The best troubleshooting trick is: Step back.
Less tersely, if a problem or decision at one level seems to be getting nowhere, go back to the choice above this choice, or the choice before this choice, especially if the next level up is NOT SEEN AS A CHOICE.
In programming, when I can’t figure out whether to use a while-loop or a for-loop, I should go back one level and ask why I need any kind of loop.
The current soap opera about “elections” in various countries could profit from this technique. We’re celebrating or mourning the probable victory of Trump in this year’s election, which won’t make a damn bit of difference. We’re celebrating or mourning the probable victory of LePen in France, which WILL make a difference.
Okay, now we see the next level.
Instead of fussing and fighting about our meaningless non-choice, we should be asking:
WHY DO SOME COUNTRIES HAVE REAL ELECTIONS WHILE WE DON’T HAVE REAL ELECTIONS?
I’ve been asking this question for quite a while, again using an engineerish viewpoint. Parliaments have functional feedback loops, whether they’re described as elections or not. The PM is just a board chairman, not a hereditary king, so his party can replace him immediately when he proves unsuitable for the party’s purposes. We’re stuck with a bad leader for 4 years. No feedback, no response.
Polistra's Mill 