled 5 times since the announcement, and State B 2 times. This means that State A will show a bigger bounce, only because it has been polled more (33% of polls are post-announcement instead of 17%).

    That said, here are the states ranked by post-announcement bounce, with only states polled since then included (the second column is that state's bounce minus the average bounce):

    1. AK 12.08 10.21
    2. ID 11.13 9.26
    3. SD 10.04 8.17
    4. ND 7.22 5.35
    5. MT 6.74 4.87
    6. OK 5.20 3.33
    7. NC 3.51 1.64
    8. WA 3.28 1.41
    9. GA 3.01 1.14
    10. NM 2.89 1.02
    11. UT 2.53 0.66
    12. MS 2.25 0.38
    13. NJ 2.18 0.31
    14. VA 1.34 -0.53
    15. NV 1.13 -0.74
    16. PA 0.97 -0.90
    17. WI 0.93 -0.94
    18. OH 0.81 -1.06
    19. FL 0.42 -1.45
    20. AL 0.40 -1.47
    21. MN 0.39 -1.48
    22. OR -0.03 -1.90
    22. CO -0.03 -1.90
    24. MO -0.11 -1.98
    25. ME -0.30 -2.17
    26. NH -0.48 -2.35
    27. IN -0.56 -2.43
    28. MD -1.87 -3.74
    29. IA -3.54 -5.41
    29. WV -3.54 -5.41
    31. WY -9.89 -11.76

    Even with all the error in this analysis, we see Alaska come out on top. Alaska has moved 12 pts in McCain's favor since the announcement. It is incorrect to interpret this as a 12 point bounce - it's really much larger, because it's weighted with the pre-convention numbers (I'll try to work on a version that isn't).

    But other moose-hunting states went right along with Alaska. Idaho's been consistently red, but Obama was actually considered to have an decent shot at Montana and North Dakota, and to a lesser extent South Dakota. Those are now squarely McCain. (Wyoming at the bottom is an outlier due to sporadic polling. I mean, seriously. It's Wyoming.)

    After them, you can see the south start to come in - Oklahoma, North Carolina, Georgia, Utah (honorary member), and Mississippi all follow closely. So Palin is first Guns and then God, electorally speaking.

    Without picking it apart state-by-state, notice that the middle-to-lower section consists of mostly Midwestern states. They basically didn't move, and moved far less than average. So, bascially (and ironically?) McCain showed extreme risk-aversion in his choice of Sarah Palin, basically choosing to play strong defense in lieu of a risk offensive choice, like Joe Lieberman or Tom Ridge. Mitt Romney: sorry dude, it looks like you just didn't get picked because Johnny doesn't like you.

    Finally, one interesting result is that West Virginia has moved relatively quickly toward Obama. It's still a long-shot, but Axelrod & Co. seem to have misfired when their 22-state plan included Georgia (McCain +11.8) and not West Virginia (McCain + 5.7)

    UPDATE: Ok, it wasn't as hard as I thought. Here are post-Palin numbers (i.e., not the average of pre- and post-Palin as above) subtracted from pre-Palin numbers. These are more likely to be centered around the true statistical mean, but are also more likely to be varied in general. (The guess of the mean is better but the variance introduced is worse)

    1. AK 20.22
    2. ID 19.07
    3. ND 14.37
    4. SD 12.71
    5. MT 11.41
    6. NM 8.87
    7. NC 8.70
    8. WA 7.44
    9. MS 6.91
    10. GA 6.69
    11. OK 6.59
    12. NJ 5.36
    13. UT 5.35
    14. WI 4.28
    15. PA 3.13
    16. VA 2.89
    17. NV 2.50
    18. FL 1.58
    19. MN 1.57
    20. OH 1.46
    21. CO -0.08
    22. OR -0.12
    23. MO -0.28
    24. ME -0.72
    25. NH -2.27
    26. IN -2.61
    27. MD -3.93
    28. WV -4.24
    29. IA -6.13
    30. WY -14.67
    31. AL -16.73

    ReplyDelete
  6. ChrisSeptember 30, 2008 11:18 AM

    September 17, 2008
    Mexed Missages
    Today's update continues the trend - Obama's odds have fallen to 37%. Part of this is due to the fact that my current model only simulates the eight most important states - and yesterday Ohio fell off (meaning the model is forced to assume it's current leader, McCain, has a 100% chance of victory there) and Pennsylvania took its place. To understand why Excel can't handle much more than an 8-state simulation, look at it this way. I need (2^x)*x cells to run a simulation on 'x' states. Stick 8 in there and stick 50 in there, and you'll see the problem. Better yet, I'll do it for you: if x is 8, then I need 2,048 cells. If x is 50, I need 56 quadrillion cells.

    Anyway, I made a big deal a few months ago of saying that it appeared that the election would come down to three states: Colorado, Virginia, and Ohio and that an Obama victory in any one state would give him victory, but that if McCain won all three he would win (I wasn't alone - within a month Karl Rove would agree, though the partisan in him added Michigan to the list).

    Now it appears we are looking at Colorado, Virginia, and Nevada, though Obama picking up only Nevada (unlikely) would result in a tie, the results of which I am working on an analysis of but would seem to favor Obama. Overall, this situation should put Obama on edge, but McCain's convention bounce should still rescind by another point or two, and the economy (finally) being front-and-center should help him out as well.

    Finally, just for fun, here are a few swing states - and their projected margin of victory for Obama minus Obama's national lead - resulting in their difference compared to Obama's national numbers:

    PA 2.1
    NH 1.5
    MI 0.8
    CO -0.9
    VA -2.0
    NV -2.9
    OH -4.0
    FL -5.2

    So if Obama leads nationally by 2%, he would lead PA by 4.1% and trail in OH by 2.0%. If he's down 1%, he'd lead NH by 0.5% and trail VA by 3.0%.

    So, if these hold, Obama needs a 1.0% national victory to collect Colorado and the presidency. If he slips in Colorado specifically, he would need to get past a 2.0% national victory to encompass Virginia, though Virginia has polled erratically as of late and is something worth paying close attention to in the near future.

    ReplyDelete
  7. ChrisSeptember 30, 2008 11:20 AM

    September 22, 2008
    More Good News
    I've updated the corner tracker. My rule so far has been to find the real probabilities of victory based on state-by-state results from 538 (he runs simulations as opposed to calculating actual odds, but I can only do 8 states). My rule has been to use the 8 closest states in my model.

    But today I can't. Because the current methodology of using the actual probabilities for the eight closest states and then assigning a 100% chance to the current leader of each state means that Barack Obama would win in my model 100% of the time, because he could lose the eight closest states and still win the election. So I've frozen the states of choice for today, which are quite a bit bluer than last week.

    ReplyDelete
  8. ChrisSeptember 30, 2008 11:20 AM

    September 23, 2008
    Foiled: A Quick Thought
    As discussed before (over and over) a 269-269 electoral tie would mean the President is chosen by the House and the VP by the Senate. Obama would probably win in the House and Biden will definitely win in the Senate. But if Obama doesn't win, then despite the fact we have a black man on one side and a woman on the other side, you'd still get two old white guys in the White House.

    ReplyDelete
  9. ChrisSeptember 30, 2008 11:21 AM

    September 25, 2008
    Go, Go, Colorado!

    The past few weeks have been quite kind to Obama in Colorado. It's possible he's getting a localized convention bounce (McCain's numbers in Minnesota have been pretty nice recently, too) but for whatever reason, Obama's really been breaking loose in the state. As you can see in the graph, it's been slightly leaning toward Obama for some time, but clearly about two weeks ago there began a quick shift toward Obama. Gibson interviewed Palin about 16 days ago, so that may be it, and I'm sure the economy hasn't hurt either. Colorado is quickly gaining in "new" blue demographics like education, youth, and prosperity, so maybe exposing Palin's incompetence really struck a nerve. Either way, this key state, and thus the election, is quickly moving toward the "safe" column.

    (Note, however, that this isn't over. Obama's lead is strong in 269 EVs - only enough for a tie. And Minnesota and Pennsylvania, while still strong for Obama, have quickly moved in McCain's direction)

    PS - As a rule of thumb, if a candidate's polling average can reach about 50%, that's a good indicator that the state can be ruled safe. Obama is very close to this mark in both Colorado and the national polling.

    ReplyDelete
  10. ChrisSeptember 30, 2008 11:22 AM

    September 26, 2008
    Electoral Votes, 09/26
    Okay, so the news for the last week has been undeniably great for Obama, to the point where watching election scenarios is getting a little boring.

    Nate's model over at 538 is now using deviations from expected primary results to predict how unexpected voters will act in the election. Overall, I think this is the best solution anyone has come up with so far.

    However, it is based on the primaries, and I think you'll see much different issues with how undecideds act in the general election. Also, it doesn't take into account that Obama may have overperformed in important primary states because he tried to, i.e., his excellent campaign specifically aimed for those states, so they may be different states this time. But above all for me is just that Obama is now squarely ahead, and this alteration has favored him in the model.

    Again, I'm not discussing whether this is accurate or not, but I don't think I'm alone when I say that, if Obama has the lead, I want to see any model make the most conservative assumptions it can about how well Obama will do. I'm working on some stuff in Excel for this, but for now, I've simply taken all Nate's odds and cut the lead in half, so if Obama is ahead by 70%, I'll put him ahead by 60%, etc., to counteract his assumption. As you can see, the Senator hasn't been hurt too badly.

    Going into the debates, Obama has a clear lead. His RCP average is +4.0 and approaching 50%. Let's hope it stays that way (or improves).

    Oh, I forgot to mention Virginia is joining Colorado in moving quickly to Obama's side while Pennsylvania moves toward McCain. Expect this trend to continue: PA is an "old blue" state and CO and VA are "old red" states. Their new colors on the 2008 map can be pretty well traced to economic success in those states, as PA's miners are becoming unemployed and CO and VA are seeing a burgeoning middle class of younger workers in high tech jobs. But watch carefully - losing PA could be quite painful in November.

    UPDATE: The RCP Average just purged its older polls, and even with the Obama +9 from the ABC News poll gone, Obama's lead has increase to +4.2.

    ReplyDelete
  11. ChrisSeptember 30, 2008 11:24 AM

    September 29, 2008
    ohmygod ohmygod ohmygod ohmygod ...
    We have the 4th poll out of 5 out just now that puts Obama ahead or tied in North Carolina.

    Now, to say he is ahead based on the polls we've seen is irresponsible; nonetheless, if Obama wins North Carolina the electoral math is irrelevant. If he penetrates McCain that deep, there will be no route to the White House because Obama won't win North Carolina without winning Virginia, Colorado, and probably Pennsylvania and Ohio.

    (Plus, Bush was around +13 there both times, and even Clinton couldn't take NC)

    ReplyDelete
  12. ChrisOctober 07, 2008 10:49 AM

    EV Update, 10/08

    We've all thought it and said it, that if there was a national security crisis shortly before the election, it would be difficult for John McCain to lose, because Republicans are the party of national security.

    What we didn't say, at least often enough, was that if there was an economic crisis shortly before the election, it would be difficult for Barack Obama to lose, because Democrats are the party of the economy.

    So here were are. Economic crisis, and I'd be lying if I told you that a landslide was out of the question.

    Barring a (Republican-favoring) crisis, Obama has locked up the former lean/swing states of New Hampshire and Pennsylvania and seems very unlikely to lose Colorado or Virginia. Florida would also be pretty safe and, though its polling is erratic, Nevada as well. That gives us what I've referred to as his core of 264 EVs plus CO (9), VA (13), NV (5), and FL (27). That brings us to 318 EVs that Obama can probably count on.

    But he's not done. Ohio (20) leans his way, and North Carolina (15), Missouri (11), and Indiana (11) are all close behind. Let's say he loses MO or IN and takes the other three. That would give him 318+20+15+11 = 364 EVs.

    Not to mention, his epic ground game has been rumored to give him an outside shot at Georgia (yes, Georgia) and its 15 EVs. Montana (3) and West Virginia (5) are real long shots, but the way things have been going I wouldn't rule them out. (And while we're pushing it, Mississippi is within 10 pts. If Obama can get 30% of the white vote he'll make a push there)

    But, while hoping that Obama can challenge Bill Clinton's 1992 victory of 370 EVs (done with Perot's help) or his 1996 return of 379 EVs (Bob Dole? Seriously?), the real question is whether Obama will win.

    If things go wrong New Hampshire might be out, reducing his core to 260 EVs. Again, though, he only needs one of CO, VA, FL, OH, NC, MO, and IN. Just one. Colorado and Virginia are his best shots, and North Carolina has gotten bluer faster than any other state, as it has a larger financial services sector.

    Here's the earlier-referenced signs test gut-check on Colorado. Aside from one poll by a poorly rated pollster, McCain hasn't led in Colorado in a single poll since 9/15 (Obama has in eleven). The total signs test is 28-11 for Obama and the weighted signs test gives Obama 75.4%.

    It's still not over, but I wouldn't worry about drowning out your night in store-brand vodka and Colt 45, either.

    ReplyDelete
  13. WarrenOctober 08, 2008 4:26 PM

    What do you think of this scenario. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/sep/23/an-electoral-college-doomsday/ (I don't know how to insert a link on this site, feel free to enlighten me.)

    ReplyDelete
  14. ChrisOctober 08, 2008 4:42 PM

    So, I don't have a lot of time to go through this but I will comment on it. I've gone through this before on here, too, so maybe you can google the site for some keywords.

    I'm not saying the article is bad per se, but I do believe it's intent is excitement over substance. The rules (as far as I know) are explicit: in the event that no one receives a majority of votes in the electoral college (so if there's a third party with EVs there need not be a tie), then the incoming House of Representatives chooses the President and the incoming Senate chooses the Vice President.

    The key is that it is not a straight-line vote in the House - it's one vote per state, delegated by which candidate has a majority of representatives in each state's delegation. (So California's 53 Reps vote, and the winner of that vote gets California's one vote. Wyoming, by contrast, has one representative, whose vote is equal to that of the entire delegation of California)

    I am working on getting my House page up to speed, but even though the one-vote-per-state rule really hurts Democrats, it seems very likely that they would still win such a scenario.

    The Democrats have no worries in the Senate (they will probably have at least 56 Senators), so Biden would be VP. And even if this guy's doomsday scenario occurred and the outgoing Senate (made up of 49 D, 49 R, and 2 Independents who caucus with the Democrats, though one of those independents is Joe Lieberman) chose the VP, I promise you Republicans will break party lines to keep Palin out of office. They really would.

    Finally, I almost hope that we end up with an Electoral College tie or we have Obama lose the popular vote and win the electoral vote, because in either situation I think the conditions would finally be right to get rid of the electoral college.

    ReplyDelete
  15. ChrisOctober 15, 2008 9:45 AM

    Electoral Votes, 10/15

    Congratulations. It's been over 20 months since Barack Obama announced his candidacy on that cold day in Springfield, IL. You may have watched in eager anticipation, curious about what the coming years of the campaign would bring.

    Well, here we are. I'll stop being flowery and cut to the chase. To his core of 264 EVs, Barack has added Colorado and Virginia to the "Safe" column. From here on out, Barack Obama's "core" means 286 EVs.

    From there, it's difficult to imagine him losing Florida, bringing him to 313 EVs. I wish there was a bit more polling, but he also seems to have good leads in Missouri, Nevada, and Ohio. Plus, if I had to put money down today, I say he takes North Carolina. That's 364 EVs.

    I'm guessing that's where he finishes on Nov. 4 given the currently available information. But let's have some fun.

    With a strong turnout, he could take Indiana (11) and possibly West Virginia (5). He pulled his resources from Montana (3) and North Dakota (3), but their enthusiasm for Palin (which was staggering) has quickly subsided. 386 EVs.

    Finally, the last tier in an Obama victory would include Georgia, Arkansas, and Mississippi. These are particularly interesting because of their proximity - it seems likely that whomever they go for, they'll all be pretty close together. Should Obama pick up this trifecta, he'd finish with 413 EVs.

    Logically, I don't see how Obama gets past 413 EVs even in a landslide. But while we're here, the next tier would be Louisiana, South Carolina, and Texas, and a massive of total of 464 EVs.

    ReplyDelete
  16. BartOctober 15, 2008 9:50 AM

    So...I may have just peed myself a little bit due to over-excitement. The image that came to mind as I read that post was Obama, dressed in a long black overcoat, delivering his inaugural speech to a crowd of millions. Seriously, we should start considering a trip down to D.C. to see this. My mother has plenty of space and will gladly hostess a celebration.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)