Was Race a Strong Factor in Clear Clinton Win in Pennsylvania?
I blogged on this issue yesterday -- and a GOP leader's claim that John McCain will have a big edge on Obama because of the rae-based vote in November. It drew a wide and varied response from readers. Some claimed that Clinton suffered from gender bias, or pointed out that Obama was getting 85% of the black vote. Others objected to bringing up this issue at all, or praised me for doing so.
Long before that, I had suggested that many understate the number of older Democrats who are (still) racist and who would tip many contests to Clinton. But I closed yesterday's post by saying that if Obama won or came close in Pennsylvania that might put the issue to rest.
Didn't happen. And the exit polls show, again, that one in four Clinton voters claim they would not vote for Obama in November -- for whatever reason. And she got 70% of the white, blue-collar vote in most regions, including the area of central Pennsylvania where I spent a lot of time growing up and heard many a racist remark.
Here's the money quote from a New York Times analysis of the exit polls: "Sixteen percent of white voters said race mattered in deciding who they voted for, and just 54 percent of those voters said they would support Mr. Obama in a general election; 27 percent of them said they would vote for Mr. McCain if Mr. Obama was the Democratic nominee, and 16 percent said they would not vote at all."
And once again, the old phenomenon of exit polls proven wrong, because people with racist views do not tell pollsters the truth on election day, again reared its head. The final exit polls today indicated only a 4% Clinton win. Now it looks like 10%. That difference is largely the racial vote, I'd guess. I call them the true "late deciders" -- they decide to show their bigotry in the privacy of the voting booth.
Tim Russert reported tonight that the GOP in North Carolina is now going to play the race card against Obama in primary ads there, which can only help Clinton.
Anyway, I will leave it at that -- you guys and gals go at it, and thank you for that. As I've said before, I am just putting this all out there, not to suggest, at all, that Obama should not or can not be the nominee. Let's just say that I am very sensitive to the continuing problems of race and racial prejudice in society.
*
Greg Mitchell's new book is So Wrong for So Long: How the Press, the Pundits -- and the President -- Failed on Iraq. It is the first five-year history of the war, has been hailed by Bill Moyers, Glenn Greenwald, and Arianna Huffington, and features a preface by Bruce Springsteen.
Read more reactions from Huffington Post bloggers to the Pennsylvania Primary
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
It's amazing to me how many Clinton supporters don't want to acknowledge that there are still racists living in white America today. Why? Do you think it will take away from your win, because you think Hillary won solely on her likability and policy points? I don't think so, and I think you know that's not true either. You can't find too many racists who admit to being one but, if you ask everyone walking down a main street today if they know someone who is a racist or makes racists comments, you'll find a high percentage of people who do. I'm not black, but I can acknowledge facts such as these. You all know it to be true. Hillary knows it, too. She played this out everytime she mentioned her grandfather, if to only remind the Penn voters that she is one of them and he is not (and all that, that implies). Her spin masters know that when she created the fake uproar over the bitter comments that she would alienate some, but these were mostly the people who wouldn't have voted for her anyway. She had nothing to lose in PA on that point. But, the racists people who needed a legitimate reason to voice their opposition found it in those comments and Hillary handed it to them on a silver platter.
That goes both ways. I do believe that I have experienced more reverese racism than I have been racist. I was totally attacked at work defending Michael Vicks dogs and was called racist. So if this is the conversation that Obama now wants Americans to have "lets go".
Do you want to know what's racist? White people who complain about reverse racism without having any idea about the racial history or context of this country and who are sure that they've never said a racist word or had a racist thought. Get a grip. Read a book.
Sorry, it doesn't go both ways really. As someone also mentioned, white people will NEVER know or understand the problems that singularly face black Americans in this country. It's not a crutch for them to use past injustices, it's a just a huge piece of the puzzle. Until you walk in someone else's shoes, who are you to dismiss the millions of black Americans cries of protest? And that's the point. There are a great number of blacks and scholars of all backgrounds who acknowledge that racism still exists in this country today. And, are you saying we are to compare the strength of that argument with some conversation about Michael Vick that you had with an idiot?
As some one here so accurately said, the Dem primary in PA. was a great victory for John McCain and the GOP. Bill and Hillary have unearthed the decayed soil to find that the GW Bush bigots are still alive, beneath the surface, and ready to vote for their own demise. Bring on the Rapture Rev, Hagee they're ready.
Blacks have overwhelmingly been voting for whites (especially Democrats) for years. The white racist Democrats of Pennsylvania are those who have never voted for a Black Deomocrat and never will. That's the difference. Philly would never have a black mayor if it wasn't for the black vote. Blacks have been loyal supporters of White Democrats. But Blacks still must count on themselves in order to be elected. How much you want to bet that a very large percentage of white democrats in Penn have never voted for a black, but most if not all blacks in Penn. have voted for a white Democrat.
So let's call this primary what it is: White racist Democrats support Clinton and she supports them.
Oh come on! Obama got 98% of the black vote. Whose racist?
Oh please if this Obama had not been in this primary race this year and it was Hillary Vs Mccain in the national elections-Blacks would be voting and pulling for Hillary at almost the same margin 90%+. I dont think the white folks would do the same for Obama.
Well, I'm racist, I guess. I want Obama as our next president for lots of good reasons, INCLUDING the fact that he's black. (I'm white.) His being president would be so healing for America, and for her image abroad as well.
Has anyone any info on how much impact (if any) Limbaugh's Operation Chaos has had on the election results?
Out of all of the comments I read on this blog. Your comment is most accurately written.
I agree completely.
Thank you,
(newyawka)
(newyawka_
I agree compltetly.
With your comments.
Thank you,
Actually this is true.
There are probably around 10 % of the voters who are racist and will never vote for Obama.
However, there are probably 40% of the voters who hate Hillary as a person and will never vote for her under any circumstances.
Hmmm...the polls yesterday showed the reverse. Most Hillary supporters would never vote for Barack. So, who are the true democrats?
Obama may lose this nomination not because HRC was a better candidate, but because America is not ready for a black president. According to exit polls about 80% of those polled said race was not an issue-that’s a big LIE, no one wants to be regarded as a racist.
In my opinion race is a big factor more than anything else. It exists because of racial politics. Specifically, in states where there is almost no black population, black-white racial politics has little traction because it isn't part of the political dialect. In states where there is a very large black population, the black vote can offset a racially motivated white vote. But the black vote is too small to offset a racially motivated white vote.
Guess what..thos
Most people that are being interviewed concerning this election are LYING THROUGH THEIR TEETH. Having grown up in the South, I can tell you that Obama has absolutely NO CHANCE of carrying ANY southern or "border' state. These people are still basically racist to the bone. The only real difference is the KIDS, who (mostly) have thankfully put the racial issue behind them. There's not enough of them to offset the way their parents and grandparents will vote, however.
Don't think these old white men will pull a lever for a woman, either. They may tell you they will, but the fact remains that these ole boys prefer their women barefoot, pregnant, and chained to the kitchen sink.
We will wake up the morning after this election to find ourselves with four more long dreadful years of Repuke rule. When that happens, I will leave this country and probably never return. I'm just thankful I have the means to do this, and my heart aches for those who cannot, especially the very young, who will grow up in a fascist dictatorship. This shouldn't be happening here, but it is and I'm afraid there is little we can do about it. Taking to the streets and starting another Revolution won't help, either. We'll just be mowed down by Blackwater thugs the way those Chinese youngsters were murdered in Tiananmen Square.
I have to agree with Mark01 about American not being ready for a black President. In polling circles, it's called the Bradley effect. In the 1980s Tom Bradley, enormously popular black mayor of Los Angeles, ran for governor of California. His white Republican opponent, George Dukmejian, was behind in the polls; on the eve of the election Bradley had a 10-point lead. Guess who won? In the privacy of the voting booth, white people voted for the white man. It's never called racist when whites vote for their own, only when blacks do. Such hypocrisy. And, unfortunately, American is not quite ready for a Hillary Clinton type of woman to be the first female President. The dreamers on both sides who think a Clinton-Obama or Obama-Clinton ticket would be the 'dream" ticket are just deluding themselves.
Maybe this election will be different; in the meantime the Republicans are laughing their behinds off, waiting to vote against Hillary, the anti-Christ, or Obama, that gun-hating Muslim.
Interesting post. Risking the racist label there was an interesting poll recently. 79% per cent of voters said that race played no part in their voting decision. Being a natural contrarian, of course examining the remaining 21% was intriguing and might be a though provoking if not useful conjecture.
A similar poll had 8% of the white voters’ state that they would have a problem voting for a black candidate. Therefore, who are the remaining 13% of the voters who would not say that race would not be a factor. A double negative I know.
Could the obvious answer lie in the fact 13% percent is also roughly the same percentage of black voters! This might indicate that the race vote simply works both ways. Actually, it indicates more than likely an advantage for the Black segment at the least. Regardless, it does indicate at the minimum a complete nullification of any negative race impact.
It is conjecture for sure, but to ignore a 92% to 8% Obama margin with black voters when analyzing the opposite point is one thing that is certain to be intellectual fallacy.
Non-constructive or flaming posts will be ignored.
Excellent analysis.
And let's also not forget the misogyny card. And also the hatred of clueless old farts card. (Don't no if there is a term for that... yet.) The fact is you either get it or you don't. I would gladly lose this election because America is full of bigots. That way at least we will all know where we stand and we can stop pretending that the problem has been solved.
Here's another thought...
IIRC, Obama actually won more of the white male vote than Hillary. Where he lost out in the vote was white women.
This is unsurprising given that women would tend to vote for Hillary, just as blacks would tend to vote for Obama.
Here's the kicker though... if you were to remove the two groups which vote along identity lines (i.e. blacks and women), the argument that Obama can't win among whites is BOGUS. He already has won.
He, of course isn't making the argument that she couldn't win it because black's wouldn't vote for her, but she via her surrogates basically is making this argument. This really is the center of her electability argument - that he can't win white votes. As I say removing the groups which are likely to vote on identity lines shows this not to be the case.
He's also not making the argument that she's only getting women's votes because she's luck to be a woman. Thank god one of them is showing some class.
I do think however, that people, including his surrogates should push back particularly on this meme and push pundits and journalists to particularly look at the white male vote for evidence that he can and has succeeded on the white vote.
Interesting point, but the only place this happened was in Illinois and the southern part of Wisconsin. Virginia was close. Frankly, his campaign implies greater support but the facts do not back it up.
Regardless, to simplify this as Black or White falls to the same simplistic and retarded media talking points that muddy the facts. You simply need to drill down one level and it gets much clearer.
To add some rigor to a world of sound bites vapid of any investigative journalism, Obama still has and always has had a structural deficiency with Reagan Democrats. As opposed to all white men as the media or campaign relentlessly implies. This subgroup will decide the next President and is one of two glaring flaws in any Obama electability justification. The other is with Latinos, a minority subgroup.
The primary reason these are major flaws, is that both groups have defected and voted for the Republican in recent times. A structural and now permanent weakness that Obama has tried to wallpaper with PR and rhetoric, does not change the numbers and the facts.
Clinton is more electable than Obama against McCain in the Electoral College. The EC also drills down past national polls that are not the really point, just like getting to the subgroups. Here it is clear.
You might have risked the "racist label" but you richly earned the IDIOT label.
"...there was an interesting poll recently. 79% per cent of voters said that race played no part in their voting decision. ...of course examining the remaining 21% was intriguing and might be a though provoking if not useful conjecture
At the very least you figured this is not a useful conjecture, so I am baffled as to the point you are attempting to make, even though QUADMAN gave you an unfliching thumbs-up
But this is where you completely lost me: "A similar poll had 8% of the white voters" state that they would have a problem voting for a black candidate. Therefore, who are the remaining 13% of the voters who would not say that race would not be a factor".
SIMILAR POLL?? Are you really making a unifed inference out of two different polls?
OK, let me accept your conjecture (if only for the sake of exposing the unintelligibility of your arguement) that all 13% of are ALL black voters (evet though Barack has never had 100%
Sorry for the late response to your comments. The point is for those whose voting decisions have race as a consideration, we simply continue to forget that it includes black voters as well as white voters. Many of the talking heads omit this aspect perhaps purposely and make the results seem more material than they should.
This is for Greg Mitchell. You associate racism with whites voting against a black(really white/black) man. What do you call the overwhelming black vote going to Obama? Do you honestly believe those voters do not see the color of his skin first. Issues are important, but they self identify as do white men and women. So call it what you will, but try to see it on both sides.
Can you explain for me why every president has been white and that it is understood that black people are the most loyal constituency the Democratic party has? If blacks were racists they would never vote for any white candidate. It's not racism. There is a percentage of whites who will never vote for any black candidate, not just Obama, no black candidate. You know for certain that black people will vote for white people and always have so they are absolutely not racists. They are rejecting Clinton because she is race baiting in favor of running like a republican on the God, guns, and gays platform.
Unfortunately AA's don't always turn out . If they vote they vote democrat, but they are unreliable.
You are no longer talking about race. You are talking about the phenomenon of people voting because they -identify- with a candidate based on something like that, not out of hostility or animosity.
And going there hillary is just as bad b/c her base is women exactly like herself, who tend to vote for her in almost exactly the same percentages. Is that sexism?
So this blogger two premises are simple, if crudely put:
1.Whites are racist because they vote for white Clinton.
AND ( this is good one)
2. Blacks are NOT racist because overwhelmingly vote for black Obama.
In another words white use race preference, but not blacks.
Obviously this is total non-sense.
Stephanopoulos, used the same argument on ABC just today.
Good going Obama supporters: keep on alienating the very group that decided EVERY election since Carter: middle class suburban white vote.
I think the point is that blacks do vote, and have voted for white candidates in large numbers. They do it because they are loyal to the Democratic Party. The question is will white Democrats return the loyalty if Obama is nominated? The exit polls say maybe not.
Obama's coalition in November is not going to include white ethnic catholics. Can he win without them? Maybe. It is going to require a big push among Latinos, educated, blacks, young people, and women. Let's find out.
If race is, an issue it is not with die hard democrats. However, it may be one of the issues with Reagan democrats and Latinos who have a history for voting republican regardless of the candidate. Just because Hillary appeals to these voters does not mean she is the devil. It does mean that Obama has failed to unite or connect with them, on perhaps race but also more likely health care and the economy.
Very well stated. I completely agree.
HERE WE GO AGAIN! everytime she wins , it's because the CRACKER voted for her. Look at the picture HP put up yesterday on the storyline headlined . It's white men again...
And deval patrick won because he is white?
There are many black candidates who have won in predominately white areas, latest was Mayor nutter . Just because they don't have many black candidates in races does not put the onus on whites.
Bobby jindal won LA governor race. East Indian American..
He won on the white REPUBLICAN ticket.
This excuse that blacks vote for whites equals they are not racists as a litmus test is BS. If this author was experienced more in Life exp vs. his writing storylines. He would figured out that the number of white candidates put up in race (not won), just running is far more than blacks . And that does not mean you can use the “whites are racists" talking point because we do not see more black candidates.
IN predominately black states you see majority blacks wining seats. In Lousiana after the horrible job done by the mayor locally ( crime ). That black mayor was still given the votes over the white candidate. Don’t blame whites and stop asking for handouts ‘blacks’. I'm non white and I made it in this country... stop begging and start doing for yourself.
Your ignorance is a fitting tribute to the public school education you got.
Your insult is a fitting tribute to your denial of reverse racism.
Don't you know? Only white people can be racist!!! (sarcasm)
G. Ferraro was correct - she just got confused. Hillary is still in the race only because women are overwhelmingly voting gender. She would have lost every primary if not for the sexist vote for her.
This article is spot on, I have stated in past post that there is a significant difference in the fact that most blacks may vote for senator Obama, as against whites voting for Hillary Clinton, someone here also made the point quite well, black people have voted for white candidates , democrats and republicans for ever, the fact is, as the blogger so aptly stated there are ignorant older whites and some brainwashed young rural white people whom are still fighting the civil war, they are stuck in their old bigoted ways and yes they cling to peripheral issues like guns , gays, and God , rather than move on mentally to improve their lots, it is no wonder that others like me can come to this country and in less than two decades build substantial middle class lives, while they are still stuck in their quote "way of life"inter
I encounter some form of black racism on a regular basis at a college where I teach.
There is white racism and black racism. If you ever been to a black church, attended a blacks only political event or heard a black comedian ANYWHERE in this country. in SOME white circles racism is also a big subject and bandied about freely.
These are realities of American condition. Some whites do cling to the Civil War mentality,
Some blacks cling to the MLK days as a way to justify their racism..
Humans ( all humans) are given to racism regardless of skin color.
One can talk about this complexity of human interaction or chose to sweep it under the carpet.
Your choice is clear.
Agreed. I am an American of iranian descent, I encounter black racism way more than I do white racism. Racism of all forms needs to be eliminated.
I agree with your comments 100%
Before Bill Clinton injected race into the campaign in South Carolina Blacks were supporting Hillary Clinton 68% to 32%.
(jamrock47)
Excuse my "bitterness" on this topic. It's hard for me to read posts about what is or isn't racism, from people who have never experienced it.
First of all, not all of Sen. Clinton's supporters are racists. There are, however, some who are not voting for Hillary as much as they are voting against Obama. These people ARE racists, and The Clintons and MSM have given them a number of BS reasons to vote against him without SEEMING racist. (flag pins, bitter, etc...)
2nd, lets not forget, not long ago Sen. Clinton was leading among black voters nationally. This changed, only when comments from Bill Clinton in SC surfaced that WERE deemed racist by black voters. Get over it people, just because you may not have thought his words were racist, they WERE. Blacks aren't voting against Sen. Clinton because she is white. Most believe that Sen. Obama is the best and most qualified candidate. Also some gave their suppport to Sen. Obama because they felt insulted by Sen. Clinton's campaign.
How dare you people call the black vote for Obama racist. He is the first bi-racial candidate with a legitimate shot at the white house, and you folks call black folks who vote for him racist. Like we always vote for black candidates for president. (remember how close Jesse Jackson came to winning? how about Sharpton, or Alan F-ing Keyes?)
This is still America and Racism still exists.
I have not read all of the comments. The gist seems to be that there are racist in the Democratic party and that most of them supported Hillary Clinton. What is the argument then if 92% of Black Voters vote for Obama? Do we call this pride instead of racism. If it wasnt racism on the part of blacks, then the numbers would align a little more evenly.
Bravo. Perfect argument. Perfect example of America's 'inherent privilege' protecting itself: turn the argument; blame the victim; play the victim; then continue on as always.
You, for one, will get the America you deserve in November.
They should have aligned more evenly if the Clintons didn't resort to race baiting it probably would have turned out that way. I knew blacks were being thrown under the bus in favor of the Archie Bunker vote in places like Ohio and PA and lots of others saw that too. Look at polls before South Carolina and you would have seen that black voters were split.
"White" is vague now. It was not always. There was a time when Irish and Italian and German were not considered white. There was a quote from somebody I don't remember that said "now that Kennedy is President, Irish are finally white". That wasn't the distant past. We are lucky that over time we are all coming togather. It's hard for us today to not call Irish or Germans "white", but that has not always been the case. Now, many light-skinned hispanics are even called white. Who would have thought!
But the darker the skin, the deeper the predjudice. We might "accept" a few shades darker each decade, but there's a long way to go.
I thought the Democratic party was the party of tolerance and understanding to the plight of all peoples and races.
Now you are telling me the Democrats are racist.
What is the world coming to?
There's a big difference between voting for someone because they're just like you and voting against someone because they're not like you. I agree that it's wrong for blacks to factor in his race. They should be voting for Obama because they think he'd make the best President, not because he happens to be black. By the same token, women should not be voting for Hillary because she's a woman, but we see that most are doing just that. By your logic, we could accuse those people of sexism. What's disturbing about the results from PA is that it suggests racism is more prevalent than sexism (not that one is any better than the other). But for all of Hillary's talk of sexism, she's lucky. The white male is being forced to choose between a white woman and a black man. He's apparently decided that race trumps gender. But in the general election, I'll bet this voter will opt for the white male over the white female. Good for John McCain.
Yes, I do think race is a factor. The women all came out for Hillary but you have Nutter and other blacks for Hillary and not Obama. Ok, if a black woman said she is voting gender, I could sort of accept but if a black man is voting for a white woman something is not balance there. There is no unity. Another thing I think is the "bitter" comment. For this we have to thank Ms Fowler for the loss votes for Obama. He was getting there until this piece of yellow journalism came up. When the party is so divided, we the democrate can pretty much write the concession speech today. Even if Hillary is the nominee. If we are touting experience, McCain has more. Catholic, Jews and blue collars would most likely vote McCain than Hillary if she is the nominee. Only the women votes are not cutting it. The youth will stay home and I think so will the blacks.
Problem is he said it! In fact he did so in a manner to elicit laughs from his captive audience. Listen to the audio. Fowler reported what happened. I don’t care what color his skin, Obama is just another far left liberal that can not get elected. The closest an African American has come to be elected in a major race was when Harold Ford ran for the senate from Tennessee, and he is currently chairman of theDLC.
Greg, you still have it backwards. Only a few months ago the margin that Clinton was supposed to win by in PA was anywhere from 20-30%. The fact that Obama got that margin DOWN to 10% showed that the race problem argument you are trying to convince us of is not as simple as you are trying to make it out to be.
So Clinton wins by 10% in a state she was supposed to totally cream him in, after/despite all her B.S. RRAM tactics. PA happened to be one of a few states that had perfect Demographics for Clinton all up and down the line.
It proves nothing in relation to how Obama will do vs. McCain in the general, and quit trying to conflate the race question WAY beyond the role that it may have played.
Please obamas people crack me up. Obamas arrogance lost him pennsylvania. Hillary knows the issues. Obama thought "WORDS" and his messiah rhetoric would carry him. He won't win.
He can't win. McCain will obliterate him. We all see and hear what we want to, 10 percent is a big deal. Bigger than a 30 or 40 percent win in Idaho, Wyoming or Utah. A few thousand activists will not recolor those states blue.
Your cracking me up now....hil
We have compromised our principals long enough. McCain may win. He may win by a lot. Then he can deal with the mess he will inherit. During the fall we can listen to an articulate Democrat lay out our case against the stale bromides and fear mongering of the right wing. We will then elect the President we deserve, get poorer, sacrifice more soldiers, and sell what remains of our economy to the Chinese.
Obama's campaign has killed the Clinton Dynasty. If it was not Obama it would have been someone else. We are eternally grateful for what he has done. The posing, lying, self-centered. Republican Clintons are dead. Now we can truly begin to move on and reclaim our party.
Pennsylvania is a racist state. I live here. I also have lived in other states, but given the vast number of old people and the lack of education of the majority, there is no doubt in my mind race played a large role in Clinton's victory. I have talked to many people about this election and have heard the things the pollsters don't hear. The ignorance makes me ill. People chop off their nose to spite their face.
PA racist state - your evidence 'I've talked to people' need more evidence than that to call a state racist
Seankelly-
I live in PA and it is a racist state. You don't even have to 'talk to people' to know that. The majority of this state is uneducated and ignorant. I live in Philly and it's no different than the 'small, rural towns' in this state, there's just more people. Racism is alive and well in the Keystone State! Alive and well!!
Despite Nora Ephron's notion that racist white men would decide PA, it looks like sexist, post-menopausal white women decided it.
Crudely put, but there is probably some truth to it. I think Hillary's more adamant supporters are the Gloria Steinems of America: Women over 60 who embraced the feminist movement in the 60s and 70s and are furious that a MAN is getting in the way of her coronation. I keep picturing them throwing their birkenstocks at the TV whenever Obama appears and scream, "This is our time!"
throwing their birkenstocks at the TV whenever Obama appears and scream, "This is our time!"
A great line! It describes both of my sisters perfectly!
Yeah, and what has Gloria done? Marry a rich guy, that's what. What a hypocrite.
Bra Burners rule!!!!!!!!!!
Next year this time both Hillary and Obama will still be senators.
So sad that racism will be the root cause of it.
Bite me, Jojojo. This post-menopausal white woman is for Obama and was casting intelligent votes before you were born.
petsounds lol. wait till he gets in office. if he screws up on anything and you dare to have an opinion about it that is not favourable to Obama. The blacks will chant in unisom about your racists white opinion. Your only good to them as long as you vote for them...
if you have a single opinion against the messiah... your racists!
Read more carefully before you get your knickers in a twist.
If you voted for Obama, as I did, then you clearly are not one of the women to whom I refer.
And indeed, I'd agree that you cast an intelligent vote here. My very clear point was that if, as Ephron implied, white men who vote in PA are sexist if they don't vote for HRC, then it also applies that white women who do vote for HRC are both racist and sexist.
"Bite me", you say? You naughty, naughty minx!
Also, Pet, I doubt you were casting any votes before I was born. Or in your apparent assumption that I was young, were you being agist?
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
