Wednesday, October 22, 2025

Another example of how the duopoly fails us, and sorry no continuation of the story today

I have been writing quite a bit lately, however none of the fun projects I want to work on. So I am not in the mood to expend creative power. Or is it just because I am lazy? You know the seven deadly sins such as sloth, throw in some pride and a sprinkling of greed and that is what the last couple weeks have been like. And does it matter if the greed is incremental and not exponential. You may have seen an X post where I addressed greed or sideways confessed it.  So if you see me in the confession line, please just say hi.

Anyway, let’s deal with the actual post.

So Trump wants to give Argentina a ton of money to keep his bud’s election prospects and then on top of it throws in we should buy some Argentina beef. And yes the U.S. cattle world found a way to complain about the policy yet still say the support Trump. How these people look at themselves in the mirror is beyond me.

How would this look different if there were no parties? Let’s use this beef conundrum for our example.

First most of the cattle world would still be conservative, still support the beef industry and still would elect maybe even the same individual to represent them in the House.

The difference is if the Representative was not beholden or forced to be loyal to a party machinery there might be some small differences in how the Representative votes.

Yes they would still support the agricultural industry, but maybe supporting more smaller and/or local businesses when it comes to writing tax breaks into bills. They might spend more time finding better immigration policy that strengthens our border, yet allows workers they need into the country.

They would not be required to blindly support the party leader just because they were the party leader or support other party priorities that might not benefit their constituents.

They would work on legislation that benefits their constituents, plus similar industries yet be able to compromise with other legislators to create more comprehensive budget plans and pass the full budget for example.

Their support of a president that promotes what Trump is doing in Argentina would not exist. They may still support the President, yet they would speak out more forcefully, call the President out and create legislation or work with the Executive branch to stop this decision.

The President not having the blind loyalty of the party would need to be more conscious of the various needs of the country and work with the legislators to do better for the country.

And when the majority of the country supports something then legislation would be written and passed.

For example since the majority of this country is working and middle class, that would mean most districts are primarily working and middle class and each legislator would be more reactive to those needs than party reliance on billionaire and lobbyist campaign donations. (on a side not since most see the need for campaign finance reform, we would have better campaign finance laws). Basically if each Representative relied on working in and within the community to get elected there would be less reliance on large donations and legislation would reflect the needs of the majority of the country. We would still have other problems like poverty, healthcare, the economy to address, yet it would be easier for conservatives and liberals to compromise or better yet write better legislation originally to help the poor or what else is needed because the people generally support these needs. The details would require the back and forth of compromise and planning, yet the wants and needs of the people are always front and forward.

So not having political machinery isn’t going to change much on the visible surface because we would still have conservatives and liberals and lunatics, but better on the results.

And for anyone that hasn’t paid attention the two party system is not part of the Constitution and even some of our forefathers warned us of the dangers. It seems awkward that someone that died over 200 years ago could say “I told you so”.

 

Go Mavericks, going to be an interesting year, strong interior defense and offense and yet perimeter question marks that if answered could mean a great year. If not then potentially an up and down year. And for those of you who don’t care, don’t watch. The NBA is underway.


No comments:

Post a Comment