Landslides
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 04:40:04 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Process (Moderator: muon2)
  Landslides
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Landslides  (Read 10363 times)
WilliamStone1776
Rookie
**
Posts: 117
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: November 09, 2017, 02:53:51 PM »

What is the threshold of EVs or percentage of the PV to be considered a landslide?
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: November 09, 2017, 04:00:12 PM »

I made and posted this graph back in 2009. It includes all the elections from 1900 to 2008. The vertical axis is the number of electoral votes for the winner and the horizontal axis is the winners margin of victory expressed as a decimal (0.15 is 15%).



This is the same data seen from the point of view of one party, in this case the Republicans.



The data on this second graph falls roughly on a straight line between -0.10 and +0.10 and from about 100 to 450 EV. Data outside that range tails off and includes the elections that are generally recognized as landslides by most political scientists.
Logged
WilliamStone1776
Rookie
**
Posts: 117
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: November 09, 2017, 06:57:33 PM »

I made and posted this graph back in 2009. It includes all the elections from 1900 to 2008. The vertical axis is the number of electoral votes for the winner and the horizontal axis is the winners margin of victory expressed as a decimal (0.15 is 15%).



This is the same data seen from the point of view of one party, in this case the Republicans.



The data on this second graph falls roughly on a straight line between -0.10 and +0.10 and from about 100 to 450 EV. Data outside that range tails off and includes the elections that are generally recognized as landslides by most political scientists.
Thanks
Logged
Skill and Chance
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,522
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: November 12, 2017, 10:42:47 PM »
« Edited: November 12, 2017, 10:50:33 PM by Skill and Chance »

I agree with Muon.  Double digit national margin = landslide.  Of course, these are heavily clustered in the End WWI-End Cold War era when most people got along unusually well and had a strong sense of common identity that is anomalous compared to the rest of US history.  You can see this clearly in how many EV held out against Teddy Roosevelt even in his 19% win (Teddy and the 1912 vote splitting were the only double digit wins between the end of Reconstruction and the end of WWI).
Logged
twenty42
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 861
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: November 13, 2017, 10:02:33 AM »

Here’s a thread on the topic...

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=272469.msg5816866#msg5816866
Logged
Flyersfan232
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,794


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: June 06, 2020, 05:00:18 PM »

if the loser have less then 200 and the popular vote if 10 or more.
Logged
Chips
Those Chips
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,245
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: June 24, 2020, 05:39:38 AM »

350 electoral votes or more.
Logged
President Biden Democrat
mrappaport1220
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 569
United States


P P
WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: June 27, 2020, 10:39:33 PM »

Yes, I agree. A modern landslide is anything above 350 electoral votes. Therefore, the 2008 election would be considered a modern landslide. Landslides like those that we saw in 1972 (Nixon) and 1984 (Reagan) won't happen in modern politics because of partisanship and party loyalty.
Logged
MillennialModerate
MillennialMAModerate
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,009
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: June 28, 2020, 07:46:59 AM »

A modern landslide (1992- onward) is anything over 350 electoral votes and anything over 8% PV.

An actual landslide is anything over 400 EV and 10% of the Pv
Logged
Please delete this account. :)
1864
Rookie
**
Posts: 32
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: July 02, 2020, 01:04:18 AM »

My definition of a landslide is a 7% or higher PV margin, as well as a 360 EV victory or higher. I'd define a old (pre-'92) landslide as 410+ EVs and a 10% margin.
Logged
GeorgeBFree
Npard23
Rookie
**
Posts: 55
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: July 08, 2020, 10:10:07 PM »

>100 EV vote margin and >54% of vote
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: October 18, 2020, 11:34:54 PM »

The median result of an American election (in electoral votes) is about 62% of the electoral vote. That is what Obama did in 2012. If you expect the electoral-vote percentage to be distributed randomly, then percentages of the electoral vote for the winner would cluster around 62%. Margins beginning in 1900 from the narrowest to the broadest divides are

01 2000 50.4
02 1916 52.2
03 2004 53.2
04 1976 55.2
05 1968 55.9 mostly squeakers
06 1960 56.4
07 2016 56.5
08 1948 57.1
---------------
09 2012 61.7 hard to characterize
---------------
10 1900 65.3
11 1908 66.5
12 2008 67.8
13 1992 68.8 bare landslides
14 1996 70.4
15 1904 70.6
16 1924 71.9
---------------
17 1920 76.1
18 1988 79.2
19 1944 81.4
20 1912 81.9 landslides
21 1952 83.2
22 1928 83.6
23 1940 84.6
24 1956 86.1
---------------
25 1932 88.9
26 1964 90.3 big landslides
27 1980 90.9
---------------
28 1972 96.7
29 1984 97.6 gigantic landslides
30 1936 98.5

That's thirty Presidential  elections, and much has changed in technologies of transportation, communication, and computation. Campaign management has become a near-science. Public polling did not exist before Gallup invented it in 1948. Five states have been added to the Union  between 1907 and 1959. Educational standards are much higher now, with lots of small children being dragooned to toil in mines and factories around 1900 with the end of their formal education, and lots of people having graduate degrees now. The American population has expanded greatly and its distribution is very different. Women got the vote by law for the 1920 election. Blacks rarely voted in the former Confederate States until the 1960's due to sundry subterfuges, but that is over.  Life spans have increased, lengthening the number of years in which people could vote by about thirty years on the average. The legal age for voting has gone from 21 to 18, which typically adds one potential vote in a presidential election for us all. 

The Electoral College remains, and except for the small states of Maine and Nebraska (such happening recently) practically all states allocated their electoral votes on a winner-take-all basis. The population has changed greatly in 120 years. The largest states in their counts of electoral votes today (CA 55, TX 38, FL and NY 29) having had 5, 15, 36, and 4 electoral votes in 1900, respectively. The four largest states in electoral votes in 1900 had 36 (NY), 32 (PA), 24 (IL), and 23 (OH). Iowa, Missouri, and Pennsylvania have lost nearly half the electoral votes that they had in 1900.   

First of all, eight elections are close. Except for 1948 and 1968 (which involve racist secessions against the mainstream Democratic Party), those elections could have gone either way. Truman kayoed Dewey by 114 electoral votes. In a two-way split of the electoral vote, such would give a  326-211 result, which would not be a close election.

that's 116 years between the first and last election in this  group, and forty elections in times of peace and war.

By looking for gaps one can subdivide the levels of victory. The biggest gap (5.8%) now separates Reagan 1980 from the three biggest electoral blowouts. A significant gap (4.2%) separates elections of 1924 and 1920. That's a good candidate for a break in classifications.

Splitting the shares of electoral votes by obvious gaps one finds

 
01 2000 50.4
02 1916 52.2
03 2004 53.2
04 1976 55.2
05 1968 55.9 mostly squeakers
06 1960 56.4
07 2016 56.5
08 1948 57.1
---------------
09 2012 61.7 hard to characterize
---------------
10 1900 65.3
11 1908 66.5
12 2008 67.8
13 1992 68.8 bare landslides
14 1996 70.4
15 1904 70.6
16 1924 71.9
---------------
17 1920 76.1
18 1988 79.2
19 1944 81.4
20 1912 81.9 landslides
21 1952 83.2
22 1928 83.6
23 1940 84.6
24 1956 86.1
---------------
25 1932 88.9
26 1964 90.3 big landslides
27 1980 90.9
---------------
28 1972 96.7
29 1984 97.6 gigantic landslides
30 1936 98.5

Do you like my classification?  Just over two weeks from now we will have some idea of where the election of 2020 belongs. The one in its own category is Obama in 2012, which was a few thousand votes away in Florida from being in the 'close' category. Until 2012 there was a huge gap (8.2%) between mostly squeaker elections and 'bare landslides'. 
 

Logged
Red Wall
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 736


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: November 06, 2020, 12:58:27 PM »

400 sounds about right. It means close to 3/4 of EVs. 350 is under 2/3. It's today's upper limit.
Logged
All Along The Watchtower
Progressive Realist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,426
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: November 10, 2020, 08:07:19 PM »

However many LBJ needs to win.
Logged
SingingAnalyst
mathstatman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,639
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: December 17, 2020, 07:40:49 PM »

The median result of an American election (in electoral votes) is about 62% of the electoral vote. That is what Obama did in 2012. If you expect the electoral-vote percentage to be distributed randomly, then percentages of the electoral vote for the winner would cluster around 62%. Margins beginning in 1900 from the narrowest to the broadest divides are

01 2000 50.4
02 1916 52.2
03 2004 53.2
04 1976 55.2
05 1968 55.9 mostly squeakers
06 1960 56.4
07 2016 56.5
08 1948 57.1
---------------
09 2012 61.7 hard to characterize
---------------
10 1900 65.3
11 1908 66.5
12 2008 67.8
13 1992 68.8 bare landslides
14 1996 70.4
15 1904 70.6
16 1924 71.9
---------------
17 1920 76.1
18 1988 79.2
19 1944 81.4
20 1912 81.9 landslides
21 1952 83.2
22 1928 83.6
23 1940 84.6
24 1956 86.1
---------------
25 1932 88.9
26 1964 90.3 big landslides
27 1980 90.9
---------------
28 1972 96.7
29 1984 97.6 gigantic landslides
30 1936 98.5

That's thirty Presidential  elections, and much has changed in technologies of transportation, communication, and computation. Campaign management has become a near-science. Public polling did not exist before Gallup invented it in 1948. Five states have been added to the Union  between 1907 and 1959. Educational standards are much higher now, with lots of small children being dragooned to toil in mines and factories around 1900 with the end of their formal education, and lots of people having graduate degrees now. The American population has expanded greatly and its distribution is very different. Women got the vote by law for the 1920 election. Blacks rarely voted in the former Confederate States until the 1960's due to sundry subterfuges, but that is over.  Life spans have increased, lengthening the number of years in which people could vote by about thirty years on the average. The legal age for voting has gone from 21 to 18, which typically adds one potential vote in a presidential election for us all. 

The Electoral College remains, and except for the small states of Maine and Nebraska (such happening recently) practically all states allocated their electoral votes on a winner-take-all basis. The population has changed greatly in 120 years. The largest states in their counts of electoral votes today (CA 55, TX 38, FL and NY 29) having had 5, 15, 36, and 4 electoral votes in 1900, respectively. The four largest states in electoral votes in 1900 had 36 (NY), 32 (PA), 24 (IL), and 23 (OH). Iowa, Missouri, and Pennsylvania have lost nearly half the electoral votes that they had in 1900.   

First of all, eight elections are close. Except for 1948 and 1968 (which involve racist secessions against the mainstream Democratic Party), those elections could have gone either way. Truman kayoed Dewey by 114 electoral votes. In a two-way split of the electoral vote, such would give a  326-211 result, which would not be a close election.

that's 116 years between the first and last election in this  group, and forty elections in times of peace and war.

By looking for gaps one can subdivide the levels of victory. The biggest gap (5.8%) now separates Reagan 1980 from the three biggest electoral blowouts. A significant gap (4.2%) separates elections of 1924 and 1920. That's a good candidate for a break in classifications.

Splitting the shares of electoral votes by obvious gaps one finds

 
01 2000 50.4
02 1916 52.2
03 2004 53.2
04 1976 55.2
05 1968 55.9 mostly squeakers
06 1960 56.4
07 2016 56.5
08 1948 57.1
---------------
09 2012 61.7 hard to characterize
---------------
10 1900 65.3
11 1908 66.5
12 2008 67.8
13 1992 68.8 bare landslides
14 1996 70.4
15 1904 70.6
16 1924 71.9
---------------
17 1920 76.1
18 1988 79.2
19 1944 81.4
20 1912 81.9 landslides
21 1952 83.2
22 1928 83.6
23 1940 84.6
24 1956 86.1
---------------
25 1932 88.9
26 1964 90.3 big landslides
27 1980 90.9
---------------
28 1972 96.7
29 1984 97.6 gigantic landslides
30 1936 98.5

Do you like my classification?  Just over two weeks from now we will have some idea of where the election of 2020 belongs. The one in its own category is Obama in 2012, which was a few thousand votes away in Florida from being in the 'close' category. Until 2012 there was a huge gap (8.2%) between mostly squeaker elections and 'bare landslides'. 
 
Awesome analysis! It's fascinating that, except for 2012, no one since 1900 received between 57.1% and 65.3% of the EV.

I guess 2020 is the 9th "squeaker" election, though it's relatively decisive as "squeakers" go.
Logged
President Johnson
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,592
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -3.23, S: -4.70


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: December 18, 2020, 02:36:50 PM »

I would characterize anything under 55% a squeaker. Anything between 55% and 60% a "medicore win" and 60% to 65% a "convincing win".

However, since that only applies to the Electoral College, it doesn't say too much. A few thousand votes can make the difference between winning with 290 or 350 electoral votes. Even in past landslides; if you peel off about 2-3% from FDR in each state within single digits, his 432 electoral vote (81%) landslide gets reduced significantly. He won several battlegrounds, even New York, by small margins that year.

Not to mention third parties. For example, Ronald Reagan had three electoral votes more than Lyndon Johnson in 1964 (489 and 486), but he just won 50.7% of the popular vote and a margin of nine points. LBJ won 61.1% and beat Goldwater by over 22% with the almost the same number of electoral votes. Even Joe Biden won a higher share of the popular vote this year. He also won a higher vote share than Bill Clinton in 1996 and Barack Obama in 2012.
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,357


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: December 18, 2020, 02:46:00 PM »

I would characterize anything under 55% a squeaker. Anything between 55% and 60% a "medicore win" and 60% to 65% a "convincing win".

However, since that only applies to the Electoral College, it doesn't say too much. A few thousand votes can make the difference between winning with 290 or 350 electoral votes. Even in past landslides; if you peel off about 2-3% from FDR in each state within single digits, his 432 electoral vote (81%) landslide gets reduced significantly. He won several battlegrounds, even New York, by small margins that year.

Not to mention third parties. For example, Ronald Reagan had three electoral votes more than Lyndon Johnson in 1964 (489 and 486), but he just won 50.7% of the popular vote and a margin of nine points. LBJ won 61.1% and beat Goldwater by over 22% with the almost the same number of electoral votes. Even Joe Biden won a higher share of the popular vote this year. He also won a higher vote share than Bill Clinton in 1996 and Barack Obama in 2012.

Yah in 1980 if you take 3 points of Reagan's final margin this is how the map would look like





Reagan wins 369 EV instead of 489
Logged
President Johnson
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,592
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -3.23, S: -4.70


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: December 18, 2020, 02:50:33 PM »

I would characterize anything under 55% a squeaker. Anything between 55% and 60% a "medicore win" and 60% to 65% a "convincing win".

However, since that only applies to the Electoral College, it doesn't say too much. A few thousand votes can make the difference between winning with 290 or 350 electoral votes. Even in past landslides; if you peel off about 2-3% from FDR in each state within single digits, his 432 electoral vote (81%) landslide gets reduced significantly. He won several battlegrounds, even New York, by small margins that year.

Not to mention third parties. For example, Ronald Reagan had three electoral votes more than Lyndon Johnson in 1964 (489 and 486), but he just won 50.7% of the popular vote and a margin of nine points. LBJ won 61.1% and beat Goldwater by over 22% with the almost the same number of electoral votes. Even Joe Biden won a higher share of the popular vote this year. He also won a higher vote share than Bill Clinton in 1996 and Barack Obama in 2012.

Yah in 1980 if you take 3 points of Reagan's final margin this is how the map would look like





Reagan wins 369 EV instead of 489

Yeah, though the Electoral College in 1964 was actually underwhelming compared to the popular vote. LBJ should at least have won Georgia that year.

What's interesting about 1980 is that if Carter takes all states Reagan won with a plurality, Carter would have won (I think it was 281 electoral votes). However, that's just in theory. Reagan would have won a head-to-head matchup without Anderson quite easily. Carter was DOA in 1980 against any credible challenger.
Logged
Chips
Those Chips
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,245
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: December 18, 2020, 11:40:05 PM »

Biggest landslides possible for either party in 2024:

Democrats:



IA and OH are both within 1% but both stay Republican affirming their future status as Republican strongholds.

Republicans:

Logged
bagelman
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,602
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: -4.17

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: December 19, 2020, 02:52:15 AM »

^ CO would be the same in the GOP landslide as IA/OH are in the DEM landslide.
Logged
President Johnson
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,592
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -3.23, S: -4.70


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: December 19, 2020, 05:22:03 AM »

Biggest landslides possible for either party in 2024:

Democrats:



IA and OH are both within 1% but both stay Republican affirming their future status as Republican strongholds.

Republicans:



I doubt New Mexico is within reach for Republicans, South Carolina is not going Democratic on the other side.

Also, I think New York goes to 27 electoral votes and California stays at 55.
Logged
Skill and Chance
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,522
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: December 23, 2020, 12:44:30 PM »

The median result of an American election (in electoral votes) is about 62% of the electoral vote. That is what Obama did in 2012. If you expect the electoral-vote percentage to be distributed randomly, then percentages of the electoral vote for the winner would cluster around 62%. Margins beginning in 1900 from the narrowest to the broadest divides are

01 2000 50.4
02 1916 52.2
03 2004 53.2
04 1976 55.2
05 1968 55.9 mostly squeakers
06 1960 56.4
07 2016 56.5
08 1948 57.1
---------------
09 2012 61.7 hard to characterize
---------------
10 1900 65.3
11 1908 66.5
12 2008 67.8
13 1992 68.8 bare landslides
14 1996 70.4
15 1904 70.6
16 1924 71.9
---------------
17 1920 76.1
18 1988 79.2
19 1944 81.4
20 1912 81.9 landslides
21 1952 83.2
22 1928 83.6
23 1940 84.6
24 1956 86.1
---------------
25 1932 88.9
26 1964 90.3 big landslides
27 1980 90.9
---------------
28 1972 96.7
29 1984 97.6 gigantic landslides
30 1936 98.5

That's thirty Presidential  elections, and much has changed in technologies of transportation, communication, and computation. Campaign management has become a near-science. Public polling did not exist before Gallup invented it in 1948. Five states have been added to the Union  between 1907 and 1959. Educational standards are much higher now, with lots of small children being dragooned to toil in mines and factories around 1900 with the end of their formal education, and lots of people having graduate degrees now. The American population has expanded greatly and its distribution is very different. Women got the vote by law for the 1920 election. Blacks rarely voted in the former Confederate States until the 1960's due to sundry subterfuges, but that is over.  Life spans have increased, lengthening the number of years in which people could vote by about thirty years on the average. The legal age for voting has gone from 21 to 18, which typically adds one potential vote in a presidential election for us all. 

The Electoral College remains, and except for the small states of Maine and Nebraska (such happening recently) practically all states allocated their electoral votes on a winner-take-all basis. The population has changed greatly in 120 years. The largest states in their counts of electoral votes today (CA 55, TX 38, FL and NY 29) having had 5, 15, 36, and 4 electoral votes in 1900, respectively. The four largest states in electoral votes in 1900 had 36 (NY), 32 (PA), 24 (IL), and 23 (OH). Iowa, Missouri, and Pennsylvania have lost nearly half the electoral votes that they had in 1900.   

First of all, eight elections are close. Except for 1948 and 1968 (which involve racist secessions against the mainstream Democratic Party), those elections could have gone either way. Truman kayoed Dewey by 114 electoral votes. In a two-way split of the electoral vote, such would give a  326-211 result, which would not be a close election.

that's 116 years between the first and last election in this  group, and forty elections in times of peace and war.

By looking for gaps one can subdivide the levels of victory. The biggest gap (5.8%) now separates Reagan 1980 from the three biggest electoral blowouts. A significant gap (4.2%) separates elections of 1924 and 1920. That's a good candidate for a break in classifications.

Splitting the shares of electoral votes by obvious gaps one finds

 
01 2000 50.4
02 1916 52.2
03 2004 53.2
04 1976 55.2
05 1968 55.9 mostly squeakers
06 1960 56.4
07 2016 56.5
08 1948 57.1
---------------
09 2012 61.7 hard to characterize
---------------
10 1900 65.3
11 1908 66.5
12 2008 67.8
13 1992 68.8 bare landslides
14 1996 70.4
15 1904 70.6
16 1924 71.9
---------------
17 1920 76.1
18 1988 79.2
19 1944 81.4
20 1912 81.9 landslides
21 1952 83.2
22 1928 83.6
23 1940 84.6
24 1956 86.1
---------------
25 1932 88.9
26 1964 90.3 big landslides
27 1980 90.9
---------------
28 1972 96.7
29 1984 97.6 gigantic landslides
30 1936 98.5

Do you like my classification?  Just over two weeks from now we will have some idea of where the election of 2020 belongs. The one in its own category is Obama in 2012, which was a few thousand votes away in Florida from being in the 'close' category. Until 2012 there was a huge gap (8.2%) between mostly squeaker elections and 'bare landslides'. 
 
Awesome analysis! It's fascinating that, except for 2012, no one since 1900 received between 57.1% and 65.3% of the EV.

I guess 2020 is the 9th "squeaker" election, though it's relatively decisive as "squeakers" go.

I would favor putting the "squeaker" cutoff at 55% or 56% of the EV.  All of the top 3 were one-state victories, which is an important distinction given how elections are regulated and disputed at the state level.  Going to 55% separates them out.  Going to 56% includes some 2 state victories where the 2nd state over the line for the victor was extremely close.  The elections over 56 of the EV are in a different class (even when the victor lost or arguably lost the PV as in 2016 and 1960), because several states have to be flipped to change the outcome (3 in 1948, 3 in 1960, 3 in 2016, and 4 in 2020 for an outright win).  These victories are inherently more robust and fit better in the same class as 2012 (Romney needed to flip 4 states).  Imagine Obama lost instead of won Florida by <1% and this becomes even clearer, though 2012 still stands out as the most robust of them due to the state margins.  It also becomes clearer if you think about the likelihood that PA gets contested by the state legislature in 2020 if it had been a bit closer and Biden lost AZ and GA. 
Logged
emailking
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,979
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: January 29, 2021, 08:12:35 PM »

306 is a landslide. Trump said it was, which means Biden got a landslide.
Logged
lord_moxley
Rookie
**
Posts: 108


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: February 13, 2021, 10:40:54 PM »

>370 EV
Logged
Chips
Those Chips
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,245
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: March 04, 2021, 11:27:44 PM »

350.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.061 seconds with 11 queries.