<?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: Who should I vote for?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://idealgovernment.com/2005/04/who_should_i_vote_for/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://idealgovernment.com/2005/04/who_should_i_vote_for/</link>
	<description>What do we want from Internet-age government? Wouldn&#039;t it be better if...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 10:03:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul Evans</title>
		<link>http://idealgovernment.com/2005/04/who_should_i_vote_for/comment-page-1/#comment-378</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul Evans</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Apr 2005 17:24:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://who_should_i_vote_for#comment-378</guid>
		<description>I looked at this. This is very flawed. It picks stand-out Lib Dem policies (because it has to include all three parties, it has to choose issues where there is a noticeable difference). As the Lib-Dems are aiming to be a good third rather than win the election – AND they want to target ABC1s in their campaigning (because they are most likely to switch vote), they have chosen standout issues of principle to stand on. 

The evidence shows that biggest factor that determines people’s vote is perception of economic competence. It isn’t even asked for. Nor does it ask whether respondents beleive that parties can do what they say – another factor that usually over-rides the question of support for individual policies.

I don&#039;t beleive this site is as independent as it claims.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I looked at this. This is very flawed. It picks stand-out Lib Dem policies (because it has to include all three parties, it has to choose issues where there is a noticeable difference). As the Lib-Dems are aiming to be a good third rather than win the election – AND they want to target ABC1s in their campaigning (because they are most likely to switch vote), they have chosen standout issues of principle to stand on. </p>
<p>The evidence shows that biggest factor that determines people’s vote is perception of economic competence. It isn’t even asked for. Nor does it ask whether respondents beleive that parties can do what they say – another factor that usually over-rides the question of support for individual policies.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t beleive this site is as independent as it claims.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: W</title>
		<link>http://idealgovernment.com/2005/04/who_should_i_vote_for/comment-page-1/#comment-377</link>
		<dc:creator>W</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Apr 2005 12:52:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://who_should_i_vote_for#comment-377</guid>
		<description>Yes, well Google assures us Maharishis are the best at articulating principles of Ideal Government, so Law may well be the way to go. The site doesnt include Natural Law...I suppose they had to draw the line somewhere to keep it simple.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, well Google assures us Maharishis are the best at articulating principles of Ideal Government, so Law may well be the way to go. The site doesnt include Natural Law&#8230;I suppose they had to draw the line somewhere to keep it simple.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard-s</title>
		<link>http://idealgovernment.com/2005/04/who_should_i_vote_for/comment-page-1/#comment-376</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard-s</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Apr 2005 12:44:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://who_should_i_vote_for#comment-376</guid>
		<description>What about my &quot;local&quot; party: Natural Law?

&quot;Our policies will make everyone healthy: Allowing us to cut the cost of the NHS.&quot;

&quot;Our policies will remove global conflicts: Allowing us to cut defence spending.&quot;

etc.

Simple and effective; what more could you want?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What about my &#8220;local&#8221; party: Natural Law?</p>
<p>&#8220;Our policies will make everyone healthy: Allowing us to cut the cost of the NHS.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;Our policies will remove global conflicts: Allowing us to cut defence spending.&#8221;</p>
<p>etc.</p>
<p>Simple and effective; what more could you want?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

