Everyone has been offering their analysis of last week’s electoral debacle. And what it means going forward.
I last week offered my pre-analysis. I didn’t have a horse in the race. Because I don’t have a horse in the race. I’ve gone a long way towards achieving George Carlin’s Zen-like detached bemusement with it all.
One thing of which I am entirely positive? The Democrats didn’t win. The Republicans lost. But in our stupid, limited-and-limiting, see-saw two Party system? If one Party falls? The other rises. By default.
For part of my election analysis, I paraphrase the great rock poet Peter Townshend:
“Meet the new dumb - same as the old dumb.”
I am reminded of a question I am told someone once asked Ralph Nader:
Interlocutor: “Are you in favor of a third party?”
Nader: “I’d like to have a second.”
To again reference Carlin: We have the illusion of choice in our elections. And our lives.
It doesn’t matter which puppets we elect. The globalist Big Businesses ran the puppet show last week. And they will run the puppet show next week.
The American people just expressed crystal clear thoughts on what their votes meant. To them. They mean nothing to the Uniparty. Post-election, the Uniparty immediately went about obfuscating them.
To wit: 71% of voters opposed a data center near them. 56% said data centers were a “crucial or major factor” in their vote.
President Donald Trump long ago went all-in with the Big Tech oligarchs. He called objecting to data centers - amongst other things - “backwards and poor.”
For campaign purposes, Democrats took the other side. Because that’s how the see-saw works. And because why wouldn’t they? It’s a 71-29 issue in their favor.
Except Democrats don’t oppose data centers. They oppose Republicans - and not Democrats - being bribed by Big Tech to allow data centers.
It only took two days for the Democrats to flop their flip:
“Newly elected Democratic governors projected calm against that backdrop. Many ran on pledges to impose data center moratoriums.
“But several winners sought to refine their positions in post-election interviews, saying they intend to put guardrails on data center development rather than block it entirely.”
So now there will be more Democrats - and less Republicans - jamming data centers down our throats. The constant? The data centers are going to be jammed down our throats. Regardless of our little elections. We’ve just changed the Party being more bribed to do it.
Big Tech is (borrowing and) spending trillions to develop Artificial Intelligence (AI) - and build the attending data centers. A big part of that budget - is bribing both halves of the Uniparty. Not just in DC, but all up and down the ballot.
Texas Republican Governor Greg Abbott and Pennsylvania Democrat Governor Josh Shapiro were once upon a time both exuberantly for data centers.
Abbott had received $9 million from data center-related donors. Shapiro $5.7 million.
But both were running for reelection in 2026. So both placed their moistened fingers into the wind - and flopped their flips.
In November 2025, Abbott called Texas an AI “epicenter.” In August, he froze data center construction.
In June 2026, Shapiro said “I’m proud to announce that with Amazon’s commitment of at least $20 billion to build new state-of-the-art data center campuses across our Commonwealth….”
In August? Just two months later - but two months closer to an election? Shapiro signed an executive order “demanding data center developers comply with strict requirements and blocking speculative, irresponsible data center projects.”
How’s that for profiles in discourage?
Of course there are still some differences between the two halves of the Uniparty. It is not entirely monolithic. But it’s getting there.
As the AI-data center debacle demonstrates, Big Biz is more and more often bribing both sides - on more and more issues. Thereby achieving the Uniparty’s warped definition of “bipartisan.”
At least one question arises: What about old issues? Where Big Biz had only bribed one side? If and when those issues arise again - how will they be handled in today’s age of “bipartisan” bribery?
To wit: Network Neutrality. In August of 2025, I extruded a rare bit of personal optimism - and hoped that this idiotic issue was FINALLY dead.
This is what I get for my optimism….
FSF’s May Predicts Return of Rate Regulation, Net Neutrality for 2027 Congress:
“The Democratic Party taking over both houses of Congress is likely to lead to the return of the net-neutrality debate, more price regulation and efforts to increase government ownership of communications facilities, said Free State Foundation President Randolph May….”
Full disclosure: Randy May is an old friend. But don’t hold that against him. He is an eminent expert on tech policy. Hold that against him.
Net Neutrality is SO old (and stupid)? It dates WAY back to the late 2000s - when Big Tech was only seriously bribing the Democrat half of the Uniparty.
President Trump seemed to have killed Net Neutrality as an issue during his first year in office - in 2017. Hence my brief, foolish flash of optimism in 2025.
If Net Neutrality is making a comeback? I am forced to wonder about some newer DC Republicans.
According to Grok, there are currently 149 House and 21 Senate Republicans who were elected in 2016 or after. That’s after the Net Neutrality debates had basically ended. And well after Big Tech had started bribing Republicans.
According to Grok, Big Tech spent at least $878 million on just federal Republicans - just in the 2026 election.
Will any of these Republicans come out in favor of Net Neutrality? Will many?
I’m sure most have never been asked about it (or heard of it). Will they revert to the default DC response to issue questions: Asking their (Big Tech) donors to tell them what they should think?
Yes, President Trump still has his veto. But he no longer has his sea legs.
His Iran war was a crucial reason why last Tuesday became last Tuesday. And he just said he’d consider cutting an illegal alien amnesty deal with Democrats.
Both ideas were anathema to all three Trump presidential campaigns. So I wonder if Trump will remain sturdy on Net Neutrality.
Thankfully, I have no such concerns about Trump’s Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Brendan Carr.
His fellow Republican Commissioner Olivia Trusty?:
“There is no public record of Commissioner Olivia Trusty taking a formal position on net neutrality, and her confirmation to the FCC does not indicate how she will vote on that issue.”
She wasn’t even asked about Net Neutrality at her 2025 confirmation hearing. You can see why I had hoped the issue was dead.
And even if Trump and his administration remain un-wobbly? They’re only in DC for two more years.
Will these new-ish, Big-Tech-bribed Congressional Republicans join with their Big-Tech-bribed Democrat colleagues and a future Big-Tech-bribed administration - and re-afflict us with Net Neutrality?
I really hope not.
But I no longer hope much. At least as far as DC is concerned.