<?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"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Bullet Points</title>
	<atom:link href="http://somatablet.com/index.php/2008/03/bullet-points/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://somatablet.com/index.php/2008/03/bullet-points/</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress weblog</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 08:08:24 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Kate</title>
		<link>http://somatablet.com/index.php/2008/03/bullet-points/#comment-8747</link>
		<dc:creator>Kate</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2008 07:01:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://somatablet.com/index.php/2008/03/bullet-points/#comment-8747</guid>
		<description>I'm not sure it's fair to call caucuses "undemocratic", especially without any evidence or reasoning. I think that they ensure the security of the party because &lt;i&gt;members&lt;/i&gt; of the party are able to choose the candidate for whom they believe whole populous should vote.

A caucus, to me, reminds me of nothing more than perhaps the most true and simple form of "democracy" in the United States--the town hall meeting. Any meeting where ideas and opinions are exchanged openly (even if the attendees are limited to a single party) is admirably democratic.

I think it would be interesting to witness an election where nominees were chosen through only caucuses. Because caucuses generally attract the more involved, educated, and well-informed party members, I think we would be presented with better nominees--maybe void a "Bush" or "Clinton" surname or maybe a true intellectual.

After all, when the nominees are chosen	 everyone gets to vote to decide between them. Call me an elitist, but I don''t know why non-party members are able to choose the parties' nominees anyway.

Hey, at least I wouldn't have to really suffer through this burdensome nomination process.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m not sure it&#8217;s fair to call caucuses &#8220;undemocratic&#8221;, especially without any evidence or reasoning. I think that they ensure the security of the party because <i>members</i> of the party are able to choose the candidate for whom they believe whole populous should vote.</p>
<p>A caucus, to me, reminds me of nothing more than perhaps the most true and simple form of &#8220;democracy&#8221; in the United States&#8211;the town hall meeting. Any meeting where ideas and opinions are exchanged openly (even if the attendees are limited to a single party) is admirably democratic.</p>
<p>I think it would be interesting to witness an election where nominees were chosen through only caucuses. Because caucuses generally attract the more involved, educated, and well-informed party members, I think we would be presented with better nominees&#8211;maybe void a &#8220;Bush&#8221; or &#8220;Clinton&#8221; surname or maybe a true intellectual.</p>
<p>After all, when the nominees are chosen	 everyone gets to vote to decide between them. Call me an elitist, but I don&#8221;t know why non-party members are able to choose the parties&#8217; nominees anyway.</p>
<p>Hey, at least I wouldn&#8217;t have to really suffer through this burdensome nomination process.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael</title>
		<link>http://somatablet.com/index.php/2008/03/bullet-points/#comment-8746</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2008 16:38:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://somatablet.com/index.php/2008/03/bullet-points/#comment-8746</guid>
		<description>I agree fully. Hopefully, when all is said and done, the delegate count matches with the popular vote.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree fully. Hopefully, when all is said and done, the delegate count matches with the popular vote.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JC</title>
		<link>http://somatablet.com/index.php/2008/03/bullet-points/#comment-8745</link>
		<dc:creator>JC</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2008 16:36:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://somatablet.com/index.php/2008/03/bullet-points/#comment-8745</guid>
		<description>6) Superdelegates are also undemocratic.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>6) Superdelegates are also undemocratic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
