Opinion
Making Your Opinion Known: To Petition or Not to Petition?

We all see the petition campaigns on Facebook.
“Sue Smith” has just signed to support a Ban Plastic Single Use Straw Campaign..She wants you to help. Click here to let the Canadian Government know you want them banned.
Online petitions do work, they gather thousands and sometimes millions of signatures from well meaning people who want to see the right thing done for the right reasons. However, over the last week I have noticed something that demands a closer look.
Change.org, CitizenGo,org, GoPetition, SumOfUS and iPetition are just a few of the companies whose primary goal is to allow citizens to make their concerns known around the world. To be fair, there are many great causes that have been advanced by these platforms for democracy, but as noted, they are not all created equal.
We should look for a couple of things when we consider signing on the digital line.
Firstly, what happens to our well-intentioned electronic signature?
Your signature and information is used by the petitioner, but after that it may be sold as part of an electronic mailing list to target you with unsolicited offers and other related petitions. You may get spam related to retail, political and social campaigns and newsletters.
Secondly, what is the petition for and what other causes do they espouse?
I will use the SumOfUs example.
I am a Canadian and SumOfUs has had some good campaigns, but this week I was caught aback by back to back requests.
The first one is aimed at the TD Bank and states the following:
MASSIVE NEWS — thanks to your pressure over the last two years, TD Bank just announced it is pulling the plug on fossil fuels and going net-zero by 2050.
This win is a testament to the strength of our people powered movement to combat climate change.
In 2019, TD executives underestimated the power of our movement and relayed to me that a plan to defund fossil fuels just wasn’t possible before 2050.
But thanks to all of the hard work of SumOfUs members like you over the past two years, TD executives JUST announced a plan to move away from funding fossil fuels.
I think this is an atrocious announcement and signals to me that the TD Bank has bought in to Agenda 21 and 2030/2050 from the UN of which Climate Change AND Net Zero are tenets.
Why would I, as a citizen of Alberta who benefits from the Oil Industry, continue to support this group?
Another one that caught my attention was aimed at Big Tech and their censorship and its influence on the Republican view on the election…In specific, censorship of
Joe Biden has won the US Presidency — but not on social media.
Tech giants like Facebook and YouTube have created toxic algorithms that push people to extreme content, littered with hate speech and lies. It’s one of the ways groups spreading election disinformation are able to grow by the tens of thousands in a matter of hours.
But massive pressure forced the tech giants to take new measures to slow the spread of disinformation — and evidence suggests they worked. This shows us the platforms *can* act if we force them to.
So let’s keep up the pressure on the tech platforms now more than ever, to stop disinformation and detox their algorithms. Join the call and share this widely!
Tell Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter: stop the spread of disinformation — detox your algorithms!
But our community has been relentless with our pressure on the platforms, and we’re finally seeing them act — with Facebook reducing the reach of pages and groups spreading election disinformation, and Twitter labeling Trump’s disinformation over a dozen times and counting.
Thirdly, if for instance, SumOfUs promotes such petitions, it should not be too difficult to ascertain who their masters are. By supporting such corporations, we are supporting the Soros and Gates of this world and their agendas.
Fourthly, every petition company uses two strategies to generate income and to extend their influence. They ask you to share on social media that you support their effort and they ask for a donation to help them meet targets. Share and you may help, but more likely you have just given them one more signee and funder to target.
Fifthly, do online petitions really help?
If we believe the emails, they do indeed often help a special interest group in their lobby or get an issue noticed by a social media audience. There is also the claim that an online petition got Trump banned from Britain as well. However, getting a specific message out to a large corporation is difficult and this is just one tool. Often these are just phishing expeditions but targeted audiences do impact decisions.
Sixthly, are the causes legitimate? The death of George Floyd was unfortunate but the petition that followed changed history. Most people are not aware that many other coloured men died that day from police activity as well. The violence that followed in the days afterward may have been avoided by the attention drawn to the issue by the petition.
Lastly, if you are truly concerned about an issue or special interest group, by all means sign the petition, then send real letters, phone, send emails, demonstrate or ask hard questions. Often companies do not understand the impact of their policies and can change. Make your voice heard.

Photo by Jeff Stokoe
Locally, in my protection of history, I had stated a petition to protect and save Red Deers oldest building (1899) and over the course of a month had garnered close to 400 signatures. During the process, others helped by manning tables and getting signatures. In the end, we did not save the building, but did manage to change official policy and make international news. You never know what your actions will do if you empower people and value their opinions.
Petition organizer tries to save historic Red Deer hotel | CBC News
The silent man loses every argument and those who rustle the bushes have a chance of changing the landscape one leaf at a time.
Get involved but be cautious.
Business
Poll: Democrats want Elon Musk jailed for trying to fix Washington

MxM News
Quick Hit:
A shocking new poll reveals that a staggering 71% of likely Democratic voters support imprisoning Elon Musk for his brief service in the Trump administration’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). The survey, conducted by The Heartland Institute and Rasmussen Reports, underscores an alarming shift in progressive politics: jailing political opponents for attempting to rein in bureaucratic waste. As Justin Haskins writes in his May 9 Townhall op-ed, this poll is not just about Musk—it’s about the dangerous normalization of authoritarianism among America’s political left.
Key Details:
-
71% of likely Democratic voters support jailing Musk for his role in eliminating government waste via DOGE.
-
80% of ideological liberals, across parties, say they would imprison Musk for his public service.
-
Nearly 70% of Democrats support banning Musk from ever serving in government again—an unconstitutional measure.
Diving Deeper:
In his recent Townhall column, Justin Haskins warns that Elon Musk’s fall from liberal darling to “Public Enemy No. 1 for the modern left” stems from a single transgression: daring to challenge the D.C. establishment. Haskins opens by recognizing Musk’s past achievements—electric vehicles, space exploration, and defending free speech. But after briefly working in the Trump administration’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)—an initiative aimed at cutting federal waste—Musk became a target of left-wing ire.
According to the Heartland Institute/Rasmussen poll, “Seven in ten likely Democratic voters want to imprison Musk for trying to make government more efficient.” Haskins adds, “This isn’t satire. This is the modern Democratic Party, where liberalism has evolved into authoritarianism dressed in the clothes of compassion and equity.”
The numbers become even more disturbing among self-identified liberals. A staggering 80% of ideological liberals said they’d support jailing Musk for participating in DOGE. Additionally, nearly 70% of Democrats back a proposal to ban him from ever working in government again—a position that clearly violates constitutional protections.
Musk’s unpopularity among Democrats has grown since his acquisition of X (formerly Twitter) and his commitment to restoring banned voices. Once celebrated as a climate champion, Musk is now demonized by the very groups that once hailed his green energy innovations. “He was supposed to walk in lockstep against conservatives at all times,” Haskins notes. “When he chose a different path… he committed a sin that some on the radical left simply cannot forgive.”
More importantly, the poll reflects a dangerous national trend: criminalizing political dissent. Haskins writes, “When nearly three-fourths of Democratic voters support jailing someone for participating in an effort to streamline federal agencies, we’ve crossed a dangerous line.” He continues, “This is the stuff of banana republics, not constitutional republics.”
The column concludes with a chilling reminder that the targeting of Elon Musk is not an isolated incident. “If they’re willing to jail Elon Musk for doing his job, what do you think they’ll do to the rest of us?” Haskins asks. The poll results reveal a left-wing movement increasingly comfortable using state power to punish those who refuse to conform.
Business
Trump says “total reset” reached in China trade talks

MxM News
Quick Hit:
President Trump said “great progress” was made in Saturday’s trade talks with China, calling the outcome a “total reset” negotiated in a “friendly, but constructive” way.
Key Details:
-
The talks took place Saturday in Geneva between U.S. officials—led by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent—and Chinese negotiators, amid a high-stakes standoff over tariffs.
-
President Trump said on Truth Social that “many things [were] discussed, much agreed to,” describing the tone of the talks as “friendly, but constructive.”
-
While no final agreement was reached, Trump said the goal is mutual: “an opening up of China to American business.” Further talks are scheduled for Sunday.
Diving Deeper:
President Donald Trump on Saturday night announced what he described as a significant breakthrough in trade negotiations with China, saying U.S. and Chinese officials agreed to a “total reset” during marathon discussions in Geneva, Switzerland.
In a post on Truth Social, Trump said, “A very good meeting today with China, in Switzerland. Many things discussed, much agreed to. A total reset negotiated in a friendly, but constructive, manner. We want to see, for the good of both China and the U.S., an opening up of China to American business. GREAT PROGRESS MADE!!!”
The session reportedly lasted over 10 hours, and was led on the U.S. side by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. While no specific deal was announced, officials described the negotiations as productive, with additional talks set to continue Sunday.
The Geneva meetings come amid escalating tariff measures. On April 2nd, the Trump administration rolled out “Liberation Day” tariffs on Chinese goods, followed by the imposition of a 145% tariff across a broader range of imports. In response, China raised duties on U.S. goods to 125%, even after briefly reducing tariffs for other trade partners to 10%.
With talks continuing into Sunday, the White House is framing the Geneva reset as a pivotal moment in its effort to realign trade policy.
-
Crime2 days ago
How the CCP’s United Front Turned Canada’s Legal Cannabis Market into a Global Narcotics Brokerage Network
-
Alberta2 days ago
Alberta Precipitation Update
-
Business2 days ago
Real Challenges Await Carney
-
Daily Caller1 day ago
States Attempting To Hijack National Energy Policy
-
Business20 hours ago
From ‘Elbows Up’ To ‘Thumbs Up’
-
Business16 hours ago
LEGO to invest $366 million on major U.S. expansion
-
Addictions1 day ago
New Report – Five years on: Tracing the costs of lockdowns
-
espionage2 days ago
GOP rep moves to shred PATRIOT Act, dismantle Deep State spy powers