Petition Tag - presidential

Facebook is the most used social network on the world wide web today with an average of approximately 1.01 Billion users per month. It's used to advertise, reconnect with family and friends as well as campaign for any political office.

Why not go one step further and allow the American people to cast the vote on Voting day via Facebook. You can pay bills, watch, television, go to school and so many other things via the Internet, why not make it easy for someone to cast their vote for their candidate via a secure app on Facebook.

There are so many Facebook users that would love to vote but for various reasons may not be able to physically get out to do it. Facebook would give them that chance. Facebook was flooded during the presidential debates. Imagine if every one of those users were able to cast their vote and really take part of their American Right. The turnout would be tremendous. The American voice would definitely be heard.

View petition

Randall Hank Williams (born May 26, 1949), better known as Hank Williams, Jr., is an award-winning American country singer-songwriter and musician.

Williams has been politically involved with the Republican Party. On October 13, 2008, at a rally in Virginia Beach for Republican Presidential nominee John McCain, he performed "McCain-Palin Tradition", a song in support of McCain and his Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin.

On November 17, 2008, Williams announced that he will run for the U.S. Senate in 2012 as a Republican party candidate, challenging incumbent Republican Senator Bob Corker. Williams was reported to have already consulted with Senator Lamar Alexander and former Senator Bill Frist, both Republicans from Tennessee. Bocephus for President in 2012!!!

View petition

On 12th of June 2009 people of Iran voted for change but their votes were stolen and the loser Ahmadi Nejad claimed victory.

People challenged the authorities and asked for openness and transparency, the authorities ignored people and labeled them as "dust & dirt”.

People poured to streets and protested, the government banned protests and mobilized forces and pain cloths mercenaries to insult them Instead of defending people’s rights, some hand selected deputies, sit obediently in the parliament, Majles, to serve their own private interests Ministry of Interior affairs does not allow legal and peaceful demonstrations, but send riot police with tear gas, water bombs and guns to attach them.

A number of universities and dormitories have been viciously invaded by security forces and their plain clothes collaborators.

Mrs. Shirin Ebadi, the only Iranian Noble peace Laurite, has condemned the brutality of Iranian authorities, and now the Judiciary system has summoned her and is going to prosecute her.

View petition

We can stop the killing of Iranian protesters; we can bring the perpetrators to justice.

View petition

A Congressional Gold Medal is an award bestowed by the United States Congress and is, along with the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the highest civilian award in the United States. The decoration is awarded to an individual who performs an outstanding deed or act of service to the security, prosperity, and national interest of the United States. American citizenship is not a requirement.

The Gold Medal and the Presidential Medal of Freedom are generally considered to carry the same level of prestige (though significantly fewer Gold Medals have been awarded). The chief difference between the two is that the Freedom Medal is personally awarded by the President of the United States (executive branch), and Congressional Gold Medals are awarded by acts of the Congress (legislative branch). Per committee rules, legislation bestowing a Congressional Gold Medal upon a recipient must be co-sponsored by two-thirds of the membership of both the House of Representatives and the Senate before their respective committees will consider it.

Since the American Revolution, Congress has commissioned gold medals as its highest expression of national appreciation for distinguished achievements and contributions. Each medal honors a particular individual, institution, or event. Although the first recipients included citizens who participated in the American Revolution, the War of 1812 and the Mexican-American War, Congress broadened the scope of the medal to include actors, authors, entertainers, musicians, pioneers in aeronautics and space, explorers, lifesavers, notables in science and medicine, athletes, humanitarians, public servants, and foreign recipients.

Bob Dylan has been among the pre eminent artists of the 20th and 21st centuries in the United States. His impact on popular culture particularly in song form, performance and the creation of highly personal songwriting which is simultaneously deeply linked to American folk music and popular arts is unique and worthy of this singular award.

View petition

This petition is being utilized as a real-time voting tool online. This effort is sponsored by the social network "Candidate Forum 2008: The American Presidential Election". See the web-link above.

View petition

This petition is being utilized as a real-time voting tool online. This effort is sponsored by the social network "Candidate Forum 2008: The American Presidential Election". See the web-link above.

View petition

This petition is being utilized as a real-time voting tool online. This effort is sponsored by the social network "Candidate Forum 2008: The American Presidential Election". See the web-link above.

View petition

This petition is being utilized as a real-time voting tool online. This effort is sponsored by the social network "Candidate Forum 2008: The American Presidential Election". See the web-link above.

View petition

This petition is being utilized as a real-time voting tool online. This effort is sponsored by the social network "Candidate Forum 2008: The American Presidential Election". See the web-link above.

View petition

This petition is being utilized as a real-time voting tool online. This effort is sponsored by the social network "Candidate Forum 2008: The American Presidential Election". See the web-link above.

View petition

This petition is being utilized as a real-time voting tool online. This effort is sponsored by the social network "Candidate Forum 2008: The American Presidential Election". See the web-link above.

View petition

This petition is being utilized as a real-time voting tool online. This effort is sponsored by the social network "Candidate Forum 2008: The American Presidential Election". See the web-link above.

View petition

This petition is being utilized as a real-time voting tool online. This effort is sponsored by the social network "Candidate Forum 2008: The American Presidential Election". See the web-link above.

View petition

This petition is being utilized as a real-time voting tool online. This effort is sponsored by the social network "Candidate Forum 2008: The American Presidential Election". See the web-link above.

View petition

This petition is being utilized as a real-time voting tool online. This effort is sponsored by the social network "Candidate Forum 2008: The American Presidential Election". See the web-link above.

View petition

This petition is being utilized as a real-time voting tool online. This effort is sponsored by the social network "Candidate Forum 2008: The American Presidential Election". See the web-link above.

View petition

THE OBJECTIVE:

This petition supports the simple idea that having choices in a democracy means being able to hear and see candidates from outside of the two parties that have had exclusive control of American politics for the past 200 years.


^^^^Breaking News^^^^

Third Party Debate date set: Oct. 19, 2008

Go to www.ThirdPartyTicket.com for details.

Please still sign this petition!

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

THE OBJECTIVE is for you to take a stand and SUPPORT REAL DEMOCRACY by encouraging four serious, highly experienced, and patriotic candidates running on the Libertarian, Green, Constitutional and Independent platforms (see details below) to hold televised and otherwise broadcast (e.g. YouTube, radio) presidential and vice presidential debates. The debates must take place as soon as possible and regardless of whether the Democratic and Republican candidates, who control the regular debate process, choose to participate.


This petition is addressed to:

1. Third party candidates (first and foremost) - because they must collaborate to organize the debates, publicize them and push for media coverage.

2. The media - because Americans want to have real options and hear real issues!

3. Sympathetic celebrities, politicians and other figures who can use their visibility to speak out and otherwise support the effort.

4. American voters - as one official noted in 1966 about Civil Rights-era mobilization in Mississippi, “the petition ‘is a forceful and dramatic expression of the feelings of [the] people…It does show that there is a good deal of organization at the grass roots level (cited in Andrews 2001, p. 88).’ ”

The petition is NOT an endorsement of any one candidate.

The petition is an endorsement of freedom of speech and voter's rights to have real options and to hear about real issues - not lipstick!

**(Worried about the “spoiler effect”? Read about it below.)**

THE PROBLEM:

The Commission on Presidential Debates, created and run exclusively by the Democrats and Republicans, has sole control over who can participate in the regular televised presidential debates. The Commission’s rules prohibit any serious candidates from participating in any debates even if they have collected the hundreds of thousands of signatures necessary to get onto all state ballots and have millions of supporters among voters.

Participation is allowed only for candidates polling at or above 15% nationally. This threshold is completely unreasonable for anyone who does not have millions and millions of dollars to buy media exposure. The commission’s rules are designed only to give the two parties exclusive control for setting the national agenda.

Candidates who can not participate in televised debates have no chance to rise in national rankings. At the same time, the Democrats and Republicans simply claim that there are no “serious” candidates out there - and so the cycle continues! Consequently, the debate rules effectively stifle any real discussion of the issues not covered by the two parties.


HOW YOU CAN TAKE A STAND

In early September, 2008, Ron Paul, a Republican congressman and former presidential candidate from Texas convened a conference at the National Press Club that brought together an impressive group of third party candidates from across the political spectrum: Chuck Baldwin, Cynthia McKinney, Ralph Nader and Bob Barr (Barr did not attend the conference but supports the joint effort). The candidates have different platforms, but all agree on several key issues, including, for example, ending the Iraq War, opposing the Patriot Act and opening up the presidential debates!
(Read all five points of agreement among the candidates here: http://www.votenader.org/weagree/)

You can also watch the entire Ron Paul/ third party conference here:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3638895556974831116&ei=NvTLSMfnFI7IqALikMDOAg&q=ron+paul+nader&vt=lf

With the initial boost from the Ron Paul conference, it is time for American voters to encourage third party candidates to go even further and organize open, democratic presidential debates, even if McCain and Obama decline to take part! It is time for the media to broadcast real debates and real issues. You can show your support by signing this petition.


Worried about the “spoiler effect”?

Convinced that Ralph Nader could “spoil” the election for the Democrats? Well, Bob Barr, the former Republican congressman and now Libertarian presidential candidate is being sued by the McCain campaign for ballot access because Republicans believe that he may take away their votes. So what does this mean? It means that third party candidates represent a range of political positions and therefore any votes they get will affect both the Democratic and Republican candidates, not just one side or the other.

Want to hear even more convincing arguments? Watch the third party candidates talk about the issues of “spoiling” the election for McCain and Obama, as well as many other important topics. Check out these YouTube videos:

McCain vs. Bob Barr lawsuit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASzndumNspE

Bob Barr on “spoiling” the election for McCain:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsFnh0SfGY4

Ron Paul on “fragmenting the Republican party” and other issues:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76se34N1K28
(*Note: Ron Paul is not running for president)

Ralph Nader on “spoiling” for Democrats: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KV8shKupf2I

Ralph Nader on many other issues: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjUcQeUNsbE


The CANDIDATES and select ISSUES (As of Sept. 17, 2008)

Bob Barr (Libertarian Party)

-Former Republican congressman and U.S. Attorney from Georgia
-On 44 state ballots
-Supports free market capitalism
-Supports personal liberty
-Advocates for a small federal government
-Supports expanding private healthcare insurance policies
Website: http://www.bobbarr2008.com/

Chuck Baldwin (Constitution Party)

-Pastor, conservative political activist
-On 37 state ballots
-Strongly pro-life
-Supports strict interpretation of the constitution
-Advocates gun ownership
-Favors giving more control over education to communities and parents
Website: http://www.baldwin08.com/

Cynthia McKinney (Green Party)

-Former Democratic congresswoman from Georgia, teacher.
-On 32 state ballots
-Strong abortion rights supporter
-Supports increasing welfare state
-Advocates for environmental protection
-Opposes war on drugs
Website: http://votetruth08.com/

Ralph Nader (Independent)

-Consumer rights advocate, lawyer, progressive political activist
-On 46 state ballots.
-Supports single payer national healthcare
-Supports impeaching Bush and Cheney
-Opposes nuclear energy but supports solar
-Wants to strengthen the civil justice system
Website: http://www.votenader.org/index.html

View petition

It is the Delegates that place a Presidential Nominee on the ballot.

It is the Electoral College that puts a President in office.

The peoples' votes do NOT count!

View petition

Much has been said by candidates in the Democratic Party Primary of utilizing Superdelegates and / or the seating of the Michigan and Florida delegates to provide a candidate with the required delegate count for election as the Democratic Presidential candidate.

This has been said while acknowledging that the use of such Superdelegates could go against the pledged delegate count, and thus the will of the Democratic Party Primary voters.

The seating of the Florida and Michigan delegates has also been proposed in clear opposition to the solution agreed upon by the DNC, and all candidates, to address the refusal of those two states to not move their Democratic Primaries earlier in the calendar year. This has been proposed by a Democratic candidate, despite the fact that, prior to the Primary, that candidate and staff members had previously agreed to the DNC decision to not seat those delegations.

The net effect of either of the above could serve to nominate a candidate in a way that would obviate the will of the Democratic Primary voters.

This petition is a way to serve notice to those in power in the Democratic Party and the candidates participating in this Presidential Primary that such tactics are viewed by the signers of this petition as a fatal breach of the trust of the members of the Democratic Party.

In particular, such a breach of trust is viewed as so serious that the signers of this petition would actively work to insure that such a candidate is not elected to the highest office in the land.

The most essential ingredient of democracy is in the expression of the will of the people by their vote. A presidential candidate that would subvert that will for their own gain, no matter what the claimed ideal, is not deserving of that office.

View petition

Dear Friends of a Free Media,

Well, if not free, at least allowing all opinions to be heard in a presidential race.

The impetus for this movement was the exclusion of candidates from the recent MSNBC debate in Nevada. MSNBC, owned by GE, used its legal muscle to overturn a judge's order to INCLUDE all the candidates. What's pathetic is that there even was an order in the first place.

The AIR WAVES, for those who remember the distant past, are supposed to be owned by the public. The corporations who run the television networks have definitely FORGOTTEN that and allege that as "private entities" they have the right to limit the voices and viewpoints you hear on these air waves.

Progressive Democrats of Los Angeles disagrees and unanimously passed this resolution which requests our Democratic National Party to REQUIRE the inclusion of all candidates in nationally televised debates. However, this issue transcends the present presidential campaign and needs to be in place for ALL FUTURE DEBATES. Because we are a Democratic club, we are directing this to our own party. It had been noted that this should apply to the Republican party also, but that is not included in this resolution, and it was observed that the blatant exclusions have not occurred with their candidates this election cycle.

If you wish to SIGN ON to this resolution,
PLEASE add your e-mail and zip. And, PLEASE FORWARD this to your contacts so that they can be included. Thank you all!!

View petition

Ron Paul needs our support on all levels. Today, the very first primary, will set a tone for the whole election. If Ron Paul wins a landslide victory, then the mainstream media will be forced to give him attention.

Today may be the most important day of our entire life. We have never had an opportunity like this to elect a president who is sparking a grassroots freedom movement which is growing daily.

View petition

Hon Kibaki, allow the will of Kenyans to prevail, agree to re count, the Presidential ballots of last year's election, and step down should you be proven to have won it wrongly.

Be a true leader, and let the true winner be the Fourth President and have a dignified legacy.

View petition

The legitamacy of the current government of Kenya is questionable given the outcry and demonstration of disgust being expressed by the citizens after the announcement of the presidential results.

The results were further dented when the chairman of the electoral commission when asked in an interview after the announcement was non committal on whether the current president actually won.

To help in the reconciliation process, the truth about the actual winner should be established and if to the reverse then the present results revoked and either the actual winner sworn in or repeat presidential elections be organised by an independent body within three months and treat the present government as interim.

View petition

The electoral college is one of the many compromises written into the t United States Constitution in 1787. The founding fathers devised the electoral college to elect the president but they did not anticipate the emergence of national political parties or a communications network able to bring presidential candidates before the entire electorate.

Providing that the president be chosen indirectly through the “electoral college” rather than directly by the voters in November was one of the founders’ hedges against “popular passion.” In the beginning, the electors had very real powers to work their will. Now, their sole function is to confirm a decision made by the electorate six weeks earlier.

Under the Constitution, each state is authorized to choose electors for president and vice president, the number always being the same as the combined number of U.S. senators and representatives allotted to that state. With 100 senators and 435 representatives in the United States, plus three electors for the District of Columbia provided by the Twenty-third Amendment, the total electoral college vote is 538.

Makeup and operation of the electoral college itself are tightly defined by the Constitution, but the method of choosing electors is left to the states. In the beginning many states did not provide for popular election of the presidential electors. Today, however, electors are chosen by direct popular vote in every state.

When voters vote for president, they are actually voting for the electors pledged to their presidential candidate. (Electors are named by state party organizations. Serving as an elector is considered an honor, a reward for faithful service.)
With the political parties in control of presidential politics, the function of the electoral college has changed drastically. Rather than having individuals seek to become electors and then vote for whomever they please for president, the parties have turned the process upside down by arranging slates of electors, all pledged to support the candidate nominated by the party.

In the earliest days of the electoral college, quite the opposite was true. Electors cast their votes for individual candidates rather than for party slates, with the majority winner being elected president and the runner-up, vice president. This made for some bizarre situations, as in 1796 when the Federalist John Adams, with 71 votes, became president and the Democratic-Republican Thomas Jefferson, with 68, vice president- roughly equivalent in modern times to an election in which Bush and Dukakis would end up as president and vice president.

In 1800 Jefferson and his running mate, Aaron Burr, each won an identical number of electoral votes, forcing the election into the House of Representatives, which resolved it in Jefferson’s favor. It was to avoid any similar occurrence that the Twelfth Amendment was passed in 1804. This amendment required the electors to cast two separate ballots, one for president and the other for vice president. This is the only constitutional change that has been made in the electoral college system, other than to add three electoral votes for the District of Columbia in 1961.

Presidential and vice presidential candidates of a party run as a team. In most of the states, it is the names of the candidates rather than the names of the electors that appear on the ballot; in the other states, both candidates and electors are identified. The victor in each state is determined by counting the votes for each slate of electors; the slate receiving the most votes (the plurality, not necessarily the majority of the votes cast) is declared the winner.

To be elected to the presidency a candidate must receive an absolute majority (270) of the electoral votes cast. If no candidate receives a majority, the House of Representatives picks the winner from the top three, with each state delegation in the House casting only one vote, regardless of its size. Only two U.S. elections have been decided this way (1800 and 1824).

The vice president is elected at the same time by the same indirect winner-take-all method that chooses the president, but the electors vote separately for the two offices. If no vice presidential candidate receives a majority, the Senate picks the winner from the top two, each senator voting as an individual. The Senate has not made the choice since 1836.

Pro/Con -
Another problem cited by critics is the possibility of “faithless electors” who defect from the candidate to whom they are pledged. Most recently, in 1976, a Republican elector in the state of Washington cast his vote for Ronald Reagan instead of Gerald Ford, the Republican presidential candidate. Earlier, in 1972, a Republican elector in Virginia deserted Nixon to vote for the Libertarian party candidate. And in 1968, Nixon lost another Virginia elector, who bolted to George Wallace.

The main danger of faithless electors is that the candidate who wins the popular vote could wind up one or two votes short of a majority in the electoral college and could lose the election on a technicality. This prospect becomes more probable when there are third-party or independent candidates who could negotiate with electors before they vote.

Those who argue in favor of retaining the present system state that there is too much uncertainty over whether any other method would be an improvement. They point out that many of the complaints about the electoral college apply just as well to the Senate and, to some extent, to the House. They fear that reform could lead to the dismantling of the federal system.

View petition

This petition is in responce to the recent events surrounding the rights and libierties of teh Ukrainian people and their right to fair, open and transparent elections.

This petition seeks to call on teh Australian Givernment to join the international community in supporting the right of Ukraininans to democracy choose their President and for the conduct of elections to be Honest, open and transparent.

In doing so demonstrate to the world Austrlia's leadership in democratic development by reinforcing its relationship with Ukraine and the Ukrainian people;

The Austraolian Givernment should also take such steps as necessary to deny Australian entry visa's to person(s) who attempt or have been found to have been guilty of falsify the results, or interfering with the democratic rights associated with the conduct and the outcome of the 2004 Ukrainian Presidential Election.

View petition

John Kerry should release his full military service record to the public, just as he and other Democrats demanded that President Bush do. President Bush complied and his full military record was released to the public. Senator Kerry still refuses to allow his records to be released. All that is required is his authorization and confusion over the circumstances by which he received 3 Purple Hearts in three months and only spent 4 months in Vietnam - returning home to be discharged early from the military.

These are important issues that should and must be addressed and all rumors could be put to rest with the release of the full military record.

View petition

The necessity and urgency of fair and accurate oversight of the 2004 US Presidential Elections is of paramount concern for hundreds of thousands of people who know for fact that their vote did not count. Whether it was by means of physically preventing voting at the polls, an intentional miscount of their vote, or purposeful deception that rendered their vote ineligible, a significant portion of the American population does not feel that the 2000 Presidential Election was executed with democracy and fairness in mind.

The American people have not been given any reason to believe that 2004 Presidential Election will be any different.

View petition

PETITION TO STOP PROSECUTION AGAINST LEADERS OF THE DEMOCRACY MOVEMENT FOR PEACEFULLY EXERCISING THE INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED RIGHT OF A CITIZEN TO RETURN TO HIS OR HER HOMELAND (Article 13, Universal Declaration of Human Rights)

For 42 years the Cuban military government has divided the Cuban families and their nation and has established a very lucrative industry from that division at the rate of one billion dollars annually. Practically every family unit has been divided. Even Castro's own family has been affected from his own totalitarian policies with his daughter Alina and sister Juanita both living in exile.

To keep this infamous policy in place (and the profits from family division), Castro discriminates his own countrymen who live outside Cuba. A "visa" system has been established for Cubans living aboard to return to their homeland to see their families. They have to acquire a visa as if they were foreigners in their own homeland so that they can be limited in the days that they may stay in Cuba. Castro then uses the visa to discriminate who can visit and who cannot. This is a clear violation of Article 13th of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of which Cuba is a signatory. More so when Castro allows American vessels from the Florida Keys to enter Cuba without a visa for 72 hours while prohibiting Cubans from the United States from doing the same, a clear practice of discrimination based on national origins.

For many years now, the Democracy Movement, a non-violent, pro-democracy civil and human rights advocacy organization has been struggling to reunite the Cuban People in their homeland with growing support both in exile and in the Island. Requests addressed to the Cuban Government have been ignored. Attempts to peacefully exercise the "right to return" have been met with violence. Unfortunately, the US Government has succumbed to Castro's threats of a massive exodus to the US and Washington came up a Presidential Proclamation (6867) under which it joins the Cuban regime in discriminating Cuban nationals --more directly the members of the Democracy Movement--in what relates to the right to return to one's homeland. Presidential Proclamation is selectively enforced against the Democracy Movement: in the six years since it was enacted, three thousand permits have been given by the US Coast Guard to Americans to enter Cuba by boat and only three have been denied--all three from the Democracy Movement. This is even recognized by the US Coast Guard in their own web page www.uscg.com. Under the Proclamation only three vessels have been confiscated since it was enacted: the "M/V Democracia", the "M/V Human Rights" and the "M/V My Right To Return Home", all three from the Democracy Movement. Since enacted, only three people have been criminally charged and are now facing trial: Ramon Saul Sanchez, Alberto Perez and Pablo Rodriguez, all three, leaders of the Democracy Movement.

These three men are facing 15 years incarceration each and $10,000 fine for having peacefully entered their waters on July 14, 2001, during a memorial flotilla to drop flowers and say prayers for the innocent children and adults that had been murdered by Cuban gunboats in those same waters on July 13, 1994.

Serious constitutional violations exist in this case. Equally serious are the violations of universally recognized rights, such as the right to return to one's country, the right to free travel, the right to freedom of expression, the right to equal treatment under the law and to not be discriminated against based on nationality and beliefs, etc.; all done--according to the Proclamation's main objective--to preserve "international relations" with the murderer of thousands of Cubans, a renown sponsor of international terrorism, a denounced torturer by the Geneva Convention on Human Rights, and a preacher of hatred and violence against the People of the United States and other nations of the world he dislikes.

Please, make the difference by petitioning the President of the United States, Mr. George W. Bush, to stop prosecution against Ramon Saul, Pablo and Alberto, and to rescind Presidential Proclamantion, 6867. Help us bring down the walls of family division that have caused and continue to cause so much suffering to millions of human beings both in Cuba and in the US.

For additional information, please e-mail us at movidemo@aol.com or call 305-264-7200. Someday the today oppressed people of Cuba will be able to reunite freely in their homeland, and we will not forget those who raised their voices for us in the midst of our plight.

View petition