What's missing from "A New Frame and Lens" — and where does the Head get it wrong?

[BetterToBest]

"A New Frame and Lens" currently covers fifteen flashpoints across five arenas — Economy & Money, Welfare/Housing & Health, Justice & Safety, Rights & Society, and Governance & World — each run through the same lens: the dominant left instinct, the dominant right instinct, the head's attempt at a synthesis, and a tail showing what happens if neither wing lets the head in.

This is a working draft, not a finished argument, and it's meant to be argued with. Two questions:

1. What's missing?
Topics we haven't tackled yet that come up often in left/right debates — foreign policy, trade, energy policy, election administration, tech/AI regulation, or something else entirely? If you think a topic belongs on the page, say what it is and why it's a big enough fault line to earn a spot alongside taxes, abortion, immigration, and the rest.

2. Where would you push back on what's already there?
For any of the fifteen topics: Did we get the dominant left/right instincts correct? Does the Head's synthesis actually resolve the tension, or does it quietly favor one side while claiming neutrality? Is the Tail realistic, or does it stack the deck? Specific quotes and specific counterarguments are far more useful here than general impressions — if you think a paragraph is wrong, tell us what it should say instead.

One ground rule, borrowed from the page's own disclaimer: we may not all agree on everything, yet this only works if the disagreement is specific enough to actually revise something. Claiming "I disagree with the abortion section" doesn't move anything forward; yet "the Right paragraph on X leaves out Y, and here's a source" does.

Have at it.