Obama Leads Mitt Romney In Ohio; 50% ...

Obama Leads Mitt Romney In Ohio; 50% Say Gay Marriage An Issue

There are 556 comments on the On Top Magazine story from Sep 23, 2012, titled Obama Leads Mitt Romney In Ohio; 50% Say Gay Marriage An Issue. In it, On Top Magazine reports that:

The poll, commissioned by Cleveland's The Plain Dealer and other major newspapers in the state, shows Obama leading Romney 51 percent to 46 percent.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at On Top Magazine.

“Stop the liberal madness”

Since: Sep 10

Location hidden

#555 Oct 8, 2012
Mona Lott wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes..... yet another vast conspiracy. Fool the idiots into thinking everything is fixed. Can't fool you, though. You don't have any sense to begin with. You're just another boring lunatic.
You can't fool conservatives but you have been fooling others however the debate has opened minds because your anti-Christian messiah was shown how clueless he is without his teleprompter.

The tide is turning.

Bye bye liberals you had a 4 year run and all you did was inflict pain and misery on the country while turning a blind eye to radical Islam which is now rampant due to Obama.

The country has had enough so bye bye.
Duke for Mayor

Uniontown, OH

#556 Oct 8, 2012
Mittens is Hitler in better clothes.

woof

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

#558 Oct 8, 2012
Duke for Mayor wrote:
Mittens is Hitler in better clothes.
woof
I hope he knocks off wearing those 'mom' jeans soon. I neer tbought I could say it, but he looks so uncomfortable in those jeans it is pathetic. He probably borrowed them from one of those Stepford sons of his. I bet he has to grit his teeth to put on something as common as blue jeans to run around in while campaigning. We GET it, Mitt, you're "down to earth" and "cool".
Cletus

San Antonio, TX

#559 Oct 8, 2012
Vote for Mitt and help end the gay scourge once and for all in this great land of the free!!!
Mona Lott

Brooklyn, NY

#560 Oct 8, 2012
luv Sarah Palin wrote:
<quoted text>
You can't fool conservatives but you have been fooling others however the debate has opened minds because your anti-Christian messiah was shown how clueless he is without his teleprompter.
The tide is turning.
Bye bye liberals you had a 4 year run and all you did was inflict pain and misery on the country while turning a blind eye to radical Islam which is now rampant due to Obama.
The country has had enough so bye bye.
Radical Islam is now "rampant due to Obama," eh? It looks to me as if radical STUPIDITY is rampant in your neck of the woods.
Mona Lott

Brooklyn, NY

#561 Oct 8, 2012
luv Sarah Palin wrote:
<quoted text>
Rush is brilliant and he has these libs pegged for the clueless idiots that they are.
Thank you Mitt Romney for showing the world how clueless Obama is.
"Key Obama supporters now turning on him"
http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/poll-key-obama-con...
hahahahaha
ahhaahhahahah
ahhaahhahah

Rush is a drug-addled nincompoop and known liar. He does play well to idiots like you, though.
Mona Lott

Brooklyn, NY

#562 Oct 8, 2012
Cletus wrote:
Vote for Mitt and help end the gay scourge once and for all in this great land of the free!!!
Like he did in Massachusettes when he was governor?

ahhahahahaha
ahahahahhaha
ahahahahahha

“What Goes Around, Comes Around”

Since: Mar 07

Kansas City, MO.

#563 Oct 8, 2012
Mona Lott wrote:
<quoted text>
hahahahaha
ahhaahhahahah
ahhaahhahah
Rush is a drug-addled nincompoop and known liar. He does play well to idiots like you, though.
yea, along with his 3 failed marriages.
xxxrayted

Brook Park, OH

#564 Oct 8, 2012
notlocal wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think there is a dead, solid number on the true unemployment in the US. People have run out of benefits and are not employed, but not counted as unemployed. Many have taken low paying jobs with no benefits. More are employed part time.
What I do know for certain is that 873,000 jobs were not created in a month. So the 7.8 is incorrect.
There is less take home pay.
Prices on everything are higher.
More people are on assistance and they don't want to be. We'll always have the 20% that do.
I disagree. I think a lot of these people want to be on the dole. Free money.

I know several friends and family members who were on unemployment. They were living it up; I don't mean spending wise, but leisure wise. Some like my neighbor worked part time doing odd jobs. Another person I know started to scrap metal. He would go out on garbage night and fill up his truck full of anything that could be turned in for scrap. He made about $30.00 per load all cash so the government had no idea. He went to different neighborhoods so he was getting scrap five nights a week.

Talking with my neighbor, after taxes, he brought home $370.00 per week on unemployment. Not bad money for staying home. Between that and working under the table, it would have been stupid of him to take a job paying less than $15.00 per hour, and he is not a skilled worker.

You bet people milk their unemployment until nearly the last day. Who can blame them? I would too. A two year paid vacation. I could use it now. Another friend of mine works at the steel mills. He found out they were laying people off, so he offered to be the next guy on the chopping block, but somebody with a year more seniority beat him to it. Imagine that, people wanting to get laid off? You can't blame them though, on top of unemployment, they get 90% of their pay too, so they make more money staying at home than they do working.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#565 Oct 8, 2012
There's only ONE poll that matters: November 6th.

IGNORE the polling numbers and GET OUT THE VOTE !!!!

Since: Jul 12

Columbia, MD

#566 Oct 8, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
I disagree. I think a lot of these people want to be on the dole. Free money.
I know several friends and family members who were on unemployment. They were living it up; I don't mean spending wise, but leisure wise. Some like my neighbor worked part time doing odd jobs. Another person I know started to scrap metal. He would go out on garbage night and fill up his truck full of anything that could be turned in for scrap. He made about $30.00 per load all cash so the government had no idea. He went to different neighborhoods so he was getting scrap five nights a week.
Talking with my neighbor, after taxes, he brought home $370.00 per week on unemployment. Not bad money for staying home. Between that and working under the table, it would have been stupid of him to take a job paying less than $15.00 per hour, and he is not a skilled worker.
You bet people milk their unemployment until nearly the last day. Who can blame them? I would too. A two year paid vacation. I could use it now. Another friend of mine works at the steel mills. He found out they were laying people off, so he offered to be the next guy on the chopping block, but somebody with a year more seniority beat him to it. Imagine that, people wanting to get laid off? You can't blame them though, on top of unemployment, they get 90% of their pay too, so they make more money staying at home than they do working.
You do an excellent job of constructing a story to suit your purposes. To bad reality exists. What is the average time someone stays on unemployment
xxxrayted

Brook Park, OH

#567 Oct 8, 2012
okb2 wrote:
<quoted text>
You do an excellent job of constructing a story to suit your purposes. To bad reality exists. What is the average time someone stays on unemployment
7/10/2012 @ 4:22PM |21,414 views
Why Long-Term Unemployment Has Doubled Under President Obama

The media has focused on prolonged unemployment over 8 percent, while generally downplaying a shocker: the soaring number of people unemployed for more than 6 months.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, back in January 2009 when Barack Obama was sworn in, there were 2.6 million people unemployed for more than 6 months. By June 2012, the ranks of the long-term jobless soared more than 100 percent to 5.3 million.

President Obama has promoted long-term unemployment by adopting policies that make it harder and more expensive for employers to hire people. He has relentlessly pushed for higher taxes, higher energy costs, compulsory unionism and, of course, Obamacare. One doesn’t need a Harvard degree to figure out that when government makes hiring more difficult and expensive, there’s likely to be less of it.

Obama’s policy of extending and re-extending unemployment benefits is another culprit. Many academic studies show how unemployment benefits undermine the urgency of finding a job. People can afford to be more picky, and as a result they’re out of work longer. But the longer they’re out of work, the more out of touch they’re likely to be and the harder to find a another job.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jimpowell/2012/07...

Since: Jul 12

Fort Huachuca, AZ

#568 Oct 9, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
7/10/2012 @ 4:22PM |21,414 views
Why Long-Term Unemployment Has Doubled Under President Obama
The media has focused on prolonged unemployment over 8 percent, while generally downplaying a shocker: the soaring number of people unemployed for more than 6 months.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, back in January 2009 when Barack Obama was sworn in, there were 2.6 million people unemployed for more than 6 months. By June 2012, the ranks of the long-term jobless soared more than 100 percent to 5.3 million.
President Obama has promoted long-term unemployment by adopting policies that make it harder and more expensive for employers to hire people. He has relentlessly pushed for higher taxes, higher energy costs, compulsory unionism and, of course, Obamacare. One doesn’t need a Harvard degree to figure out that when government makes hiring more difficult and expensive, there’s likely to be less of it.
Obama’s policy of extending and re-extending unemployment benefits is another culprit. Many academic studies show how unemployment benefits undermine the urgency of finding a job. People can afford to be more picky, and as a result they’re out of work longer. But the longer they’re out of work, the more out of touch they’re likely to be and the harder to find a another job.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jimpowell/2012/07...
Again, you do an excellent job of constructing a reality that has nothing to do with question asked.

Let me rephrase the question and break it down for you.

1. How many people who start drawing unemployment benefits draw the entire 26 weeks of normal benfits before getting a job?

2. Of the people that go on extended benefits, how many use all their weeks before getting a job?

3. What is the average time people stay on unemployment before getting a job?

Since: Jul 12

Fort Huachuca, AZ

#569 Oct 9, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
7/10/2012 @ 4:22PM |21,414 views
Why Long-Term Unemployment Has Doubled Under President Obama
The media has focused on prolonged unemployment over 8 percent, while generally downplaying a shocker: the soaring number of people unemployed for more than 6 months.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, back in January 2009 when Barack Obama was sworn in, there were 2.6 million people unemployed for more than 6 months. By June 2012, the ranks of the long-term jobless soared more than 100 percent to 5.3 million.
President Obama has promoted long-term unemployment by adopting policies that make it harder and more expensive for employers to hire people. He has relentlessly pushed for higher taxes, higher energy costs, compulsory unionism and, of course, Obamacare. One doesn’t need a Harvard degree to figure out that when government makes hiring more difficult and expensive, there’s likely to be less of it.
Obama’s policy of extending and re-extending unemployment benefits is another culprit. Many academic studies show how unemployment benefits undermine the urgency of finding a job. People can afford to be more picky, and as a result they’re out of work longer. But the longer they’re out of work, the more out of touch they’re likely to be and the harder to find a another job.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jimpowell/2012/07...
The median time on unemployment (50% longer, 50% shorter) is less than 19 weeks.

The average is longer showing that people with marketable skills and/or in the right age groups have little trouble getting a job while those outside those bounderies (say 57 years old or older) have a hard time getting a job. This is true even when they may have marketable skills.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t12.ht...

The fact is, there is a lack of jobs, not a lack of people willing to work. There are a few instances where there is a mismatched skill set where an employer is looking for a specific skill set that no longer exists.........due to unemployment.

TomInElPaso

“Impeach the reality show actor”

Since: Dec 08

El Paso, TX

#570 Oct 9, 2012
Your quoting an OPINION piece not a research article.

Bogus at best.
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
7/10/2012 @ 4:22PM |21,414 views
Why Long-Term Unemployment Has Doubled Under President Obama
The media has focused on prolonged unemployment over 8 percent, while generally downplaying a shocker: the soaring number of people unemployed for more than 6 months.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, back in January 2009 when Barack Obama was sworn in, there were 2.6 million people unemployed for more than 6 months. By June 2012, the ranks of the long-term jobless soared more than 100 percent to 5.3 million.
President Obama has promoted long-term unemployment by adopting policies that make it harder and more expensive for employers to hire people. He has relentlessly pushed for higher taxes, higher energy costs, compulsory unionism and, of course, Obamacare. One doesn’t need a Harvard degree to figure out that when government makes hiring more difficult and expensive, there’s likely to be less of it.
Obama’s policy of extending and re-extending unemployment benefits is another culprit. Many academic studies show how unemployment benefits undermine the urgency of finding a job. People can afford to be more picky, and as a result they’re out of work longer. But the longer they’re out of work, the more out of touch they’re likely to be and the harder to find a another job.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jimpowell/2012/07...

TomInElPaso

“Impeach the reality show actor”

Since: Dec 08

El Paso, TX

#571 Oct 9, 2012
You're

“Stop the liberal madness”

Since: Sep 10

Location hidden

#572 Oct 9, 2012
TomInElPaso wrote:
Your quoting an OPINION piece not a research article.
Bogus at best.
<quoted text>
What a pleasant surprise.

I can not find the post but recall you laughed when I said that Romney would win the debate and than you went on with your usual gay self-righteous tangent .

Tsk tsk tsk.

I want to add that he will also win the election.

Don't ever accept a job as a political commentator because you are liberal clueless.
notlocal

AOL

#573 Oct 9, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
I disagree. I think a lot of these people want to be on the dole. Free money.
I know several friends and family members who were on unemployment. They were living it up; I don't mean spending wise, but leisure wise. Some like my neighbor worked part time doing odd jobs. Another person I know started to scrap metal. He would go out on garbage night and fill up his truck full of anything that could be turned in for scrap. He made about $30.00 per load all cash so the government had no idea. He went to different neighborhoods so he was getting scrap five nights a week.
Talking with my neighbor, after taxes, he brought home $370.00 per week on unemployment. Not bad money for staying home. Between that and working under the table, it would have been stupid of him to take a job paying less than $15.00 per hour, and he is not a skilled worker.
You bet people milk their unemployment until nearly the last day. Who can blame them? I would too. A two year paid vacation. I could use it now. Another friend of mine works at the steel mills. He found out they were laying people off, so he offered to be the next guy on the chopping block, but somebody with a year more seniority beat him to it. Imagine that, people wanting to get laid off? You can't blame them though, on top of unemployment, they get 90% of their pay too, so they make more money staying at home than they do working.
Hey, xxx. I know and I agree with you on some of it. My own step son collected unemployment for almost TWO years while working under the table; and his "baby momma" (hate that term) was on welfare, food stamps, energy assistance, free medical for her and her daughter, help with housing and daycare assistance. And, yes, their money was not spent wisely. Makes you want to throw up.

And there are millions like them across the country.

But I think the peoole that have really been forced to go on unemployment, who have mortgages and car payments they can't possibly meet, I think they'd rather be working.

My husband worked for two companies in 23 years, and the second was only due to him relocating, and since 2008, he's worked for 5, although he was called back to one 3 times for short periods. And his resume is outstanding.

Plus where he used to have 5 men, safe crews, ALL the companies have cut back to 3 men crews.

Now if Romney is elected and we head towrads energy independence, he'll be able to pick and chose.

But we have my income, no kids at home and no bills, really. I feel so sorry for families with kids and mortgages.

TomInElPaso

“Impeach the reality show actor”

Since: Dec 08

El Paso, TX

#574 Oct 9, 2012
You just go ahead and keep counting on that. Meanwhile we'll keep making sure Romney doesn't get the states he needs. Nothing much has changed at this point no matter how you count it.
luv Sarah Palin wrote:
<quoted text>
What a pleasant surprise.
I can not find the post but recall you laughed when I said that Romney would win the debate and than you went on with your usual gay self-righteous tangent .
Tsk tsk tsk.
I want to add that he will also win the election.
Don't ever accept a job as a political commentator because you are liberal clueless.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#575 Oct 9, 2012
luv Sarah Palin wrote:
<quoted text>
What a pleasant surprise.
I can not find the post but recall you laughed when I said that Romney would win the debate and than you went on with your usual gay self-righteous tangent .
Tsk tsk tsk.
I want to add that he will also win the election.
Don't ever accept a job as a political commentator because you are liberal clueless.
Win/Loss, especially in this debate format (without specific points of argument and rebuttal) is purely subjective.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

US News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 min flack 1,643,945
News Trump all but endorses GOP's Moore despite sex ... 3 min Retribution 69
News Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 3 min Aquarius-WY 320,485
News Democratic senator apologizes for making some w... 6 min Geezer 2
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 6 min Jim-ca 42,607
News Twenty years later, there's little hope that Jo... (Dec '16) 8 min BrotherMoon 19
News U.S. Middle District court indicts 4 illegal al... 8 min tomin cali 1
News Many Christian conservatives are backing Alabam... 13 min Lawrence Wolf 236
News Sen. Al Franken accused of inappropriate behavi... 17 min Lawrence Wolf 155
News Trump discounts sex assault accusations against... 34 min iamcuriousnow 67
News White House will override Obama's climate plan 1 hr Big Al 1,220
More from around the web