What won't the Hamptons-based New York Times publish?

THURSDAY, MAY 30, 2019

In what way did this column make sense?
Kevin Drum is a nicer guy than we are.

We learned that yesterday. We learned it when we read his post about Alice Garza's guest column in the hard-copy New York Times.

Drum noticed the fact that Garza's column doesn't exactly make any discernible sense. That said, he was basically nice about that fact, and he didn't ask the obvious question:

Why would a newspaper like the Times put such material in print?

Our reaction was somewhat different. This is the way Garza's column began. We'll post our reaction below:
GARZA (5/29/19): During election season, I always cringe when I see candidates eating fried chicken next to a bottle of hot sauce in Harlem or taking staged photos with black leaders. These shallow symbolic gestures are not a substitute for meaningful engagement with black voters. And candidates should know that we see right through them.

Candidates and their campaigns are comfortable talking at black people, but few want to talk to us. This limits our ability to influence their decisions and policies. And it’s a bad strategy at a time when black people, black women in particular, form the base of the Democratic Party, are its most loyal voters and mobilize other people to go to the polls.

That’s why, in 2018, I started the Black Census Project, the results of which we are releasing on Tuesday. More than 31,000 black people from all 50 states participated in what we believe is the largest independent survey of black people ever conducted in the United States.
During election season, Garza always cringes when she sees candidates taking staged photos with black leaders.

We're a little bit different. We cringe when we see newspapers like the Times publishing material like this.

As Drum noted, Garza's survey doesn't exactly make sense. It doesn't involve a representative sample, whether of black people on the whole or of some particular segment of the black population.

For that reason, no one can sensibly know what to make of this survey's findings concerning the overall views expressed by its respondents, as Garza does throughout her column.

How unrepresentative were this survey's respondents? Readers of the Times column aren't told, but Drum posted this background information from the survey's web site:
BLACK CENSUS PROJECT: Because traditional surveys too often erase the diverse experiences of Black people and particular segments of the Black community, the Black Census Project intentionally oversampled certain populations: Black Census respondents are younger, more likely to be female, and more likely to identify as LGBTQ+ than the Black population as a whole. The Black Census sample has a higher educational attainment than the adult Black population nationally (nearly a fifth has earned an advanced degree)...
As Drum notes, only 8 percent of the overall black population has an advanced degree. It's hard to see what we're supposed to learn when a survey reports the overall views of such an unrepresentative sample.

The Times, of course, didn't notice this problem. Nor did it notice the silliness of passages like this:
GARZA: The most common response among people who were politically engaged was that no politician or pollster has ever asked them what their lives were like. Fifty-two percent of respondents said that politicians do not care about black people, and one in three said they care only a little.

Yet this doesn’t stifle our participation in politics. Nearly three in four respondents said they voted in the 2016 presidential election, and 40 percent reported helping to register voters, giving people a ride to the polls, donating money to a candidate or handing out campaign materials. Six in 10 women surveyed reported being electorally engaged. These responses debunk the myth that black communities don’t show up to vote — we do and we bring other people with us.
So goes Garza's cheer-leading.

Meanwhile, Earth to the Times—no politician or pollster has ever asked most people of every demographic group what their lives are like. Also, the fact that people say they voted and drove people to the polls doesn't mean that they actually did so.

Meanwhile, the Times also published this, part of Garza's claim that liberal groups should focus more attention on black voters:
GARZA: [W]hite voters are declining in numbers and advancing in age, while communities of color get bigger and younger. It is illogical to overextend resources to soothe the fears of an aging group, shrinking in size, that is fearful of demographic shifts and oblivious to the ways that policies that lift the boats sinking the fastest will lift theirs too. The Democrats’ approach hurts everyone—including the working- and middle-class white voters who want to see change. Nor is it a winning strategy for a party that claims to embrace progress.

Campaigns that fail to understand or try to remedy the ways structural racism damages black people’s lives are doomed. Without this analysis, their solutions will always miss the mark when it comes to black voters.

Some say that politics is quid pro quo, but that hasn’t been true for black voters. Our turnout in the 2018 midterms increased by nearly 11 percentage points over 2014, and voters in the 2018 election chose from the most diverse pool of candidates ever.
Black turnout increased by nearly 11 percent! That's supposed to sound exciting and inspiring. It sounds like that's supposed to identify black voters as the key demographic, the group which is on the rise.

But uh-oh! According to the Census Bureau figures to which Garza links, overall voting rose by more than 11 percent in 2018. Whites, Hispanics and Asian-Americans all showed larger increases in turnout than black voters did. The numbers look like this:
Increase in voter turnout, 2018 over 2014
Hispanic folk: 13.4 percent
Asian-American folk: 13.3 percent
White folk: 11.7 percent
Black folk: 10.8 percent
No, it doesn't actually matter, and all those groups are important.

That said, those numbers make black voters look like the stragglers of 2018—and this is the very data set to which Garza links! In these ways, the New York Times makes us all dumber than rocks, pretty much every day of the week.

(For readers of the hard-copy Times, today's "Noteworthy Facts" are just this side of being noteworthily insane. As always, they're on page A3.)

Why would a major newspaper publish material like this? Answer—because it's the Times, and because Garza is saying things which are currently fashionable in the lower-IQ precincts of the upper-end Hamptons! Few things have to make much sense to appear in the New York Times, an upper-class paper which, despite its egghead branding, just isn't real sharp at all.

As a general matter, we don't like Garza's instinct, now quite common within our tribe, to slice and dice the population into atomized parts. This now includes the common practice, displayed in Garza's column, of voicing invidious distinctions between black men and black women. This now-common practice seems to date to silly statistical claims about voter turnout in the Alabama special election which elected Doug Jones.

(Atomized cheer-leading from paragraph 2: This is "a time when black people, black women in particular, form the base of the Democratic Party, are its most loyal voters and mobilize other people to go to the polls." Useless black men, please report to the underside of the bus! Increasingly, this is the way the "assistant professor left" thinks and proselytizes.)

The woods are lovely, dark and deep. Anthropologists say our liberal team was never especially sharp. Sadly reporting from the years which follow Mister Trump's Completely Inclusive War, they tend to cite the New York Times as a prime example of this existential former problem.

34 comments:

  1. Dear Bob, what are these "black people" you zombies keep talking about?

    There are people who do manual labor, there are professionals, there are business owners, there are lumpen-proletarians, and the elite.

    All these categories have different political interests.

    But grouping people by the color of their skin, as if Oprah Winfrey and Michael Jordan are identical to the kid selling drugs on the corner, that is simply irrational, and racist. And that's what your zombie death-cult is.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tell it to the cops.

      Delete
    2. The GOP and the KKK. They're identical.

      Delete
    3. Also, Putin's wishes and Trump's actions.

      Delete
  2. Somerby goes from a misunderstanding (on his part) to an accusation of bad faith.

    First he criticizes something that is true of all surveys. They all rely on self-report and it is true of all self-report studies that informants can lie. That is no more true of this study than it is true for any other survey.

    Second, he objects to the oversampling. Oversampling is commonly done in political polling because the electorate is different than the general population. So pollsters try to obtain a sample that resembles the electorate, the people who actually vote. They do not seek a representative sample. They seek a sample with the characteristics of voters. Garza does the same and it is not a defect of her study. It is how political polling is generally done. Pollsters use a model of the electorate to decide who and how much to sample based on measured demographics.

    Garza objects to traditional polling and says that it neglects African Americans, so she is studying a group the resembles African American voters. There is nothing wrong with doing that, as long as she clearly states who she polled, and it appears she did that, based on Drum's reporting. So, Somerby cannot fairly complain because she is using a different model than other pollsters -- they all use different models and argue about them.

    Somerby keeps talking about a "representative" sample. He never says representative of what. We assume he thinks it should be the general population of African Americans. In that case, what he may want is an "unbiased sample," one selected at random. In that case, he wouldn't necessarily get any specific proportions of people within the African American population and whether it resembled black voters is a matter of chance too, and probably unlikely to happen since there is something different about those who vote compared to those who do not.

    Somerby's main complaint is that Garza is singling out black voters for political purposes, to increase their voice in decision-making. It seems to bother him that they are forming a faction that may vote together and be appealed to as a group. Even though that is how politics works and how it has worked for several hundred years.

    I assume Somerby is similarly opposed to unions (a non-liberal stance) and interest-based organizations of all kinds, including AARP for example, VFW, NARAL and so on. Or does he just object when disadvantaged people unite to achieve more leverage?

    When Garza reports her results, she will no doubt say that 11% of her sample said this, and 33% said that. She will not say that 11% of African Americans said it, she will carefully say that her sample said it. She can generalize back to black voters if she selected a sample to resemble the characteristics of that group. Everyone does that, knowing all of the caveats Somerby raises, which are true for every survey ever done. And her results will be interesting to many people, including campaigns, and they will take them with due caution, as they do any survey.

    Apparently, it is OK when someone surveys Obama voters who switched to Trump, but not OK to ask a black sample resembling those who voted in a past election what they think about anything.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. a black sample resembling those who voted

      You think the BCP is representative of black voters? That would mean that 20% of black voters had an advanced degree.

      In 2016, exit polls found that about 15M black people voted (Down about 2M from 2012, by the way.) So that means that 3M black voters with advanced degrees (20%*15M). But only about 2.1M black citizens have advanced degrees.

      Delete
    2. First, these proportions change with every election. It seems likely there would be more highly educated people voting in a midterm than in a general election. I'm not going to be dragged into the weeds of closely examining her model, even though that's where you live.

      Her point is that no one has surveyed black voters before. As the first such survey, she is doing something useful no matter what the quibbles you might raise about her model.

      You are all posing amateur criticisms (Somerby's are egregious) about a field in which experts make and justify choices. I'm am absolutely certain that neither you nor Somerby has taken a course on sampling theory (part of any undergrad stats major) but you think your opinion invalidates what this person has done! That is called arrogance.

      There is no reason why the results from this poll should scale up to fit the general black population or the results in any given region of the US. That doesn't make it invalid or more importantly not useful to people who want to know more about black voters. The exact %s are shiny objects for you and Somerby (and Drum to a lesser extent) to chase around like kittens. They bat things around but have no idea what they're doing.

      Delete
    3. “I'm not going to be dragged into the weeds of closely examining her model, even though that's where you live.”

      Look, I’ve never studied statistics, but is it okay if I drag you into the weeds?

      Because it appears the sampling statistics in Garza’s methodology are skewed. So why do you state that “There is no reason why the results from this poll should scale up to fit the general black population or the results in any given region of the US.”?

      I’d really like to know. I’ve learned a lot of useful stuff here, mainly from commenters.

      Leroy

      Delete
    4. You don't know what the word "skewed" means.

      My point has been that it is unreasonable for someone to expect to be a statistician and polling expert without the training involved. Somerby doesn't know what he is talking about, neither does Drum (as often as not) and neither does deadrat.

      But they don't actually care about the statistics issues. Somerby himself says that he dislikes slicing people up into demographic groups, so he doesn't like it that this person is actually studying how black voters think. We shouldn't care about black voters distinct from white voters because we are all human, so we should ignore all differences and treat everyone as if they are all white, as we have been doing for a long time.

      Delete
    5. Okay. But if about 20% of the sample group have higher degrees, doesn't that count as an anomaly? That doesn’t even count the fact that Garza admitted that she intentionally “oversampled” other certain indicators of the people included in the survey.

      How is that not skewed?

      Leroy

      Delete
    6. "skewed" has a technical meaning that is different from what you are talking about.

      You are complaining because she oversampled highly educated people. She explained why she did that. You may disagree with her reasoning, but it was a choice and not a mistake. All political polls oversample and undersample in order to resembled what they expect will be the characteristics of a voting group who has not gone to the polls yet. They create a model of what they expect that group will be like and then sample to fit that model.

      This study created a model of African American likely voters and they sampled accordingly. You may disagree with their model, but the fact that they oversampled in comparison to the general population or the last election is not an error but a decision they made in conducting their survey. If you want to disagree, offer some reasons for taking issue with it. But it is not a matter of accuracy because it is a hypothetical population being discussed.

      How can deadrat or Somerby say that 20% of those who vote in the next election won't have higher degrees if that event hasn't happened yet? Theirs is a guess as much as this survey's was, but the survey creators arguable know the group they are polling better than Somerby does. And since he is far from am expert in this stuff, he should have more humility about it.

      Skewed refers to a distribution that is distorted by extreme values so that the mean is not equal to the median and mode. A skewed distribution is not distributed symmetrically around the mean. Skew has nothing to do with oversampling based on some characteristic of your informants. That is part of sampling. You would refer to a sample that is different from the population as "biased," if it is selected in some manner that results in measurement differences from the population.

      Delete
    7. “You may disagree with their model, but the fact that they oversampled in comparison to the general population or the last election is not an error but a decision they made in conducting their survey.”

      Duh. But You didn’t answer my question, because I don’t know what “Skewed refers to a distribution that is distorted by extreme values so that the mean is not equal to the median and mode” even means. Though it sounds a lot like what this survey has done, but I plead ignorance. In this case anyway.

      How can the survey be "scaled up" to reflect the general population? I want to know godammit.

      I ain’t dissing you, I just want a coherent explanation of your critique.

      Leroy

      Delete
    8. I ain't holding my breath

      Delete
    9. I'm am absolutely certain that neither you nor Somerby has taken a course on sampling theory (part of any undergrad stats major) but you think your opinion invalidates what this person has done! That is called arrogance.

      Would you call it arrogance to be absolutely certain of things you have no reliable way to know? Like your statement about me. Of course, I can’t prove that because anyone can claim in cyberspace to have an undergraduate and a graduate degree in mathematics, which required passing courses in calculus, real analysis, and statistics and probability.

      I don’t live in “the weeds of closely examining her model.” I haven’t read her model so I don’t know her statistical methods. I’m not challenging the model and its utility, nor raising quibbles about it.

      In fact, I was asking about the last statement in your comment which essentially asked why it’s “not OK to ask a black sample resembling those who voted in a past election what they think about anything.”

      This doesn’t have anything to do with changing proportions, but nice deflection. And it has nothing to do with statistics or Garza. It has to do with simple arithmetic and you.

      Delete
    10. Kevin Drum on the survey:

      "if you want to get an idea about the priorities of the politically activist segment of the African American population, it’s probably a good place to start"

      One person suggests Somerby's criticism is misplaced because the survey was intentionally biased.

      Others chime in to essentially reiterate Somerby's post, ignoring that the first person acknowledges that the survey provides information on a population that resembles a subset of black voters.

      Whatever!

      Notably, the 2016 black voter rate was only lower than the elevated rates of the Obama elections, but was the same as 2004 and continued the trend of increasing black voter rate over time.

      Interestingly, black voters with college degrees vote slightly more Republican than those without college degrees.

      Some say college degrees merely give the illusion of greater cognitive abilities.

      Trump won in 2016 largely due to lower turn out rates for Democratic voters. Converting Trump voters is a silly notion; whatever inspires increased voter turn out for Dems is fine.


      Delete
    11. Polling and sampling theory require some math background that you, Somerby and Leroy obviously do not have because if you did, you wouldn't say the stupid stuff you do. This isn't a matter of simple arithmetic. It is true that statistics doesn't require advanced math, but you still have to put in the effort to learn it before pontificating. You are out of your depth, based on your comments, not any particular knowledge about you or your life.

      Delete
    12. I’ll say it again: it’s not that my academic background prevents me from understanding the statistical methods of the survey; it’s that I haven’t examined them. I therefore make make and have expressed no judgment about the matter. Ditto for the usefulness or interest in the survey.

      I’ve made one observation about a comment that you made.

      Apparently, it is OK when someone surveys Obama voters who switched to Trump, but not OK to ask a black sample resembling those who voted in a past election what they think about anything. (Emphasis mine.)

      Given the description of the education level in the sample, it seems for that sample of African-Americans to resemble African-Americans who voted in 2016, more African-Americans with advanced degrees had to have voted than there are African-Americans with advanced degrees.

      This isn’t a matter of statistics. It’s a matter of taking some data and doing some simple arithmetic.

      If I’ve got my numbers wrong or if I’ve done the computation wrong, then just tell me where went astray.

      Delete
    13. 8:47, I owe you an apology, I think, for my knee-jerk reaction to your reply. Because you told me some things I didn't know re: sampling in regards to how studies are constructed in attempting to create an honest sample of segment of the electorate. Thanks for the tips. I had no idea that a hypothetical model is first assembled, and then sampling is engineered to prove – or I assume, disprove – the model. I can see where this might work in, say, assessing climate change, but I hadn’t considered it as a reliable means of assessing a subgroup of society.

      Apparently these are successful modeling techniques, otherwise they wouldn’t' be in use. But I find it discouraging that these models are used by the political class to inform their messaging. I suppose this might fall under the rubric of “identity politics,” and is itself a disturbing phenomenon, as Garza mentioned citing chicken eatin’ photo ops.
      My particular sin here, if you could call it that, is that I didn’t read Garza’s article. Might have helped!

      Leroy

      Delete
    14. 2:02, some of your numbers do seem slightly off, but who cares, the survey was not intended to look at representing all black voters, and it certainly resembles a subset of black voters who voted in past elections; i.e. you are not necessarily wrong so much as you make no meaningful point.


      Whites have been using identity politics forever, illegitimately, most likely. I suppose that is disturbing; however, other groups engaging in identity politics due to actual issues like racism and prejudice leading to inequality seems reasonable and effective.


      Somerby seems to occasionally quote out of context to push his particular narrative of the day. Additionally, it seems like Somerby's analysis is constrained by misguided notions about converting Trump voters and the actions of those that perpetrate violence against black people, such as Zimmerman - someone who is truly deplorable.

      Delete
    15. some of your numbers do seem slightly off, but who cares

      I do. And so would anyone interested in the accuracy of their statements.

      the survey was not intended to look at representing all black voters

      Then perhaps Garza should stop making false statements about the black electorate.

      and it certainly resembles a subset of black voters who voted in past elections

      This is trivially true. All you have to do is pick your “subset” of black voters to match the characteristics of your sample.

      i.e.

      You either don’t understand what id est means or you don’t understand the vacuity of your “subset” statement.

      you are not necessarily wrong so much as you make no meaningful point.

      Your intellectual dishonesty is breathtaking.

      Whites have been using identity politics forever, illegitimately, most likely. I suppose that is disturbing; however, other groups engaging in identity politics … reasonable and effective.

      Illegitimately? You mean like “Segregation today, segregation tomorrow; segregation forever”? What do you “suppose” about that? But it’s OK for “other groups” as long as you approve of their goals, right? Four legs good; two legs bad.

      Your intellectual laziness is breathtaking.

      Somerby's analysis is constrained by misguided notions about converting Trump voters and the actions of those that perpetrate violence against black people, such as Zimmerman - someone who is truly deplorable.

      Somerby’s “analysis” of Zimmerman’s shooting of Martin is based on what we know of the incident and the state of Florida law. That Ziimmerman seems like a deplorable person is immaterial. I’m not sure why you’ve introduced Zimmerman into a discussion of Garza’s survey, but if you’d like to try going ten rounds on the matter, I’ll oblige. You won’t last one, mostly because I’ve acquainted myself with the law and acquaintance with facts seems something foreign to you.

      ~~~~~~~~

      By the say, I’m just messin’ with you about my breath being taken away. I’m no longer surprised by anything said by members of the Anonymi Ignorami.

      Delete
    16. 12:33, you make several assertions, largely baseless and uncompelling, so again, you are not necessarily wrong so much as you make no meaningful points.

      Some say Somerby could care less about the survey, that he does care Garza started BLM from the injustice of the Zimmerman case.

      "Correct," Good said.

      Many people do not think Zimmerman reasonably believed that his use of deadly force was necessary to defend himself against imminent death or great bodily harm.

      DETECTIVE:
      And you were able to overpower him as far as holding his wrist, you gained wrist…we call it wrist control…you gained wrist control on him basically, and you were able to basically liberate both hands…

      ZIMMERMAN:
      Yes, sir.

      Some do.

      Juror Maddy Rivera:

      "as long as, what was told to me, as long as he felt like he was threatened, he was able to use his gun"

      If all your focus is on what happened in the courtroom, you have no meaningful point, Emmett Till killers were also found innocent.

      Maybe you are saying to yourself "These assholes, they always get away." Okay, we don't need you to do that.

      Delete
  3. "Useless black men, please report to the underside of the bus!"

    Garza didn't eliminate men. She didn't sample men equally with women because men do not participate equally in the political process. She stated that.

    But the way Somerby says this reveals something pathetic about him. He feels threatened simply because women are emphasized over men. How would he live in an environment where women were in charge, a reversal of the current situation where men run things? If he thinks being out-numbered is equivalent to being thrown under the bus, how would he tolerate working in a female-dominated environment (the mirror of the male-dominated environments women enter in tech fields, for example)?

    Next we'll see Somerby marching with a sign saying "Women will not replace us!" So sad that he thinks giving women occasional importance is the same as harming men. Now we see why it was impossible for a woman to become president, to the point that traitors colluded with an enemy nation to keep a highly qualified woman out of office. If she had been elected, she might have been shot by some deranged man who believes that any progress by women diminishes men to the point that they must crawl under a bus. And if men are not the boss, they are nothing and must disintegrate because their identity depends on being large and in charge.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There's more women than men. If they wanted to be in charge, they could be by the power of the vote.

      Delete
    2. It may come to that.

      Delete
  4. Kevin Drum regularly makes mistakes concerning research methodology. His readers correct his mistakes in the comments. Somerby should go back and read those comments before he places too much emphasis on anything Drum said about how this study was done.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 4:42 PM,

      Kudos for taking only four lines to offer nothing useful. A couple of the anonymi around here go on for paragraph after whiny paragraph to do that.

      Delete
  5. Even in a presidential election, it pays to look at turnout at a more granular level. In Pennsylvania for example, where Trump won by only 44,292 votes, Clinton gained at least 35,000 fewer black votes than Obama in Philadelphia alone.

    Also, in two critical states that swung to Trump—Michigan and Wisconsin—black turnout dropped by just more than 12 points.

    The margins were very narrow in all three states. Had Clinton gotten Obama levels of the black vote, she may very well have won the election.

    This isn’t to suggest that the Democrats’ strategy should focus exclusively on their current “base”, but it is to show how important coalitions are to a political party, and they shouldn’t be neglected in pursuit of an appeal that completely ignores the specific interests of these coalitions. The larger turnout in midterm 2018 compared to midterm 2014 may be the direct result of candidates more pleasing in 2018 to the various segments of the electorate. That is also something that shouldn’t be ignored.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "gained 35,000 fewer black votes"

      If only I could gain fewer pounds on my diet.

      Delete
    2. Pick those nits!

      Delete
    3. Er, Sparky? It wasn't a serious comment on argument. I just found the phrasing amusing.

      Delete
    4. That one would find innocent trivial errors amusing, and that one would want to share that insight into their character, is amusing in and of itself, but likely only to those who share similar values to those that such a person would possess, or perhaps they are possessed by. Clearly, such individuals are medicating a severe wound in a manner that makes any attempt of rescue fail, as amusement is a heavy anchor.

      Delete
  6. Real Voodoo Love Spell That Work Fast With 100% Guarantee Result to Get Your Ex Boyfriend/Girlfriend Back After Breakup/Divorce contact Unityspelltemple@gmail.com or call/whatsapp him +2348055361568.

    I'm Natasha Wanderly form USA

    Love spell from dr.Unity brought my husband back" After 12years of marriage, me and my husband has been into one quarrel or the other until he finally left me and moved to California to be with another woman. I felt my life was over and my kids thought they would never see their father again. i tried to be strong just for the kids but i could not control the pains that torments my heart, my heart was filled with sorrows and pains because i was really in love with my husband. Every day and night i think of him and always wish he could come back to me, I was really worried and i needed help, so i searched for help online and I came across a website that suggested that Dr Unity can help get ex back fast. So, I felt I should give him a try. I contacted him and he told me what to do and i did it then he did a Love spell for me. 11hours later, my husband really called me and told me that he miss me and the kids so much, So Amazing!! So that was how he came back that same day,with lots of love and joy,and he apologized for his mistake,and for the pain he caused me and the kids. Then from that day,our Marriage was now stronger than how it were before, All thanks to Dr Unity. he is so powerful and i decided to share my story on the internet that Dr.Unity is real spell caster who i will always pray to live long to help his children in the time of trouble, if you are here and you need your ex lover back or save your marriage fast. Do not cry anymore, contact this powerful spell caster Dr.Unity now. Here’s his contact,

    Email him at: Unityspelltemple@gmail.com ,
    Call/WhatsApp him: +2348055361568,
    Check is website:https://unityspelltemples.blogspot.com ,
    your kindness will never be forgotten.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hello everyone, am very happy to share this little awesome testimony about Dr olu a great herbal doctor who help me enlarge my penis size.3.2 cm to 8.3 cm longer with his herbal cream mixture, my girlfriend is now so amazed with the autonomous size of my penis , if you you are also in need of help on how to enlarge your penis to become bigger and stronger I adverse you to contact Dr on his email (drolusolutionhome@gmail.com) ) you or contact on whatsapp number +2348140654426 because he is one of the best herbal doctor that i can only show you up to, if your penis is 4.2 cm and want to get it reach 9.2 cm within three weeks i Dr olu is also specialized on obey m breast and boobs enlargement i advise you to contact him for help

    ReplyDelete
  8. Hello viewers around the Globe, I was despondent because i had a very small penis, about 2.5 inches soft and 4 inches hard not nice enough to satisfy a woman, i have been in so many relationship, but cut off because of my situation, i have used so many product which doctors prescribe for me, but none could offer me the help i searched for. i saw some few comments on the internet about this specialist called Dr, OLHIA and i decided to contact him on his website i saw on the internethttp://olihawonderfulherbs.webs.com/ so I decided to give his herbal product a try. i emailed him and he got back to me, he gave me some comforting words with his herbal pills for Penis Enlargement, Within 3 week of it, i began to feel the enlargement of my penis, " and now it just 4 weeks of using his products my penis is about 9 inches longer, and i had to settle out with my Ex girlfriend Ella, i was surprised when she said that she is satisfied with my sex and i have got a large penis. Am so happy, thanks to Dr OLIHA I also learn that Dr OLIHA also help with Breast Enlargement Hips and Bums Enlargement etc.. If you are in any situation with a little Penis, weak ejaculation, small breast_hips_bums do get to Dr OLIHA now for help on his email {oliha.miraclemedicine@gmail.com} or whats app him number: +2349038382931

    ReplyDelete