Key to Abbreviations of Party Names and Identifying Labels

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

KEY TO ABBREVIATIONS OF PARTY NAMES AND IDENTIFYING LABELS The following is a list of the abbreviations used to identify the party labels appearing on the various state ballots for the U.S. Presidential candidates in the 2008 general election. The party label listed may not necessarily represent a political party organization. AIF = America’s Independent Party of Florida LTX = Louisiana Taxpayers Party AIP = American Independent LU = Liberty Union AKI = Alaskan Independence MTP = Mountain Party AMI = America’s Independent NA = No Affiliation BP = By Petition NB = Nebraska Party BTP = Boston Tea Party NEW = New C = Conservative NLP = Natural Law Party CON = Constitution NMI = New Mexico Independent Party CPF = Constitution Party of Florida OBF = Objectivist Party of Florida CPI = Constitution Party of Illinois OBJ = Objectivist Party D = Democratic P = Prohibition Party DCG = D.C. Statehood Green PE = Peace DFL = Democratic-Farmer Labor PET = Petition DNL = Democratic-Nonpartisan League PFP = Peace And Freedom ECO = Ecology Party of Florida PG = Pacific Green FSL = Party for Socialism and Liberation-Florida POP = Populist FSW = Florida Socialist Workers PSL = Party for Socialism and Liberation GI = Green Independent R = Republican GPF = Green Party of Florida REF = Reform GR = Green-Rainbow SFL = Socialist Party Of Florida GRC = Green Party of Colorado SLP = Socialism and Liberation Party GRN = Green SOC = Socialist Party USA HQK = HeartQuake ‘08 SWP = Socialist Workers Party I = Independent UN = Unaffiliated IAP = Independent American Party USP = U.S. Pacificist Party IDE = Independent Party of Delaware UST = U.S. Taxpayers IDP = Independence VH = Vote Here IGR = Independent Green Party WF = Working Families LBC = Libertarian Party of Colorado WG = Wisconsin Greens LBF = Libertarian Party of Florida LBT = Libertarian Compiled By: Public Disclosure Division, Office of Communications, Federal Election Commission 800/424-9530 (option 2) or 202/694-1120 - Page 7 of 7 - .

Copy Link

Recommended publications

Petition to Suspend Reactor Licensing Decisions and Reactor Re
February 27, 2014 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE COMMISSION In the Matter of ) Detroit Edison Co. ) Docket No. 52-033-COL (Fermi Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 3) ) In the Matter of ) Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. ) Docket Nos. 50-247-LR (Indian Point Nuclear Generating ) and 50-286-LR Station, Units 2 and 3) ) In the Matter of ) FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co. ) Docket No. 50-346-LR (Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, ) Unit 1) ) In the Matter of ) (Florida Power & Light Co. ) Docket Nos. 52-040-COL Turkey Point Units 6 and 7) ) and 52-041-COL In the Matter of ) Nextera Energy Seabrook, L.L.C. ) Docket No. 50-443-LR (Seabrook Station, Unit 1) ) In the Matter of ) Pacific Gas and Electric Co. ) Docket Nos. 50-275-LR (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, ) and 50-323-LR Units 1 and 2) ) In the Matter of ) Progress Energy Florida, Inc. ) Docket Nos. 52-029-COL (Levy County Nuclear Power Plant, ) and 52-030-COL Units 1 and 2) ) In the Matter of ) South Texas Project Nuclear Operating Co. ) Docket Nos. 52-012-COL (South Texas Project, ) and 52-013-COL Units 3 and 4) ) In the Matter of ) Tennessee Valley Authority ) Docket Nos. 52-014-COL (Bellefonte Nuclear Power Plant, ) and 52-015-COL Units 3 and 4) ) In the Matter of ) Tennessee Valley Authority ) Docket Nos. 50-327-LR, (Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, ) 50-328-LR Units 1 and 2) ) In the Matter of ) Tennessee Valley Authority ) Docket No. 50-0391-OL (Watts Bar Unit 2) ) In the Matter of ) Virginia Electric and Power Co.
[Show full text]
2020 Has Been an Unusual Election Year NONPARTISAN As We Continue to Work Under the Global Pandemic of COVID-19
BY PATTI BRIGHAM, LEAGUE PRESIDENT 2020 2020 has been an unusual election year NONPARTISAN as we continue to work under the global pandemic of COVID-19. However, the League of Women Voters of Florida (LWVFL) is continuing VOTER to educate Florida’s voters in advance of the November 3rd election. The LWVFL is a non-partisan organization governance. However, ensuring citizens have GUIDE and does not endorse political candidates or direct access to making change when politi- parties but we do take positions on policy is- cians fail to act is critical for our voters and sues such as election reform, health care, and explains our opposition to this election cycle’s education. Amendment Number Four. HOW DO AMENDMENTS GET ON THE BALLOT? These and other issues are reflected in the The League does not take lightly the respon- A LOOK AT FIVE WAYS. PAGE 2 questions we have posed to the candidates sibility of supporting or opposing constitu- this year to inform voters on their positions. tional amendments. Nor should voters. These VOTER APPROVAL FOR ALL The 2020 ballot will also contain a slate of are complex issues, often complicated by CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS constitutional amendments, which is why confusing ballot language. As a result, we AMENDMENT 4 BREAKDOWN. PAGE 3 the League’s positions are reflected in the encourage you to read this guide and careful- amendment summaries in this Voter Guide. ly consider our summary of the amendments, TAX EXEMPTIONS FOR SPOUSES OF DECEASED MILITARY MEMBERS what passage of them would mean and what AMENDMENT 6 BREAKDOWN. PAGE 4 For example, the League does not believe would happen if they are voted down.
[Show full text]
Green Party of Florida Case No.: FEC 12-414 ------~'
STATE OF FLORIDA FLORIDA ELECTIONS COMMISSION In Re: Green Party of Florida Case No.: FEC 12-414 ------------------------~' NOTICE OF HEARING ON APPEAL OF AUTOMATIC FINE TO: Kelley S. Roark, Esquire Kelley Roark, P.A. · 2915 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 300 Mianii, Flo.rida 33137 Division of Elections 500 South BronoughStreet .RA GrayBililding, Room.316 Tallahassee, Florida 32399~0250 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on May 14, 2013,at8: 30 a.m. orthereaftei as the parties can be heard, the Florida Elections Commission will bringon to be heard Respondent's appeal of the fine imposed by the filing officer for Respondent failing to file timely a campaign treasurer's rep01t. The Commission shal! meet at: Senate Office Building, 404 S(luth Monroe Street, Room Sc401, Tallahassee, F:Io.rida 32399-6526. Respondent and staff shall have the opportunity to brieflY present their case to the Commission Failure. to appear in accordance withthis notice will constitute a waiver of your right to a hearing, and the Commission will decide this case on the record before it Convenience of location is not a basis for continuing or postponing the scheduled hearing. See reverse side for additional instructions. If you require an accommodation due to a disability, contact Donna Ann Malphurs at (850) 922-4539 or by mail af 107 West Gaines Street, The Collins Building, Suite 224, Tallahassee, Florida 32399, at least 5 days before the hearing. PLEASE GOVERN YOURSELF ACCORDINGLY. Dated on April 16, 2013 Amy McKeever Toman Executive Director Hea038 (2/09) Please be advised that other cases have been scheduled for the same time.
[Show full text]
Candidate Information Guide
2020 Candidate Information Guide Tressa Guynes Clerk & Recorder Montrose County 0 | P a g e TABLE OF CONTENTS From The Clerk ...................................................................................................................................................... 0 Steps for Candidacy – County Offices ...................................................................................................................... 1 Basic Qualifications for County Offices ................................................................................................................... 2 Ballot Access – County Offices .............................................................................................................................. 4 Running for Municipal Office.................................................................................................................................. 8 Running for School Board Office ............................................................................................................................ 9 Running for Special District Board .......................................................................................................................... 9 Running for State Office ......................................................................................................................................... 9 Withdrawal Process .............................................................................................................................................
[Show full text]
OFFICIAL 2020 PRESIDENTIAL GENERAL ELECTION RESULTS General Election Date: 11/03/2020 OFFICIAL 2016 PRESIDENTIAL GENERAL ELECTION RESULTS
OFFICIAL 2020 PRESIDENTIAL GENERAL ELECTION RESULTS General Election Date: 11/03/2020 OFFICIAL 2016 PRESIDENTIAL GENERAL ELECTION RESULTS General Election Date: 11/08/2016 Source: State Elections Offices* SOURCE: State Elections Offices* STATE ELECTORAL ELECTORAL VOTES CAST FOR ELECTORAL VOTES CAST FOR VOTES JOSEPH R. BIDEN (D) DONALD J. TRUMP (R) AL 9 9 AK 3 3 AZ 11 11 AR 6 6 CA 55 55 CO 9 9 CT 7 7 DE 3 3 DC 3 3 FL 29 29 GA 16 16 HI 4 4 ID 4 4 IL 20 20 IN 11 11 IA 6 6 KS 6 6 KY 8 8 LA 8 8 ME 4 3 1 MD 10 10 MA 11 11 MI 16 16 MN 10 10 MS 6 6 MO 10 10 MT 3 3 NE 5 1 4 NV 6 6 NH 4 4 NJ 14 14 NM 5 5 NY 29 29 NC 15 15 ND 3 3 OH 18 18 OK 7 7 OR 7 7 PA 20 20 RI 4 4 SC 9 9 SD 3 3 TN 11 11 TX 38 38 UT 6 6 VT 3 3 VA 13 13 WA 12 12 WV 5 5 WI 10 10 WY 3 3 Total: 538 306 232 Total Electoral Votes Needed to Win = 270 - Page 1 of 12 - OFFICIAL 2020 PRESIDENTIAL GENERAL ELECTION RESULTS General Election Date: 11/03/2020 SOURCE: State Elections Offices* STATE BIDEN BLANKENSHIP BODDIE CARROLL CHARLES AL 849,624 AK 153,778 1,127 AZ 1,672,143 13 AR 423,932 2,108 1,713 CA 11,110,250 2,605 559 CO 1,804,352 5,061 2,515 2,011 CT 1,080,831 219 11 DE 296,268 1 87 8 DC 317,323 FL 5,297,045 3,902 854 GA 2,473,633 61 8 701 65 HI 366,130 931 ID 287,021 1,886 163 IL 3,471,915 18 9,548 75 IN 1,242,416 895 IA 759,061 1,707 KS 570,323 KY 772,474 7 408 43 LA 856,034 860 1,125 2,497 ME 435,072 MD 1,985,023 4 795 30 MA 2,382,202 MI 2,804,040 7,235 963 MN 1,717,077 75 1,037 112 MS 539,398 1,279 1,161 MO 1,253,014 3,919 664 MT 244,786 23 NE 374,583 NV 703,486 3,138 NH 424,937
[Show full text]
Strategies of Narrative Disclosure in the Rhetoric of Anti-Corporate Campaigns." Dissertation, Georgia State University, 2012
Georgia State University ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University Communication Dissertations Department of Communication Spring 3-20-2012 Strategies of Narrative Disclosure in the Rhetoric of Anti- Corporate Campaigns Richard A. Herder Georgia State University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/communication_diss Recommended Citation Herder, Richard A., "Strategies of Narrative Disclosure in the Rhetoric of Anti-Corporate Campaigns." Dissertation, Georgia State University, 2012. https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/communication_diss/32 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Communication at ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Communication Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. STRATEGIES OF NARRATIVE DISCLOSURE IN THE RHETORIC OF ANTI-CORPORATE CAMPAIGNS by RICHARD ALEXANDER HERDER Under the Direction of Dr. Michael Bruner ABSTRACT In the years following World War II social activists learned to refine rhetorical techniques for gaining the attention of the new global mass media and developed anti-corporate campaigns to convince some of the world’s largest companies to concede to their demands. Despite these developments, rhetorical critics have tended to overlook anti-corporate campaigns as objects of study in their own right. One can account for the remarkable success of anti-corporate campaigns by understanding how activists have practiced prospective narrative disclosure, a calculated rhetorical wager that, through the public circulation of stories and texts disclosing problematic practices and answerable decision makers, activists can influence the policies and practices of prominent corporations. In support of this thesis, I provide case studies of two anti-corporate campaigns: the Amalgamated Clothing and Textile Workers Union vs.
[Show full text]
Letter to US Senator Ron Wyden from 85
June 30, 2013 Chairman Ron Wyden U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 405 Dirksen Senate Building, Washington, D.C. 20510 CC: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell U.S. Senate Speaker John Boehner, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, Energy and Commerce Committee Ranking Member Henry Waxman Natural Resources Committee Ranking Member Ed Markey U.S. House of Representatives Dear Chairman Ron Wyden and Members of Congress: In a January 30, 2013 letter to President Obama, you and fifteen of your colleagues in the U.S. Senate wrote that “pollution can cause asthma attacks, heart and lung disease, cancer, damage to the reproductive system, strokes, and premature death.” 1 You said that you “stand ready to work with [the President] to use available tools to provide stronger safeguards that will address dangerous air pollution.” With your clearly stated intentions on the public record, we, the undersigned, are writing to ask you to expand upon your laudable efforts on behalf of the health and well-being of all Americans by ending your support for the expansion of polluting industrial-scale biomass energy. While receiving many of the same taxpayer subsidies as genuinely clean energy sources which emit no pollutants, such as solar and wind, electricity-generating biomass facilities emit large quantities of health-damaging air pollution. For example, the latest U.S. Environmental Protection Agency data shows that biomass incinerators emit 98% as much nitrogen oxides (NOx) as burning bituminous coal and higher levels of the most dangerous particulate matter (PM 2.5 , including ultrafine and nano particulates).
[Show full text]
January 10, 2019 Re: Legislation to Address the Urgent Threat Of
January 10, 2019 Re: Legislation to Address the Urgent Threat of Climate Change Dear Representative: On behalf of our millions of members and supporters, we are writing today to urge you to consider the following principles as the 116th Congress debates climate change legislation and momentum around the country builds for a Green New Deal. As the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change recently warned, if we are to keep global warming below 1.5°C, we must act aggressively and quickly. At a minimum, reaching that target requires visionary and affirmative legislative action in the following areas: Halt all fossil fuel leasing, phase out all fossil fuel extraction, and end fossil fuel and other dirty energy subsidies. The science is clear that fossil fuels must be kept in the ground. Pursuing new fossil fuel projects at this moment in history is folly. Most immediately, the federal government must stop selling off or leasing publicly owned lands, water, and mineral rights for development to fossil fuel producers. The government must also stop approving fossil fuel power plants and infrastructure projects. We must reverse recent legislation that ended the 40-year ban on the export of crude oil, end the export of all other fossil fuels, and overhaul relevant statutes that govern fossil fuel extraction in order to pursue a managed decline of fossil fuel production. Further, the federal government must immediately end the massive, irrational subsidies and other financial support that fossil fuel, and other dirty energy companies (such as nuclear, waste incineration and biomass energy) continue to receive both domestically and overseas.
[Show full text]
April 30, 2018 the Honorable Ryan Zinke Secretary of Interior U.S
Adventure Scientists • Advocates for Snake Preservation • Alameda Creek Alliance • Alaska Clean Water Advocacy • Alaska’s Big Village Network • All-creatures.org • Anacostia Riverkeeper • Animal League Defense Fund • Animal Welfare Institute • Animals Are Sentient Beings, Inc. • Animas Valley Institute • Basin and Range Watch • Battle Creek Alliance • Bird Conservation Network • Black Warrior Riverkeeper • Blue Heron Productions • Blue Mountains Biodiversity Project • Born Free USA • Boulder County Audubon • Boulder Rights of Nature, Inc. • California Wolf Center • Campaign to Fight Toxic Prisons • Cascades Raptor Center • Center for Biological Diversity • Center for Environmental Policy, Bard College • Center for Food Safety • Center for Snake Conservation • Christians Caring for Creation • Citizens Committee to Complete the Refuge • Ciudadanos Del Karso • Clean Air Watch • Columbia Riverkeeper • Community Works CIC • Conservation Alabama Foundation • Conservation Congress • Conservation Northwest • Conservatives for Responsible Stewardship • Cottonwood Environmental Law Center • DC Environmental Network • Defenders of Wildlife • Defiance Canyon Raptor Rescue • Delaware Ecumenical Council on Children and Families • Desert Tortoise Council • Dogwood Alliance • Don’t Waste Arizona • Earthjustice • Earthworks • Eastern Coyote/Coywolf Research • Ebbetts Pass Forest Watch • Eco-Eating • Ecology Party of Florida • Endangered Small Animal Conservation Fund • Endangered Species Coalition • Environmental Committee for the SLV • Environmental Protection
[Show full text]
Political Forecast for 2016
Political Forecast for 2016 Dr. Susan A. MacManus University of South Florida, Tampa Dept. of Govt. & Intl. Affairs Anthony Cilluffo, Georgia Pevy, David Bonanza Research Associates FSASE Canvassing Board Workshop January 14, 2016 SLIDESHOW FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY Election Dynamics in 2016 • Florida: key battleground state • 2 major statewide races: President and U.S. Senate • 3 major elections: Presidential Primary (March 15), Regular Primary (Aug. 30), General Election (Nov. 8) • 2 major national party conventions (GOP July 18-21; DEM Week of July 25) • Presidential debates in Florida • Fundraising for campaigns at all levels • Interface with national parties and PACs • Constant barrage of political-related media • New district lines—U.S. Congress, state legislature What’s Different in 2016? Voter Attitudes Trust levels Fears Tone of Candidates, Ads Heightened Activism/Protests Americans Distrustful of Govt. An Era of Protests: Peaceful & Violent “…[E]veryone with a smartphone is now a reporter, news photographer, and documentary filmmaker. It’s a wonder that every newspaper doesn’t have a ‘Protest’ section.” Thomas L. Friedman New York Times January 13, 2016 Florida’s Close!! 2010 Gov., 2012 Pres., 2014 Gov. Results Scott 48.9% Obama 50.0% Scott 48.2% Sink 47.7% Romney 49.1% Crist 47.1% Turnout Florida: Nation’s Premier Swing State What is a Swing State? Diversity • Race/ethnicity • Age • Economic • Party Affiliation Ability to Pick Winning Candidate Percent (%) 100 Voter Registration Pattern: 1972 Pattern: Registration Voter 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 Nov-15 - 2015 Other Democrat Republican Racial/Ethnic Vote: FL Generations in 2016 Why Look at Generations? • Generational differences, especially in racial and ethnic composition, political preferences, and news sources, have become a major focal point of today’s campaigns.
[Show full text]
NRC Staff Answer to Joint Intervenors' Motion for Leave to File New
March 9, 2012 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of ) ) ) PROGRESS ENERGY FLORIDA, INC. ) Docket Nos. 52-029 and 52-030 ) ) (Combined License Application for Levy ) County Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2) ) NRC STAFF ANSWER TO JOINT INTERVENORS’ MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE NEW CONTENTION 14 INTRODUCTION The NRC staff (Staff) hereby answers Joint Intervenors’1 “Motion for Leave to File Contention 14: Proposed Levy County Site for Two AP1000 Reactors Does Not Comply With Existing State and Federal Law” (Motion) and “Contention 14 and Contention 14-A” (Contention 14) pursuant to 10 CFR § 2.309(h)(1) and the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board’s Initial Scheduling Order. Progress Energy Florida, Inc. (Levy County Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2), LBP-09-22, 70 NRC 640, 647 (2009). As explained below, the Joint Intervenors’ proposed new contention should be denied because it does not meet the contention 1 The Joint Intervenors are the Ecology Party of Florida, the Green Party of Florida, and Nuclear Information and Resource Service. admissibility requirements in 10 CFR § 2.309(f)(1) and because it does not meet the timeliness requirements in 10 CFR §§ 2.309(f)(2) and 2.309(c)(1). PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On July 28, 2008, Progress Energy Florida (Applicant) filed an application for a combined construction permit and operating license (COL) for two new reactors in Levy County, Florida. On February 6, 2009, the Ecology Party of Florida, the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, and the Green Party of Florida (Joint Intervenors) collectively filed a petition to intervene and several contentions.
[Show full text]
Civil Society Institute Nuclear Information and Resource Service
Civil Society Institute 1 Bridge Street, Suite 200, Newton, MA 02458; 672-928-3408; [email protected] Nuclear Information and Resource Service 6930 Carroll Avenue, Suite 3440, Takoma Park, MD 20912; 301-270-6477; [email protected] January 6, 2014 Dr. James E. Hansen Columbia University Earth Institute 475 Riverside Drive New York, NY 10115 Dr. Ken Caldeira Department of Global Ecology Carnegie Institution of Washington 260 Panama Street Stanford, CA 94305 Dr. Kerry A. Emanuel Room 54-1814, MIT 77 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02139 Dr. Tom Wigley National Center for Atmospheric Research P.O. Box 3000, Boulder, CO 80307-3000 Gentlemen, Although we greatly respect your work on climate and lending it a much higher profile in public dialogue than would otherwise be the case, we read your letter of November 3, 2013 urging the environmental community to support nuclear power as a solution to climate change with concern. We respectfully disagree with your analysis that nuclear power can safely and affordably mitigate climate change. Nuclear power is not a financially viable option. Since its inception it has required taxpayer subsidies and publically financed indemnity against accidents. New construction requires billions in public subsidies to attract private capital and, once under construction, severe cost overruns are all but inevitable. As for operational safety, the history of nuclear power plants in the US is fraught with near misses, as documented by the Union of Concerned Scientists, and creates another financial and safety quagmire – high-level nuclear waste. Internationally, we’ve experienced two catastrophic accidents for a technology deemed to be virtually ‘failsafe’.
[Show full text]