Harsh Republican Restrictionism Loses Bigly in the Midterms

Candidates who channeled Trump on immigration got roundly smacked.


President Donald Trump deliberately made this election about the alleged threat of immigration rather than his real accomplishments on the economy,

Fibonacci Blue via Fotercom

which, apparently, were just "boring" to him. He tried to sow fear and panic in the wee hours of the election about the migrant caravan—going so far as to call this the "election of the caravan." He claimed that the caravan was composed of criminals, and included Middle Eastern terrorists. He deployed 15,000 military troops on the Southern border, threatening to shoot them if they threw stones. He promised to scrap birthright citizenship by executive order. This was so over-the-top that House Speaker Paul Ryan called him and begged him to cool it and talk up the economy instead. To no avail. Trump responded by tweeting that Ryan "knew nothing about" birthright citizenship. Ryan called again and begged again and was ignored again.

So how did hardline Republicans who followed Trump's rather than Ryan's strategy do?

Not well, to put it mildly.

Iowa's Rep. Steve King, who out-Trumped Trump, won his re-election bid but just by a squeaker. FiveThirtyEight had put the odds of King, a shameless racist, keeping his seat at 80 percent for the simple reason that his district is overwhelmingly white and hardline Republican. He made headlines some months ago when he tweeted his support for far-right Dutch candidate Geert Wilders noting that Wilders was right in keeping out non-white immigrants because "you cannot rebuild your civilization with other people's babies." King endorsed white nationalist Faith Goldy for mayor of Toronto and gave an interview to Unzensuriert, a publication associated with Austria's Freedom Party, which was founded by a former Nazi SS officer and is now led by Heinz-Christian Strache, who was active in neo-Nazi circles as a youth. He had previously commented that undocumented Mexicans have "calves the size of cantaloupes because they're hauling 75 pounds of marijuana across the desert."

In the last few weeks, a la Trump, he'd taken to banning news outfits like the Des Moines Register and The Weekly Standard from his events because he didn't like their coverage.

All of this took toll on his final tally. In the past he'd won this district by double digits. This time? Less than three points!

His other ultra-restrictionist colleagues weren't so lucky.

The four most anti-immigration hardliners were: Kris Kobach (Kansas governorship), Corey Stewart (Virginia governorship), Dave Brat (U.S. House from Virginia) and Lou Barletta (U.S. Senate from Pennsylvania).

Stewart and Barletta never really had a shot. But Kobach and Brat's seats were winnable by the GOP had it fielded the right candidates in these largely conservative districts. Instead, they lost.

Kobach, the Kansas secretary of state, readers will recall, was the author of Arizona's notorious "Your Papers Please" law. Subsequently, as Matt Welch wrote, he tried to make a career out of chasing the non-existent problem of illegal immigrant voter fraud, even heading Trump's voter fraud commission before it was disbanded because of Kobach's rank incompetence.

Slate points out, he spent years promoting Crosscheck, a program that ostensibly detected double voting but actually had an error rate of 99.5 percent. He pushed a law that compelled Kansans to provide proof of citizenship in order to register to vote, then defended it himself at trial—at which point it became clear that he had zero understanding of the basic rules of civil procedure. A federal judge repeatedly reprimanded him during the hearings, then ruled against him and held him in contempt of court. Although a lawyer, he was ordered to take six hours of remedial legal classes. Kobach also built a lucrative legal practice talking cities into passing ordinances that punished landlords and employers who did business with undocumented immigrants, only to then lose in court when the laws were inevitably challenged.

All of his added up to a 4.5 points loss for him. (His career might be dead unless Trump, as per rumor, nominates him to replace Jeff Sessions as Attorney General. That, if nothing else, would make for joyous confirmation theater as Democrats publicize his record of mischief.)

Brat lost by a smaller 1.5 point margin. But the outcome was still stunning given that only four short years ago, Brat, a professor and a political neophyte, ousted House Majority Leader Eric Cantor in an upset victory largely by berating Cantor's support for comprehensive immigration reform. In this round, not only did Trump endorse him but Steve Bannon traveled to Virginia to stump for him. His opponent, Abigail Spanberger, however, made Brat's hardline position a major campaign issue, mobilizing suburban women against him in an open repudiation of his and Trump's anti-immigration agenda.

One last thing, some Republicans are suggesting that Trump's harsh immigration policies and rhetoric delivered for Ron DeSantis in the Florida gubernatorial race. DeSantis' opponent was Andrew Gillum, an arch progressive lefty, whose nomination everyone initially believed meant a sure-shot victory for DeSantis. After all, Republicans have won the governor's race in this state for the past 20 years. But DeSantis eked out a mere 0.7 point victory. Why? Because DeSantis' alignment with the president in a heavily Latino district was major liability. Had he not gone full-blown Trumpist and refused to distance himself from the president's excrescences on the caravan and birthright citizenship, there is a very good chance that he would have won by a far wider margin. Ditto for the Ted Cruz-Beto O' Rourke Texas senatorial race that Cruz won by a mere 1.5 points!

It is hard to see these results as anything other than a repudiation of Trump's hardline immigration nonsense. As Cato Institute's David Bier notes, the House is now the most pro-immigration it has been since at least the 19th century. The last time the Democrats controlled the House, they couldn't even get a majority of the House to support a very restrictive version of the Dream Act. This time, House Democrats are unified on providing a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers, legalization of long-time illegal residents, and doubling legal immigration, while permitting only moderate enforcement measures to be attached. There are no anti-immigration Democrats in the House now. In addition, a contingent of pro-immigration Republicans survived, and they would likely join any effort to improve the legal system.

So the question now is if Trump will get the message and start working with Democrats on sensible immigration reform sans his poison pills like demanding a 40 percent cut in legal immigration in exchange for legalization of Dreamers. Or keep doubling down on a bad bet and do to the Republican Party what he did to his casinos: Bankrupt it with his ill-advised gamble.

NEXT: New California Gov. Gavin Newsom Has Been 'Vocally Anti-Gun Every Chance He Gets'

Immigration Midterm

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

Please to post comments

68 responses to “Harsh Republican Restrictionism Loses Bigly in the Midterms

  1. Governor of Fl says huh?


      “Stop Illegal Immigration
      Enact E-verify to ensure a legal workforce and higher wages for Floridians
      Do not allow sanctuary cities in Florida”

      1. But BETO. what about Beto!!

        1. He got the shit kicked out of him, threw back a few cocktails and drove off into obscurity.

          1. Don’t worry; the clueless wing of the Democrats will position their vehicles to keep him from getting away.

          2. Beto forced Republicans to claw and spend to keep a Republican Senate seat (consuming resources and showing the way for the future in Texas) and helped many downballot Democrats.

            Ask Pete Sessions.

            And ask yourselves about Republican electoral prospects without a red Texas. A Texas in which an incumbent senator hits 51 percent before Texas is done with demographic improvement is a beautiful sight.

            1. Beto wasted $69 million dollars on a race that he couldn’t win. That money could have been spent in places like Florida or Indiana and possibly made a difference. Thanks to retards like you, it wasn’t.

            2. Democrats imported voters to permanent one party rule in CA.

              Same is happening in Texas.

              We’ll see if the Republicans summon the will to stop it. Could be too late.

              1. How are Republicans going to stop the electorate from improving?

                Preventing people from becoming educated?

                Rescinding graduate degrees?

                Offering refresher classes on bigotry through the Federalist Society?

                Forbidding elderly conservatives to take their stale, bigoted thinking to the grave so that they can be replaced by better Americans in our electorate?

                Preventing smart, ambitious young people from leaving downwardly mobile towns at high school graduation and ending the bright flight that creates the depleted human residue in our desolate rural communities?

                Banning development of marketable skills?

                Stopping educated, tolerant, decent people from moving to attractive, modern, successful cities and suburbs?

                Precisely how are conservatives and Republicans going to prevent America’s electorate from becoming less rural, less religious, less intolerant, less white, and less backward? This is going to work out for right-wingers much as the culture war has gone for 60 or 70 years.

                Carry on, clingers. While your betters permit, anyway.

                1. You are breathtakingly ignorant. It is truly amazing to see. Keep being you.

            3. All it will take Rev, is the media losing their monopoly… Ooops, they already have! They’re fighting desperately to suppress speech, but unless they become fully effective, the leftist narrative cannot completely control things anymore.

              And god forbid they lose the education system… It’s funny that intelligent and wealthy people tend to be conservative when looking only at income… But the ones that went to college are all magically left leaning. It’s all about indoctrination, not actually being intelligent. If they lose that system, they’re doubly done.

              If all else fails, there’s always the fact that the right owns all the guns in the USA. Hopefully it doesn’t come to it, but if 2026 needs to be 1776 V 2.0 so be it.

    2. “, there is a very good chance that he would have won by a far wider margin. Ditto for the Ted Cruz-Beto O’ Rourke Texas senatorial race that Cruz won by a mere 1.5 points!”

      The chicken bones said so.

      1. My own Representative carried Texas District 21 by 50.34%, where his predecessor, over the past 30 years, routinely racked up 65%+

        Republicans squeaked past Hillary in 2016, and took that as a mandate to resurrect all the vampire blue laws people keep driving stakes through. They even intend to introduce a Texas Legislature bill to require showing a birth certificate before choosing a restroom. “For the children.”

    3. “President Donald Trump has given his endorsement to 79 gubernatorial, House and Senate Republican candidates on the ballot Tuesday and stumped for many of them in their home states.

      Trump’s 42-29 right now.”

  2. Shikha, seek help.

    1. “Trump responded by tweeting that Ryan “knew nothing about” birthright citizenship.”

      So Trump agrees with all the duh-heads here on these pages, who want to talk legalese all day about what the Constitution supposedly says (through convoluted arguments about word meanings, history, precedents, etc.), and advocate a new “Bureau of Exporting the Illegal Native-Born Offspring of Illegal Subhumans”, AKA the PPP, the Papers Please Police.

      And few want to talk about the practical impact (on international opinion, relations with other nations) of exporting young people to another land, who speak not the language of a destination they never knew. What if the sub-human offspring was born of an illegal Mexican and an illegal Guatemalan? Where do we export them to? Split them in two and send half and half?

      “Peace on Earth, good will towards men” doesn’t seem like a likely outcome of Der TrumpfenFuhrer’s preferred policies… Eventual shooting wars are more likely! I don’t want to be a part of an Evil Empire!

      So if Shikha “seeks help” in spreading her message, I for one will help!

      1. The problems of the children of illegal aliens are not the responsibility of Trump or Americans generally.

        The responsibility goes to their illegal alien parents and their Globalist Uniparty enablers.

        1. Also their responsibility is paying Social Security taxes to support the Uber-Menschen Native-Borns of the Native Borns… The illegal sub-humans serve more purely as pure tax-slaves (w/o being able to draw Social Security bennies), while us Ubermenschen (less-pure tax slaves) enjoy the fruits of the labor of the more-pure tax slaves!!! The Untermenschen WILL support their Betters!!!

          It is a dirty little secret that Der TrumpfenFuhrer and His Lackeys do NOT like to discus!

          See “The Truth About Undocumented Immigrants and Taxes” (in quotes) in your Google search window will take you straight there, hit number one… AKA…

          1. The illegal sub-humans serve more purely as pure tax-slaves (w/o being able to draw Social Security bennies),

            That is because they used some other person’s SSN. So, are you saying the ” illegal sub-humans” deserve to collect SS over the other person. They could have got a work visa and a legal SSN. But no, they are privileged.

            1. “So, are you saying the ” illegal sub-humans” deserve to collect SS over the other person.

              So you are saying that you can’t or won’t read or think straight.

          2. Unfortunately, for the ones that even pay into SS, all the OTHER benefits they use (roads, schools, etc) MORE than offset this fool.

            NOBODY in the USA who makes less than $55-60K a year household income is a true net tax payer… The % of illegal immigrant households who make that is probably something like 5% at best… So 95% of them are net tax drains, just like all the native born blow it cases. Being stuck with native born blow it cases IS NOT a valid reason to IMPORT more blow it cases.

            I really don’t understand how this is complicated. The difference to the economy, and to tax payers, between bringing in 10 million doctors, engineers, scientists, etc from around the world and 10 million dish washers… It is mind boggling. If we’re going to destroy freedom in America and our entire culture by importing more foreigners than we can assimilate… Can’t we at least import the ones that will be good economically? FFS.

  3. “FiveThirtyEight had put the odds of King, a shameless racist, keeping his seat at 80 percent for the simple reason that his district is overwhelmingly white and hardline Republican.”

    This is oddly put; it implies that Silver does something other than evaluate others’ polls. I should be re-written in two coherent and factual sentences.

    1. I should be re-written in two coherent and factual sentences.

      “Don escaped the second-largest U.S. state by both size and area. The second-largest U.S. state, by both size and area, is Texas.”

  4. “Last night, Van Jones spoke for many progressives in his sorrow: “This is heartbreaking,” he said.”

    1. Commie tears.
      So delicious!

  5. >>>Cruz won by a mere 1.5 points!

    Cruz won. Full stop.

    >>>working with Democrats on sensible immigration reform

    this is adorable.

    1. Steve King won as well. It is adorable she thinks politicians care about their margin of victory.

      1. They don’t, of course. But their national committees should. Maybe bubble Democrats are too stupid to realize that Beto was not, in fact, a strong candidate; but Republicans should not be. If Beto got this close, anyone less of a joke than him would have won. This is what Texas is becoming.

        1. I think it’s more a statement about Ted Cruz than anything. He’s just not likeable.

          1. Ted should have jumped off the Establishment stage the second T gained ground in the election. He got my vote because duh, but he really lost me during ’16 I was a fan

    2. Cruz won. Full stop.

      Texas becomes less white, less rural, less religious, less bigoted, and less backward on essentially a daily basis.

      Can’t stop that music, clingers.

      1. The whole country is becoming less rural and less religious, but let’s call what they are also becoming “differently bigoted and backward”.

        1. “It’s only bigotry and backwardness when Whitey does it”

      2. >>>clingers


  6. This time, House Democrats are unified on providing a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers, legalization of long-time illegal residents, and doubling legal immigration, while permitting only moderate enforcement measures to be attached.

    Does Shikha not know that bills must be passed by the Senate and signed by the President to be law? Meanwhile, if nothing is passed, Trump can continue to deport the “Dreamers” at his leisure. So, if the Demcorats want to give the Dreamers a pathway to citizenship, they will have to give Trump whatever he wants on border security and enforcement. Since the status quo favors Trump, he has all of the leverage. And that will remain true no matter how hard Shikha wishes it were otherwise.

    1. So, if the Demcorats want to give the Dreamers a pathway to citizenship, they will have to give Trump whatever he wants on border security and enforcement.

      And this is the politically correct, bi-partisan kumbaya MO. If you were a businessman intent on burning the house down and draining the swamp, promising to do something, getting concessions, and then reneging on the promise you didn’t make isn’t outside the realm of possibility.

      1. Yeah, Trump is a secret Democrat who is going to sell out the Republicans. You called it dude.

        Or is he an evil white nationalist bent on deporting all of the brown people as reason claims?

    2. There has always been a pathway to citizenship for current illegal aliens.

      Get out of the country and get in line with the rest of the world who wants to come here.

      We should not reward those who break our immigration laws over those who obey them.

  7. The only “victory” to claim here is the governor of Kansas. Every other evil restrictionist either won election or lost a race that was considered hopeless for the GOP anyway.

    1. Was the dude who ran against Jon Tester a restrictionist? Also, was Dana Rohrbacher (I am not going to google his name to spell it right).

  8. Yes, this country is definitely having a “Libertarian Moment” with respect to immigration. With Orange Hitler proving every day that restrictions on immigration are inherently racist, people are realizing unlimited immigration is the only sensible, humane policy. In fact, I think whoever ends up being the Democratic nominee in 2020 should explicitly endorse the Koch / Reason immigration agenda and make it a central campaign theme.


    1. Meh, you’ve done better.

      Orange Hitler

      Hitler would not have allowed the election in the first place. In fact, Hitler dissolved the federal system in Germany on his path to power. Who is it that is currently trying to destroy the American federal system by injecting “senate/house popular vote” nonsense?

  9. *Shikha last night*

    “Shit! *sobbing* Now I have to re-write that article. Oh, what’s the difference everyone is going to mock what I say anyways. I’ll just leave it as is.”

    1. Like a lot of progressives, she spent a lot of time sobbing, and doing a few other things, over a framed 8 x 10 glossy of Beto last night.

      1. Trump on the topic: “You could see, she was sobbing out of her eyes, sobbing out of her…wherever.”

  10. Man Shiksa, you smells of desperado that’s been baking in the desert too long. Read it as you wish – but the Republicans did quite well understand the circumstances and their immigration stance likely helped.

    1. Under, not understand. Damn auto suggest.

      1. Apart from the fact that you have pointed out that she is a shiksa apropos of nothing, I do like the fact that you have found a vulgar way to lampoon her love of lawbreakers migrating across our southwestern border by saying she “smells of desperado.”

  11. Let’s see, no materialization of a blue wave, instead they took control of the House by a thin margin, lost most Governor races, and probably lost 2 more Senate seats. Yet somehow this was a loss for Trump hardliners. It’s like the author had her head in the sand for the 6 months leading up to the election except for actions Trump took or something.

    1. ” It’s like the author had her head in the sand ….”

      You’re much too kind. Her head is so far up her own ass, she can still taste Christmas dinner.

    2. “Let’s see, no materialization of a blue wave, instead they took control of the House by a thin margin”

      Probably the best case scenario for Trump’s re-election.

  12. “Harsh Republican Restrictionism Loses Bigly in the Midterms”

    Goebbels is jealous.

  13. It’s pretty funny to see Dalmia, of all people, assert that someone else is a shameless racist.

  14. More stupid lies from Shikha.

    Trump is more popular than ever. Lefties ton like him, big surprise.

  15. Harsh Republican Restrictionism Immigration Enforcement Loses Bigly in the Midterms

    It really did not.

  16. Iowa’s Rep. Steve King, who out-Trumped Trump, won his re-election bid but just by a squeaker.

    Roundly smacked.

  17. I enjoyed the article. But the fact is that the Dems gained votes thanks to Beauregard and God’s Own Prohibitionists’ platform keeping after that Coathanger Abortion Amendment. The millstone-cum-albatross is the Democrats’ own fascination with Millerite pseudoscience predicting a Global Warming Rapture, despite its rejection by 97% of all scientists who actually graduated with a BS or better. Only the LP–the party that WROTE the Roe v Wade decision and is OK with nuclear energy and against all carbon taxes–is on the realistic side of both those issues. Individual rights for women and No to pseudoscientific soothsaying taxes is how grownups vote.

  18. “It is hard to see these results as anything other than a repudiation of Trump’s hardline immigration nonsense”

    The Left and their wish fulfillment fantasies.

    Also, I note how far Reason has embraced leftist race baiting.

    Yes, yes, everyone who disagrees with you is a Nazi. Yawn. Heard it before.

  19. I’ll agree that wholehearted support for immigration restrictionism was likely a problem for Kobach in Kansas. That said, Shika’s analysis of this race appears wrong and her analysis of other races looks even more incorrect.

    In the particular case of Kobach, go view the general election ads of Laura Kelly (his opponent) on YouTube. They in fact don’t mention immigration (or Voter ID, another Kobach hot button issue) but (1) tie Kobach to Brownback tax cuts / cuts in state education funding (since mostly repealed, with some Republican state legislators voting with Democrats to override Brownback’s veto of the repeal) and (2) point out the number of Republican former Kansas elected officials (including multiple Republican former governors) who endorsed Kelly.

  20. As for other cases where Shika is simply wrong or oversimplifying:

    – “Brat, a professor and a political neophyte, ousted House Majority Leader Eric Cantor in an upset victory largely by berating Cantor’s support for comprehensive immigration reform.”

    I think it rewrites history to state that’s “largely” the issue that Brat used to defeat Cantor. It was one of many policy complaints, the others of which had a Tea Party (as well as libertarian) bent to them: criticism of the 2008/09 bailouts and overall “crony capitalism”, unhappiness with budget deals, etc. Broadly speaking, voting for Brat over Cantor was a vehicle for Republican primary voters There was also a general sense that Cantor had lost touch with his district and lost due to good old-fashioned hard work retail politics by Brat, such as going out and meeting people who had never seen Cantor in person for years.

    As for Spanberger defeating Brat, immigration was probably an issue for some voters, but go look at Spanberger’s general election ads on YouTube. I did, and didn’t see one mention of immigration. The themes are running on her bio (dedication to public service and heavily emphasizing that she formerly worked for the CIA), vague centrism (working to “solve problems”), and the one issue specifically mentioned is healthcare (ACA / pre-existing conditions).

    1. “Ditto for the Ted Cruz-Beto O’ Rourke Texas senatorial race that Cruz won by a mere 1.5 points!”

      That’s very dubious analysis at best. I live in Texas, and I can recall the ads that I saw the most from various statewide candidates. I’m sure that Cruz mentioned border security / immigration, but the Cruz ads that I remember seeing the most hammered O’Rourke on economic / business / energy issues.

      Governor Greg Abbott was also on the ballot, and I recall much more mention of “securing the border” in his ads. Abbott won over Lupe Valdez by 13.4 points. Abbott had also championed legislation (which passed in 2017) essentially banning “sanctuary city” policies during the last Texas legislative session.

      I’m not at all saying that’s the only reason that Abbott won by a far wider margin than Cruz. There are a host of other possible explanation. O’Rourke is a more dynamic and charismatic candidate than the somewhat gaffe-prone Valdez (and O’Rourke raised much more money). Cruz has never achieved Abbott’s level of being generally popular across both the “base” or “anti-establishment” wing of the Republican Party in Texas and the “establishment” or “business” wing. I’d say there’s also been a degree of discomfort that Cruz so quickly ran for the presidential nomination after first being elected to the Senate in 2012.

  21. It’s also worth noting that Carlos Curbelo largely did what Shika advises – probably even more so – by putting huge distance between himself and Trump on immigration policy issues. He also lost his Congressional seat this week, by 1.8 points. That’s not to say that a different approach would have resulted in a win. It is to say that every particular candidate faces a specific set of circumstances due to differences between the electorate of each district or state, each challenger, each candidate’s personality and history, etc. It’s ridiculously shoddy analysis for Shika to put forth an all-encompassing theory tied to one particular issue.

  22. As for suburban women “mobilizing” against some Republican candidates for office, immigration policy is just one of a host of reasons why Trump struggles among this group compared to popularity of pre-Trump Republicans. A lot of it comes down to style – including on immigration issues, but certainly not only on immigration issues.

  23. Shikha had one to many illegals rolling for her while writing this article. I’ll bet she didn’t pay them either.

  24. Trump won’t get the message, which would require learning from his mistakes. He would rather double down, and continue to make a fool of himself. And then congratulate himself, telling the world that he won again.

  25. God I hope we can see some sanity on immigration. At the very least we need our quotas lifted or outright abolished.

  26. You, Shitma, are a PERFECT illustration of why we MUST control immigration.

    As an immigrant, you reflexively decide we MUST allow in any half illiterate peasant from the entire world over… Not matter what negative effects it will have on our society, culture, or economy.

    King is right that you can’t rebuild YOUR civilization with other peoples babies. Europe and America will fall to pieces if/when they become non white majorities. They will obviously continue to exist as land masses, and possibly nation states of some sort… But they will NOT be the countries they were 50 or 100 years ago, or even are today.

    They WILL resemble the nations their population came from. And sorry Shitma, but I don’t want to see the USA turn into a Balkanized disaster area filled with endless ethnic infighting. And I don’t want to see Europe turn into Eurabia.

    As the native inhabitants of Europe, and as the majority ethnic group in the US, we have no obligation to destroy our civilizations so that foreigners like you can come here because you want to make more money. So fuck off!

    1. Also, if we’re to take in every illiterate peasant from the world over… There’s a FAR easier way to do this:

      Just bring back colonialism!

      Keep in mind that the entire world ACTUALLY materially benefited from Europeans running the world. They became wealthier, more prosperous, had access to more/better technology, and so on. If the entire western world is simply to become foreigners, it’s a LOT easier to just keep them all where they are, and simply expand the political borders again.

      I imagine the British would AGAIN do a far better job of running most of the world than the natives currently are… Because as fucked as the UK is, I can’t name a single country in Africa that’s ran even close to as well. Not really in Asia either…

      Speaking of Asia, THANK GOD it’s not all just a white mans burden anymore… The Asians have their shit together nowadays, some of them anyway. So I suggest we give China, Japan, and South Korea large chunks of the world to run as well.

      Now come on open borders people, TELL ME why this doesn’t make every bit as much or more sense than just over crowding western nations?

Comments are closed.