<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Primary Reactions &amp; Binary Thinking</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/archives/2008/01/09/primary/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/archives/2008/01/09/primary/</link>
	<description>Sci-fi, comics, humor, photos...it&#039;s all fair game.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 23:03:41 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Daniel</title>
		<link>http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/archives/2008/01/09/primary/#comment-38984</link>
		<dc:creator>Daniel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jan 2008 22:26:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/archives/2008/01/09/primary/#comment-38984</guid>
		<description>I imagine, at least in politics, that a lot of it has to do with the fear of someone really awful getting into office on a plurality while votes for better candidates are divided among wiser votes (Awful, better, and wiser be left to the individual voter&#039;s interpretation).

Caucuses are nice in the sense that they allow caucus-goers to support their second or third or nth choice when it becomes clear their current choice isn&#039;t viable.  Of course, most of us enjoy the luxury of voting any time of day, and I don&#039;t approve of excluding absentee voters and voters with night jobs.  Perhaps some kind of caucus-ballot would be in order.  Rank several candidates in order of preference, then count the top choices.  Anyone whose top choice is inviable at the end of an iteration gets their next choice tabulated instead, and so on.  It would be so easy to manage nationwide if we could only get reliable, secure computer voting systems in place...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I imagine, at least in politics, that a lot of it has to do with the fear of someone really awful getting into office on a plurality while votes for better candidates are divided among wiser votes (Awful, better, and wiser be left to the individual voter&#8217;s interpretation).</p>
<p>Caucuses are nice in the sense that they allow caucus-goers to support their second or third or nth choice when it becomes clear their current choice isn&#8217;t viable.  Of course, most of us enjoy the luxury of voting any time of day, and I don&#8217;t approve of excluding absentee voters and voters with night jobs.  Perhaps some kind of caucus-ballot would be in order.  Rank several candidates in order of preference, then count the top choices.  Anyone whose top choice is inviable at the end of an iteration gets their next choice tabulated instead, and so on.  It would be so easy to manage nationwide if we could only get reliable, secure computer voting systems in place&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
