Commission on Presidential Debates
Commission on Presidential Debates
It's Time for a Woman Moderator: Equality in the 2012 Presidential Debates!
(Note: To sign a second petition calling on the Romney and Obama campaigns to support the call for a woman presidential debate moderator, please go here: http://www.change.org/petitions/obama-and-romney-support-the-call-for-a-woman-to-moderate-a-presidential-debate) This is an exciting time to be a young woman interested in politics. Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin’s presidential and vice presidential campaigns put women in the spotlight in the political realm in 2008, finally providing a way for girls across our nation to envision themselves in these positions of power. We already know that no women will be on stage at this year's presidential debates, but what about in the moderator's chair? We were shocked to find out that it has been 20 years since a woman last moderated a presidential debate. Moderators are chosen by the Commission on Presidential Debates, which is made up of three women out of seventeen commissioners. 20 years is way too long: we're encouraging the Commission to name at least one woman to moderate one of the three upcoming presidential debates between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama. Presidential debate moderators have a lot power when it comes to helping the American public to better understand candidates. Being a moderator is a tough job; the moderator must keep debate flowing, make sure candidates stay focused on relevant topics, and maintain an unbiased stance. Men are no more capable of performing these tasks than women -- but for the last two decades, only men have been given the job. Women and men will never be truly equal in our country until they’re one and the same in positions of power and both visible in politics. We need to take immediate action in order to move towards this change. There is no reason why a woman shouldn’t have a chance to show what she’s capable of by moderating debates in the upcoming election. Tell the Commission on Presidential Debates to have a woman moderate one of the debates now.
Allow candidates appearing on the ballot in all 50 states into presidential debates.
Currently, presidential debates only allow participants who have been polling at or above 15%. We believe this is exclusionary and rigs the system in favor of the Republican and Democratic parties. Given margins of error, the luck of the draw that can be involved in polling, and to allow Americans to see all their options, we support a change to the rules imposed by the Federal Election Commission and Commission on Presidential Debates that would allow any candidate appearing on the ballot in all 50 states to participate in the Presidentiual Debates.
Tell presidential candidates: women’s REAL issues deserve a debate
It's time for presidential candidates to go on record about issues that affect all women and their families. Women represent more than half the population and turn out to vote more than men, yet women’s issues have received little attention during this presidential election cycle. In 21 primary debates, over 700 questions were asked of 16 candidates; only 6 were about issues that disproportionately affect women. Womensdebate.org is a nonpartisan collective of concerned citizens who are calling upon all political candidates to commit to a live presidential debate or town hall focused exclusively on issues affecting American women and girls, namely: Elimination of barriers that prevent equal participation in the economy Access to quality affordable health care opportunities for all Safe and just recourse when confronted with violence and sexual exploitation Whether for yourself, your daughter, your spouse/significant other, your colleague or because it is the right thing to do, we urge you to sign this petition to have gender equality and women’s rights be addressed during this important election year. We are all working towards a common goal – an equitable and safe environment for all. Contact us at email@example.com.
Life without parole is unfair for first time offenders. Some times Justice is not JUST
On April 21 2017 Alquan Hill was sentenced to life in prison with No Parole. More importantly his trial was unfair and the jurors had their mind made up before they even went to deliberate. In less then 15 minutes they decided on life without parole. In 15 minutes they gave a mans life away. In 15 minutes they took a father from his 3 kids and his loved ones. I understand a young Mother loss her life but Alquan is not her killer and his life was also taken. Alquan was one of the 6 men in custody for murder. Alquan has no record and DID NOT shoot or kill the victim. Once in the courtroom the district attorney slammed bullets around the jury and gave the impression that Alquan shot 6 guns and drove 2 cars with his car being a stick shift. His remark being "He who hunts with the wolves is responsible for the kill". With that being said the district attorney ONLY charged Alquan Hill with first degree murder. The actual shooter only was charged with second degree murder. Should Alquan be punished ?. The answer is yes. Life without Parole is NOT the answer . Justice first begins with JUST. Please support this petition first time offenders do not deserve LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE. Especially when they aren't the killer. If we cut back on the sentencing on LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE we as a country will also save a lot of money that's spent each year on housing inmates. This petition isn't to take away justice from the victim but to ensure the defendant also gets a FAIR trial and fair sentencing based off the background of the defendant. Please understand this isnt to make light of the loss of the victim nor act like her life doesn't matter she was valued we just want fair sentencing. Sometimes the convicted need support as well.
The Polls Misrepresent the American Public - Open the Debates
The Commission on Presidential Debates is a private organization controlled by former and current leaders of the Democratic and Republican parties. It has established a 15% polling threshold for the inclusion of third-party candidates in the 2016 debates. The Commission claims these polls are “selected based on the quality of the methodology employed.” Americans are told that the polls reflect the “national electorate.” But in reality, any American who looks closely at the methods of these polls will realize that these polls do not represent the American public. Indeed, a recent article in the prestigious Wired magazine claimed that “the polls are all wrong.” As such, contrary to popular belief and contrary to the information printed in the mainstream outlets that conduct polls, the polls do not represent the national electorate. In the future, pollsters should improve their methods. But in this cycle, the damage has been done. The polls are deeply flawed and they have systematically misrepresented the American public. As a result, third-party candidates have not received as much free media coverage as Clinton and Trump. The only moral way forward is for the Commission to toss out the polling threshold. Open the debates.
Third Parties + stopping world sex trade
Please, I Want to Hear What the Third Parties Have to Say about stopping the world's sex trade, now; don't you? Despite all the media discussion about the differences between the candidates in the presidential and vice presidential debates, millions of voters are not seeing their own opinions represented on major issues like the bailout, the occupation of Iraq, and health care. Like many other Americans, I oppose the $700 billion taxpayer bailout for financial institutions, I want our troops returned home safe and sound now, and I support the single-payer national health plan. Green presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney expresses my opinions on these and other issues. Barack Obama and John McCain do not. Any candidate who is on enough ballots to be elected president should have a place in the debates. The only valid measurement of public support for candidates is the election. Opinion polls are subjective, vulnerable to bias, constantly fluctuating, and often exclude certain candidates from the questions asked. Polls are not democratic and should not be used to determine who gets to participate in debates. The exclusion of all candidates except for Democrats and Republicans from the debates is an affront to democracy and to the right of voters to be informed about all the choices they'll see on the ballot. We have the right to vote for whichever candidate best reflects our own interests and ideals. The two major parties agree on so many issues that there is little to debate. Debate selection criteria is exclusionary because it requires 15% support in national polls. Third Party Candidates should be included in the debates. Replace the anti-democratic Commission on Presidential Debates. We will boycott any of your advertisers that currently sponsor the Commission on Presidential Debates.
Include candidates in presidential polls with access to 75% ballots & 270 electoral votes
The Commission on Presidential Debates determines whether or not a candidate can be included in the debates based on their performance in five selected national polls. For one to be included in the debates, said candidate must achieve a polling average of 15% nationwide. To achieve this, potential candidates need to be included in national polls. Therefor:We the people, respectfully request USA media and all polls relevant to the debates to include any and all presidential candidates who have achieved ballot access in at least 75% of states, giving them at least access to enough electoral votes to achieve the 270 votes required to become President of the United States of America. This would require a candidate to achieve a minimum of ballot access in 38 states, with the potential to achieve the 270 electoral votes. This sets a minimum standard and achieves equality and a basis for future candidates to meet to potentially become president.We the people, believe that Governor Gary Johnson, Libertarian Party Candidate and Doctor Jill Stein, Green Party Candidate for President of the United States deserve to be included in any and all relevant national polls. Recent polls have shown that both candidates are achieving the minimum 5% already in nearly, if not all national polls, to receive public funding of presidential candidates, should they actually receive the 5% of the votes, yet national polls fail to include potential presidential candidates outside of the duopoly that is the United States of America.In recent months, support for new party candidates, such as the Libertarian Party and the Green Party have reached unimaginable support. The duopoly of bipartisan candidates being the only viable candidates is coming to an end. We are no longer voting for the lesser of two evils. This year, we're CHOOSING from the BEST of four candidates. We deserve more. When limited to only two options, people are often simply choosing the lesser of two evils. This needs to end. With the most polarizing candidates in the Democratic and Republican parties, new party candidates are receiving unprecedented support. They deserve to be included in all relevant national polls.We the people, as undersigned, demand more! PLEASE include all potential candidates, meeting said standard requirements, in all national polls relevant to the debates! Respectfully, we deserve more. We demand more. We need a standard of equality across the board. Thank you, Sincerely, We The People
Eliminate the live audience at final Presidential Debate
Despite being told that cheering and jeering aren't permitted in the debate hall, Trump supporters continually do so in their effort to support Trump and heckle Hillary. If the commission is uncomfortable enforcing the rules they set for proper behavior, eliminating the live audience altogether is the only solution.
Let Gary Johnson Debate
This country needs a viable third option to the current two party system. Governors Gary Johnson and Bill Weld will be featured on the ballots in all 50 states, therefore should be allowed to debate with the other two candidates. This countries politics are as divisive as ever and denying a legitimate candidate the opportunity that his rivals are being given is partisan by definition. I want this petition to go as far as possible to give the American people the most information on all the presidential candidates.
Jill Stein: Open the Presidential Debate to Third-Party Candidates before the election
Following the most-watched U.S. presidential debate in history, a significant amount of voters were dissatisfied by both candidates. Their inability to address important issues and provide substantial answers was disappointing. The most disappointing aspect of the debate was the ban of third-party candidates, Jill Stein and Gary Johnson, to join the debate. According to the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD), candidates with less than 15% support in national polls cannot be included in national debates. This rule, set by the CPD, is controlled by the Democratic and Republican parties. It caused third-party candidates, including Libertarian Gary Johnson and the Green Party’s Jill Stein, to be excluded from the debate stage. Jill Stein was escorted away from Hofstra University on Sept. 26, where the debate was held. We want to abolish the rule set by the CPD to open the presidential debate to all nominees for President of the United States in the 2016 election. It is undemocratic to televise national debates solely with the opinions of the two largest parties. The 'New York Times' calculated that only 9% of Americans voted for Trump or Clinton (i.e. only 14% of eligible adults). The truth is that the candidates are the face of the corporations and interest groups they represent. The groups behind the Democrats & Republicans filter the information passed on the mainstream media. They want you to believe that Clinton and Trump are the only ones who can actually run for presidency although more than 85% of Americans didn't vote for them. I highly encourage you to check out the other candidates that are also running for president in 2016, such as Jill Stein who is believed to have the most progressive agenda.