There are a couple of dominant ways of thinking, that we teach to our kids. We either reward them for making snap judgments and coming up with simple solutions that solve small immediate problems(you are so clever), or we reward them for the work they put in and the results of endurance(you are such a hard worker). The difference of training a fixed mindset vs. a growth mindset.
A quick hack vs. a sustainable engineering principle that handles complexity and large datasets better with time.
This is also true in politics. A quick hack vs. a sustainable method. The quick hacks are easier to sell as it can churn out apparent results for the current input, but has not been tested with more complicated scenarios, and since you were able to come up with that quick hack, a sequence of such methods should work faster and you should be able to handle all edge cases on a case by case basis.
I hate bad engineering at all fronts.
There are huge expensive systems that we rely on, that are basically held together by duct tape and rely on some key employee that is the only one that understands it well enough to respond fast enough for our system to appear to work. I think this is very much the case with other than software systems as well. Government installations, health organisations and private corporations. Just because it works, does not hold water for it working well enough or optimally.
When I look at political parties, I look at how they tend to solve problems and the way that they are solving the problems rather then the problems they are solving. If you are just looking at the problems that they intend to solve instead of looking at the methods they use, you are encouraging bad engineering behaviour and most likely do not understand or appreciate fine tuned algorithms or adaptable systems. Educate yourself and vote for sustainable systems rather than recursive patch work that aims at hiding the problems rather than solving them.
Less hacks, more quality engineering!!
V 