Op-Ed: Why Tesla And Trump May Need Each Other

11 months ago by Tesla Mondo 148

TESLA AND TRUMP MAY NEED EACH OTHER

Here’s how people aged 18 to 25 supposedly voted, according to Survey Monkey:

18-15-year-old-voters-teslamondo

And here’s which stocks they own, according to MarketWatch:

young-tesla-investors

So Trump’s fans are kinda old; Tesla’s are kinda young. And Trump and Tesla differ just a bit on climate change and likely won’t see eye to eye on environmental policy, tax subsidies or how to manage thinning hair.

But unless Trump wants a youth revolt, he’ll have to go easy on Tesla. In fact, Trump could score a massive win with young people if he backs Tesla. He didn’t need the youth vote this time, but these peeps will be four years older and more influential when Trump is up for reelection, and a new crop of even more rabid Tesla fans will backfill.

Moreover, if Trump wants to make American great again, he’ll surely acknowledge that Tesla is already making American ingenuity and manufacturing great again. Plus, both Trump and Musk are at least mildly irritated at China’s protectionist shenanigans. Look at the agita Tesla has suffered just trying to qualify for Chinese EV incentives, despite the overwhelming air pollution problem. TeslaMondo thinks there’s enough common ground to supersede the other stuff and make Elon and Trump strange bedfellows. Very.

Here’s hoping against hope for some camaraderie between President Bunker and Meathead Musk.

president-bunker-teslamondo

*Editor’s Note: This and other Tesla-related posts appear on TeslaMondo. Check it out here.

Tags: , ,

148 responses to "Op-Ed: Why Tesla And Trump May Need Each Other"

  1. Warren says:

    People between 18 and 25 will be paying to ride in an electric, autonomous taxi, on their way to a temp gig. I think Donald and Elon will get along fine.

    1. mx says:

      Those people, the exploited people, will vote Democrat.

      1. Yogurt says:

        So the exploited people will vote for the party that had Bill Clinton sign off on NAFTA and the China free trade agreement selling them and the middle class down the river??

        Brilliant!!
        At the end of the day the Republicans and Democrats just screw up the country and world in two different ways…

        1. Michael Mehrer says:

          ALL of the trade agreements have been purely GOP actions, please check the record for yourself. For you to trot out Bill signing a Republican policy (NAFTA) is ridiculous.

          1. speculawyer says:

            Yeah, it has been amazing to watch the GOP go from the totally support free trade party into the protectionist party.

            And even more funny, they deny that they even did that. Well, the National Review people realize it but the Trumpkins don’t.

          2. Yogurt says:

            Sorry but when you are president you take the ultimate responsibility for signing on the dotted line not the people who wrote the bill for better or for worse…

            1. SJC says:

              No, Congress has to write good bills.
              Look at the sue Saudi bill, the president told them not to do it, they overrode the veto then said he should have said something when they learned the consequences. He DID say, they did NOT listen.

        2. BraveLilToaster says:

          Yeah, right. You’re grasping at so many straws that you think you’ve got a whole fistful of them.

          Here: https://electrek.co/2016/11/11/automakers-ask-trump-not-to-make-them-produce-electric-cars-in-first-lobbying-effort-since-election/

          The *very first* lobbyists since the election were American automakers telling him to not force them to make EVs. What do you *think* he’s going to do to CAFE?

          I’ll tell you what. I’ll bet you $50 that the federal incentives for EVs are going away, and that CAFE standards will be changed from 50mpg to 20 in his first 100 days in office.

          The only real question is “how much do you want to bet that this new government will also subsidize coal like mad?”

      2. Jim Whitehead says:

        Survey Monkey is not a scientific poll, it just pure entertainment. Any online poll is easy to rig by campaign workers of either party. Why do you think most so-called scientific polls called for a Hillary landslide, not a Trump victory? Because they were rigged to make her look inevitable. Since respectable polls got Trump’s victory wrong, why does anyone pay attention to a clearly worthless survey monkey online poll? A coin toss would have been more accurate calling the election – its right 50% of the time!

    2. Ed Hart says:

      Since perception is everything, The Donald would take several giant steps upward if he would fly to California to meet with Musk.

  2. SparkEV says:

    “But unless Trump wants a youth revolt, he’ll have to go easy on Tesla.”

    This is horse manure. Most young people can’t afford Tesla, and equating that is just nonsense. Indeed, high priced EV might seem to them as toy for people like Dump.

    Young people mostly vote Democrat even without a-hole like Dump as Republican candidate. To show they mostly vote Democrat in this election without any context to past is misleading.

    But just wait until those young people start paying taxes. When taxes become the biggest expense of their lives, many will change their tunes. I wasn’t political until I realized taxes were by far the biggest expense, same will be true for many Democrat voting young people.

    When I say paying taxes, I don’t mean wage garnishment like most employees (ie, treated like criminals with judgment against them). I mean actually writing out the check and seeing your bank account drop enough to buy a brand new car every year.

    1. cmg186 says:

      “Young people mostly vote Democrat even without a-hole like Dump as Republican candidate. To show they mostly vote Democrat in this election without any context to past is misleading.”

      +1000 Sparky.

      1. Kdawg says:

        In the 80’s, young people actually voted Republican. Clinton got the young vote in the 90’s. It was split about 50/50 in the 2000/04. Obama got the young vote in 08/12.

    2. mx says:

      >>When taxes become the biggest expense of their lives

      Man, I love this argument.
      It truly is a vote AGAINST SUCCESS.

      How much, let’s call it what it is, CAPITAL GAINS tax did you pay under Bush in the 2008? Remember, you paid NOTHING. You paid ZERO Taxes, why? Because YOU LOST A FORTUNE.

      Obama GROWS the economy for 7 straight years, cuts back on Wall Street Fraud, and makes American Business start to grow again. So, Everything is going Great for the 1-10%, and yet, you’ve STILL got something to bitch about.

      A Successful Economy means Your Going to Bitch About Your Taxes. You have to hand it to Repub Strategists. Along with Gerrymandering, Drivers License Voter ID for city residents who don’t own cars, and this Bitching about Greater Incomes, Better Business Conditions, and a Brighter Economic Future, by Bitching About Taxes. It fools the gullible every time.

      Remember Reagan said: “Trust but Verify”.
      You’d better Start Verifying your belief system.

      1. SparkEV says:

        Young people don’t get their income from capital gains (aka, investment income), but from their labor. They also typically don’t have much to deduct. Then they are hit with full brunt of income tax.

        At about $60K/yr which is typical of entry level engineer, you’re doling out about $20K in taxes, enough to buy a new car every year. As they become more experienced and make more money, they are hit with even higher rate.

        Then they realize “tax the rich” that Democrats tout is not the rich, but actually the middle class like them where a good surgeon could land them at 40% tax rate. Meanwhile, tax on the rich (ie, those who can afford to live off of investments) still remain 20%. It sure soured me from Democrats who love to have even higher tax rate for the middle class like me. That’s why I call them Dumbocrats.

        1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          “Young people don’t get their income from capital gains (aka, investment income), but from their labor.”

          Wow, you said it, Sparky.

          I mean, seriously, the Capital Gains tax? That’s a concern only for the 1%!

        2. Kdawg says:

          Expect your taxes to go up with Trump. Especially if you have kids.

          1. mx says:

            Especially a new build out of the military.

            1. Aaron says:

              Don’t forget the wall that Mexico won’t pay for…

            2. pjwood1 says:

              C’mon. Trump sees the wastefulness of letting the military get what could be spent on “butter”. Clinton was more the hawk. It comes down to how much the R’s roll him over.

        3. mx says:

          Sparky, then you need to learn how tax rates work.
          1) If you’re single renting, yes you’ll be paying a higher tax rate than a married couple or a family. I didn’t write the tax code, talk to your Repub reps.

          2) Not all your income is taxed at your top tax rate.
          If you’re making 60,000 than only the top $23,000 is taxed at 25%. The first 9,225 is taxed at 10%, then $9,226 thru $37,450 is taxed at 15%.
          Your Effective tax rate for Federal Taxes is 18%.

          3) But, should you be paying this burden? No, you’re not making millions of dollars in income, but the top 1% has so many tax avoidance schemes that it’s hard to cut our taxes.
          And voting Republican is only going to make that worse.

          4) The other taxes in the system are more regressive too. With a Flat tax being the most regressive, and that’s a Republican policy.

          You’re Never better off voting Republican.

          1. SparkEV says:

            I’m well aware of the tax code. You need to learn to read what I wrote instead of making up straw man arguments.

            1) Most young people are single and renting. This “screw the young” was by Dumbocrats agreeing on “progressive” tax code with Republitard blessing.

            2) Tax is not only the federal income tax. Add in state income tax, sales tax, excise tax (young tend to drink and travel more), gas tax, electric tax, water tax, blah blah blah, and you’re getting close to $20K in taxes at $60K income.

            3) Dumbocrats were in power in the past, yet middle class paying far bigger share than the rich didn’t change. If anything, they lie and tell you they’ll soak the rich when the reality is they soak the middle class.

            4) Current tax system is far more regressive than many tax plans. As you know, the rich pay capital gains rate while middle class pay far more. You call that progressive?

            An example of system that’s less regressive is version of fair tax. No tax for those making less than 3X poverty rate and 21% flat for all income above that would be fair. Then you tax the rich at the same rate as middle class, unlike tax plans Dumbocrats propose which tax middle class more than the rich.

            You’re so steeped in Republican hate that you can’t see straight. Go look at what happened with Democrat control, and you’ll see that they aren’t any better, and worse in many cases.

    3. speculawyer says:

      Yes, they can’t afford Tesla cars . . . yet. But that doesn’t mean they don’t support Tesla. The young people LOVE Tesla and are eagerly looking forward to Tesla reducing the price of EVs. And they will cheer on Tesla from the sidelines until they can afford one.

  3. Someone out there says:

    So clueless people voted for Hillary, no surprises there.

    1. Anon says:

      You’re standing on the wrong side of the mirror.

      Demographic data shows Trump did great with uneducated– and therefore gullible, voters.

      1. Jsmay311 says:

        Trump “loves the poorly educated”. 😛

        1. Scott Franco says:

          Then apparently half of america are uneducated deplorables.

          How sad for all you genius democrats.

          1. Michael Mehrer says:

            Probably 7 million less than half.

            1. James says:

              Electric cars.

              I think they are great.

          2. Kdawg says:

            Actually only 18% of the population voted for Trump.

            1. speculawyer says:

              And even if you only look at those that voted, less than half voted for Trump. More people voted for someone other than Trump . . . and one person literally got more votes than Trump . . . 600+K more right now and that gap may continue to widen as the votes are counted.

              1. Tim says:

                Shhh. Don’t tell them that Trump only won because the Electoral College favors smaller population rural states.

                One can relish Trump won the presidency, but one cannot claim he received a majority mandate.

                People just suffer congnitive dissonance too often. Either taxes will go up or the deficit will go up. Choose.

                1. Rightofthepeople says:

                  Likewise, Hillary also did not receive a majority of the popular vote. What’s your point?

                  1. Tim says:

                    It would have been easier for you to type SQUIRREL than write what you did.

                    What does Hillary have to do with the fact that the majority of voters did not vote for Trump and therefore any claimed popular mandate is an unsustainable position.

                  2. Kdawg says:

                    Majority doesn’t always have to mean “greater than 50%”. It can mean “most”. For example, “the majority of the time”.

          3. mx says:

            Global Warming is real. Did you look that up yet? There’s a global meltdown you can see on u-tube.

            Did you remember the rampant Wall Street Fraud when Bush was elected? You didn’t hear about that? Because Fox News didn’t report it?

            If your a Republican, and have money, You’re the target.

          4. Anon says:

            Your inability to provide proper percentages, since approx 50% of the population DIDN’T vote, reveals much.

            Sad.

        2. bogdan says:

          All politicians love the poorly educated. They are so easy to manipulate. You can promise them everything and they will believe it!
          But that’s not an ‘US only’ problem. It’s a global trend unfortunately.

          1. Anon says:

            It also explains why Conservatives the world over, don’t promote higher quality education, under various guises– like lowering taxes.

            The lack of Critical Thinking Skills, makes people into political puppets– and they know it.

    2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      “So clueless people voted for Hillary, no surprises there.”

      Just another “useful idiot” for the Trumpians. Appalling to see how many Americans were taken in by such obvious Big Lies. Well, they’ll get a harsh education in the difference between reality and Trump’s Big Lies, in the coming months.

      1. Someone out there says:

        Luckily we have tons of evidence proving Hillary is a liar and a cheat so we don’t have to guess in that case.

  4. Warren says:

    We had a war between tech billionaires, and old industry billionaires. The billionaires won. People between 18 and 25 weren’t going to win either way.

    1. ffbj says:

      Seems pretty much to be the case.

  5. Four Electrics says:

    A better example of wishful thinking can not be found on the Internet. Some of Tesla Mondo’s other posts come close, however.

  6. Another Euro point of view says:

    As I understood it many 18-25 did not vote at all, now taking into account the average price tag of a Tesla I take it many 18-25 couldn’t care less.
    Instead I believe that best chance of being favorably looked upon by D. Trump & Co is being an all American success story, now I would note be surprised that for many Trump voters Model X is nothing short than an evil mobile (very expensive, sponsored by their taxes and mostly driven by affluent west coast liberals). Model X might come down in history as an unfortunate mistake as it gives Tesla the wrong image at the wrong time, while if all that time and resources would have been allocated to Model 3 instead Tesla could have benefited from a much better image among those very Americans that made Trump access to power possible.

    1. Roy_H says:

      What a pile of bs. Just because most people cannot afford a Model X does not make them hate it. On the contrary it gives hope that the Model 3 will become a reality. Model 3 would not happen without S and X to pay for it.

  7. TNT says:

    The way I look at it, Trump’s tax cuts will be greater than the ev tax credits and I get them every year so it will be even easier to buy a Tesla. Heck, maybe I should cancel my M3 order and just get a MX.

    1. Scott Franco says:

      Exactly. Furthermore, the EV subsidies we are getting (yes, I have received 3 of them now) are taken from one group of taxpayers and given to others. In fact, since most are taken from all taxpayers, it is effectively a wealth transfer from poor people to rich people, since EV buyers tend to be upper income.

      Having the government subsidize things is never a good idea. They take money, then give it back to you after taking a cut. It always amazes me how people think that the government giving out money is somehow “free”, as in free college, health care subsidizes, etc. Its your money. They took it from you by force.

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        “Having the government subsidize things is never a good idea.”

        Gosh yes, it’s terrible how governments in Western countries subsidize such things as roads, bridges, elementary schools, colleges, universities, hospitals, the electrical grid, water and sewer systems, scientific research, mail delivery, the rural telephone system… and in every industrialized country except the USA, universal health care.

        So hey, Scott, why don’t you move to a region where the government subsidizes none of that. For example, the parts of Somalia still not under control of the central government. Or central New Guinea. Why don’t you move to one of those places, since you claim you’d like it better?

        * * * * *

        REG: All right… all right… but apart from better sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health… what have the Romans ever done for us?

        –Monty Python’s “Life of Brian”

        1. Scott Franco says:

          Why don’t you move to a communist country? They are getting pretty scarce, but I think you can still find one.

          1. Anon says:

            Democratic Socialism really is better… Learn the difference between the various political systems of the world.

          2. Mister G says:

            So your choices are Somalia, central new Guinea, and Sahara desert; locations without government subsidies for infrastructure, education, defense, Healthcare, etc.. Pick one lol

        2. Mister G says:

          Pushi, Scott franco won’t be going to countries without government subsidies, he likes first world amenities too much lol

          1. G2 says:

            Well done gentlemen, well done.

      2. Kdawg says:

        Expect your taxes to go up under Trump. Especially if you have kids. Unless you make $413,000/year, then your taxes go down. And those people won’t have to worry about an estate tax, so the super rich can keep the money in their family to continue the wealth gap.

        http://www.npr.org/2016/11/13/501739277/who-benefits-from-donald-trumps-tax-plan

        1. speculawyer says:

          I need to write an article about the Estate Taxes and Trump . . . especially in view of his near $1billion loss that allowed him to not pay federal taxes for many years.

          In summary, between taking that big loss plus depreciation on his buildings, he hasn’t had to pay much tax at all for the last 20 some years. Now that sounds like a big loophole and it largely is. But not completely . . . in theory what is supposed to happen is that he eventually sells a building and thus becomes liable for a huge capital gain tax on high sales price minus the low basis (which has been pushed down really low with all those depreciation deductions).

          However . . . when you die, you get a step up in basis for free such that you don’t pay capital gains taxes. But normally you would pay estate taxes. However, if estate taxes are eliminated as he would like to do . . . he’ll pay nothing . . . .

          Trump may literally be allowed to have made millions of dollars and not pay Federal taxes for some 30 years. Is that fair? Clearly not. But who’s going to stop him? The GOP?

          I wonder why no one wrote this story. I guess it is a bit too complex for many.

          1. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ sven says:

            Speculawyer said:
            “. . . in theory what is supposed to happen is that he eventually sells a building and thus becomes liable for a huge capital gain tax on high sales price minus the low basis (which has been pushed down really low with all those depreciation deductions).”

            Actually, that is incorrect. Trump would first have to “recapture” any depreciation taken on the sold asset as ordinary income, then only the realized gain in excess of depreciation taken would be capital gain. This is know as Section 1231 Depreciation Recapture. Since the depreciation expense on the asset was taken against ordinary income (lowering ordinary income over the years), when the asset is sold, any gain attributable to past depreciation expense vis–à–vis a lower adjusted basis must be recognized as ordinary income.

            Per Wikipedia:
            “Depreciation recapture is the USA Internal Revenue Service (IRS) procedure for collecting income tax on a gain realized by a taxpayer when the taxpayer disposes of an asset that had previously provided an offset to ordinary income for the taxpayer through depreciation. In other words, because the IRS allows a taxpayer to deduct the depreciation of an asset from the taxpayer’s ordinary income, the taxpayer has to report any gain from the disposal of the asset (up to the recomputed basis) as ordinary income, not as a capital gain. Any gain over the recomputed basis will be taxed as a capital gain in accordance with section 1231 of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC).”

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depreciation_recapture_(United_States)

          2. Scott Franco says:

            Good, so you are onboard for fair tax simplification that eliminates the huge number of loopholes.

      3. mx says:

        It’s a wealth transfer from all people to rich people back to all people. Because the Federal Credit gets subtracted in the price of the used car.

        So, the second buyer gets the tax credit with No Federal paperwork. Making it and effective program.

        And it takes big polluting V8’s off the market.
        That’s a win for fresh air in your neighborhood.

      4. Bill Howland says:

        An Ev tax credit is not a subsidy.

        It is less theft of your own money.

        If a burgler breaks into my home and steals only 1 tv set instead of both of them, I don’t consider that he GAVE me anything. He is still guilty of THEFT, not just as much.

        If I refused to go to work there would be no taxes to be paid to the gov’t so they’re not out anything..

        They could cancel 100% of federal income taxes and it wouldn’t make much difference since Quantitative Easing generates most of the cash out of thin air anyway, to the point where the value of the dollar will decrease on avg halved every 9 years. I’m sure that some of us understand what the word INCOME means in this context – but that’s a different subject. The Supreme Court in fact has RULLED on this issue TWICE. They said working for wages is not ‘income’, but it is an ‘even exchange of labor for pay’ and that if you weren’t liable to pay taxes before the incometax ammendment, then you weren’t liable after.

        The Supreme Court after this has always refused to hear any arguments after the first 2 decisions.

        It has been successfully deferred until now.

        1. Anon says:

          How about this example:

          Government takes some of your taxes, and educates your neighbor’s kids. Kid go on to be successful and do not go on to exist on Welfare Programs, or deal drugs to make a living.

          Greedy Bill would rather promote Stupid People, who end up being unemployable and trapped in a downward socio-economic spiral that takes more money from everyone in the long run, to fix?

          The lack of Dumb People, is indeed a gift. Taxes are totally worth supporting the greater good of society, Mr. Scrooge. Police, Fire, Ambulance, Infrastructure, Social Services, etc., are all necessary evils, if you want to continue your posh way of life.

          If you really don’t want to pay Taxes, move to Alaska– build a cabin on a desolate mountain with no roads or electricity and no sewage system; live there so you’re not parasitizing the rest of us. Nature will deal with you and your silly conservative ideology soon enough.

          1. Bill Howland says:

            NO shortage of clowns here:

            Fed Gov’t doesn’t take my taxes to educate kids – those are called PROPERTY TAXES which I also pay in abundance.

            Such taxes are 5 times the amount I spend on Utilities.

            So you can say the Solar Panels I’ve installed on my house to lower the electric bill are a complete waste since its just pennies compared to the tax bill.

            Armchair warriors can criticize what I pay or don’t pay when they are willing to pay my bills.

            What is Anon supposed to mean anyway? Are you ashamed of your own name?

    2. Nix says:

      If you don’t pay taxes to run the gov’t, who does? And if nobody pays, what huge sectors of the gov’t do you gut? Or do you just massively increase the deficit, and let Millennials pay the bill after you are dead and gone?

      1. SparkEV says:

        I would be more accepting that we need to pay these huge taxes if our military budget isn’t more than next 8 biggest militaries combined.

        http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jan/13/barack-obama/obama-us-spends-more-military-next-8-nations-combi/

        As far as cutting is concerned, Stossel has opinions on what to cut, and I largely agree. Problem is no politician will kill anything. I think it was Reagan who said any government service is too hard to kill.

        1. Nix says:

          SparkEV, do you seriously believe that Trump or his political party will reduce military spending?

          The Paul Ryan budget that dates back to FY2012 (that Trump now backs), would INCREASE defense spending by $800-900B over the next 10 years. Ha campaigned on building up the military over and over, and so has Paul Ryan, dating back to his 2012 VP bid as Romney’s running mate.

          http://www.forbes.com/sites/charlestiefer/2016/11/09/president-trump-is-likely-to-boost-u-s-military-spending-by-500-billion-to-1-trillion/#30a613cd4108

          1. Scott Franco says:

            Good. We didn’t beat the USSR by military force, we outspent them. We spend 3 times as much as the nearest country (China) but what we get for that is we are the undisputed leader of the world, and the last time someone attacked the US directly, we spent a huge amount of money (nobody actually knows how much) to develop a the most powerful weapon in the world, and then dropped it on them.

            The US gets respect for its money. If you want to talk about waste in military spending, or why we defend idiots like Europe who don’t even like us and can well afford to defend themselves, that is a good conversation to have. But not unilateral disarmament al la Obama. Sorry.

            1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

              Scott Franco said:

              “We spend 3 times as much as the nearest country (China) but what we get for that is we are the undisputed leader of the world…”

              Yeah, we’re so “undisputed” that people keep calling on us to intervene militarily even in places where intervention by the U.S. would only make things worse. Places like Syria. Hey, Trump isn’t wrong on everything; he’s right to say we should stay out of Syria. (Unfortunately, he also says he wants to increase the size of our already massively bloated military budget.)

              “…and the last time someone attacked the US directly, we spent a huge amount of money (nobody actually knows how much) to develop a the most powerful weapon in the world, and then dropped it on them.”

              No, the last time someone attacked the U.S. directly, on 9/11, we stupidly reacted by getting involved in the morass of tribal wars in countries like Afghanistan and Iraq. That has only made us less safe, by riling up a lot more terrorists to attack the U.S. and other Western countries. If our military was, say, a third the size it is, then probably we wouldn’t have been tempted to do all that, and we’d all be a lot safer today.

              All the nuclear weapons, fighter planes, tanks, and missiles in the world won’t make us one iota safer against terrorist attacks. We would be safer with a considerably smaller military than we have today, and we’d waste far less taxpayer dollars on it if it was a third the size it is.

              1. Scott Franco says:

                And so you think that our reaction to 9/11 should have been “oh well, we should have stayed out of the middle east”, and just let it all slide.

                1. Bill Howland says:

                  9/11 was a Synthetic Terror event.

                  Its instructive to ponder that the “Project for a New American Century” group (PNAC) said that a “Pearl Harbor event” will be necessary for Americans to accept a new war in the middle east.

                  Before clowns start yelling ‘conspiracy theory’, you might think about what the powers that be have calmly stated, or the “conspiracy theory” which has been shoved down our throats as the official explanation. Here’s a 5 minute synopsis.

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuC_4mGTs98

                  Now as far as Trump goes – he’s already putting Neocons in charge, as well as the new Attorney General who is just as honest as the last two – since he’s fully involved in the ‘WTC project’ in view of admitting he was warned by didn’t ‘bother’ to warn 300 firemen who died – and then made sure the crime scene was quickly shipped to china and melted down.

                  I’m a reluctant supporter of Trump – to the extent he does what he’s claimed – to which I’m becoming increasingly doubtful.

            2. Kdawg says:

              And we’ll “defeat” Mexico by spending billions on a wall too!! -smh-

              As far as beating Russia, I think they just picked our next president.

            3. Bill Howland says:

              Reagan specifically did *NOT* win the cold war. He ENDED the cold war.

              Unbeknownst to most, another very HOT cold war has been brewing on Russia’s borders by the US and NATO. Hopefully, a la Reagan, Trump will END this.

              How dare Russia put their country in the middle of all of Nato’s military bases and rocket launchers.

          2. SparkEV says:

            Nix, why do you assume I agree with Dump and Republitards? It’s Reagan who went to great debts to grow the military. I think you’re like mx in that anything you don’t agree automatically assume I must agree with Republican.

            My political leaning is anti-socialism. There are many Republican socialists out there with the chief among them just being elected president. To pull a Godwin, protecting jobs from foreigners is exactly what German Socialists did in 1930’s and 1940’s.

      2. Scott Franco says:

        This is a standard liberal debating tactic, changing the subject. Nobody said anything about the governments right to collect taxes. What is being discussed is their using it to support one product, people or thing over another one. This is in part and parcel why government wealth transfers don’t work.

        When the government decided to help GM motors, they took from taxpayers to support a business that was failing. Because successful people pay taxes, that is, to pay taxes you must earn money (and recall that people in the top %50 of earners pay %97 of taxes), you are taking money from the successful people in the economy and giving it to the failures.

        Look, bottom line is it is not my place to teach you basic economics. I am sorry you skipped econ 101 to smoke pot. But that was YOUR choice.

        1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          Scott Franco said:

          “Nobody said anything about the governments right to collect taxes. What is being discussed is their using it to support one product, people or thing over another one.”

          And yet, here you are complaining about the molehill that is the tax rebate on EVs, instead of the trillions of dollars in taxpayer money, not to mention the lives of thousands of Americans in military service, spent on protecting our oil interests overseas; most of that spent for no other purpose than gasmobile drivers and truck drivers having cheap gas and cheap diesel.

          Biased much, dude?

          If it wasn’t for the massive government subsidy of cheap gas, the gasmobile would have been obsolete decades ago.

        2. Kdawg says:

          You mean like bailing out big banks? And now we are going to bail out big oil and big coal?

          FYI, the EV tax credit was put through by a Republican.

  8. AtlantaCourier says:

    You lost.

    So it’s not your place to sit around and think what Trump “ought” to do if he wants this outcome or that.

    The Republicans could do nothing to stop ObamaCare when Obama got elected. They actually did submit an alternative to ObamaCare but I have to admit, we totally ignored it.

    Obama’s foolish words after his election now ring in our ears like a bad hangover.

    “You lost! We won! Deal with it!”

    Then he proceeded to essentially decree the Affordable Healthcare Act into existence when he promised action by Executive Order to secure the last vote.

    Now we are paying for it. It was ObamaCare that lost the election and for what? Most Democrats will be glad to see it go when the Repukes dispose of it.

    We can sit around and take satisfaction in what might happen if Trump doesn’t do this or that and maybe we’ll be right. But it won’t amount to a hill of beans as far as getting America right.

    Trump is King now and we must submit to his every whim and fancy for the next few years.

    Or do we?

    I think Trump can be made to see the light. He’s at odds with many Republicans. But he’s friendlier with the Tea Party element whose numbers are not insignificant.

    I want a carbon tax. So does Elon. The Repukes want huge tax reform. One of the ideas they will likely visit is the Fair Tax. The Tea Party likes the Fair Tax. I like the Fair Tax. The Fair Tax is huge tax reform. And sensible Democrats find the Fair Tax to be palatable. Are we stupid not to see this opportunity?

    The Fair Tax proposal was concocted about 20 years ago and must be rejiggered to account for things like higher debt and whatever healthcare changes are put into place.

    Ding! Carbon Tax anyone?

    The Fair Tax needs a bit of maintenance and the Republicans are about to pop the hood on the old beast. We want a carbon tax. But a carbon tax will never happen on its own. It needs a home. The hood is about to open on the Fair Tax and it is now UP TO US to figure out how to get the catalytic converter installed.

    Under the Fair Tax, a carbon tax wouldn’t be an explicit additional “tax”. That wouldn’t work. Rather a single Fair Tax rate would need to bake in the the cost of carbon credits previously charged to producers and essentially be invisible to the consumer at the checkout stand.

    Are we clever enough to figure this out? Or are we just going to settle for ineffective talk and prognostication?

    Anyway, it’s just a thought which, thanks to Obama’s wise words, is about the only thing we’ll be able to do for a while.

    But maybe if we’re just clever enough…

    1. Roy_H says:

      Wow! “Fair Tax” is a gift to the wealthy, zero tax on investment income.

      1. Rightofthepeople says:

        And zero tax loopholes for the wealthy, don’t forget about that. It’s called the fair tax for a reason. The more stuff you buy, the more tax you pay. That would seem to affect the wealthy as well as capture the underground economy including the illegal drug trade. Everyone pays their fair share under the fair tax.

      2. AtlantaCourier says:

        “Wow” is right.

        Even Fair Tax opponents see through that weak argument. They are cringing right now and wondering how such a lightweight ended up on their bench.

        But I will play ball.

        Yes, under the Fair Tax. NOBODY pays income tax. It’s not just the rich.

        In this way, Roy_H, and to use your own words, the Fair Tax is actually a “gift to all Americans.”

        Thank you for pointing this out.

    2. Scott Franco says:

      Carbon tax was originally a Republican idea, to create a “cap and trade” market for carbon emission.

      The greens hyjacked the idea to become just another wealth transfer system to support universal socialisim. Don’t expect Republicans to support it.

      1. speculawyer says:

        Uh, the Republicans completely bailed on cap & trade themselves. It didn’t even get a chance to be taken over.

        1. Anon says:

          Affordable Care Act was also taken directly from a Republican Think Tank.

          And look how well they embraced it, because the other side branded it. Boo hoo. How shallow a service Republicans performed on behalf of the American People. And yet, fickle fools still voted those obstructionists back in to power.

          When you replace your ethical system with money from special interests, you create a monster that only serves itself, and not the people. That’s the main problem with the current Republican Party.

          Incompetent Figureheads like Trump, are just icing on the cake.

    3. Kdawg says:

      “It was ObamaCare that lost the election and for what? Most Democrats will be glad to see it go when the Repukes dispose of it.”

      Umm, you may want to read this.
      http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37953528

      Big surprise.. Trump wasn’t honest.
      ———-
      Trump: Obamacare key provisions to remain

      1. AtlantaCourier says:

        I never claimed Trump was honest. ObamaCare may or may not be dead. Parts of it may persist.

        I could just as well have suggested that you tie nationalized healthcare to your support of the Fair Tax. I’d go for a scenario like that. After all, Social Security is provided for in the Fair Tax.

        What I’m saying is that the window is open. You can scream out of it at the passersby below and they’ll just keep walking, or you can think of a reasonable solution before the window closes.

        The alternative for the next few years is that Democrats will have zero say in the inevitable outcome.

        You can hope and prognosticate, but you will not be allowed to participate.

        I say come up with something that might appeal to some of the Republicans. They are divided. Which side can you help and if so, will they compromise if it means getting your support?

        Many of the Republicans want the Fair Tax, but probably can’t push it through even with their current majority.

        So that means they’ll push for something WORSE which will pass and which still leaves the Democrats out of the discussion.

        The result: Bad outcome and Democrats get no say.

        Trump being honest or dishonest does not change that. But he may listen if it means getting your support.

        The window is open, but only for a short time.

    4. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      “You lost.”

      No, we lost. America lost, by electing as President someone wholly unfit for office.

      And I can’t imagine what you think you’re accomplishing by name-calling and mischaracterizing a politician *gasp* playing politics as if there’s something unusual or wrong with that.

      The only thing wrong with ObamaCare is that it didn’t go nearly far enough. But then, what later became Social Security first appeared in the USA as pensions for Civil War orphans and widows. Some times social safety net programs take time to grow.

      I have confidence that in time, the USA will have universal health care, just like every other industrialized nation in the entire world. Too bad it’s taking so long. (Japan’s seems to be particularly successful, affordable, and popular. Why not imitate Japan in that regard?)

      1. AtlantaCourier says:

        “The only thing wrong with ObamaCare is that it didn’t go nearly far enough.”

        I’m right there with you. It did not go far enough. If it had been tied to passage of the Fair Tax, it would have received support from about 25-33% of Republicans in Congress as long as it was done right.

        Then, having originally been passed with significant Republican support, it would not be facing certain repeal as it is now, and we’d have affordable healthcare, thank you.

        Instead, Obama essentially imposed the law on Americans by promising to issue an Executive Order to secure the last holdout vote in Congress which was needed for passage. This foolish action guaranteed instant repeal of law if the Republicans ever got back into power.

  9. Euro point of view says:

    you seem to forget that his majesty Elon Musk clumsily took party for the Dem’s just before the elctions . so smart .

    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      Whatever you were trying to say, you didn’t.

  10. Bill Howland says:

    Well one thing is for sure:
    Trump is a fighter..

    He had the entire media establishment, the democratic party and the republican party totally against him.

    What worries me is the neo-cons he has surrounding him. Hopefully he’s just dumb about them.

    His ego is big enough that if something sounds wrong to him, he won’t go for it.

    I was a rather reluctant Trump supporter due to him being a neophyte about Washington.

    But so much for Hillary wanting to “Bring People together”. All the protests in the big cities have more than a little bit of organization behind them since they use mostly the same slogans and the same printed plackards.

    Reminds me of all the protests and riots when Obama was elected president.

    Oh, that’s right, there WEREN’T ANY.

    I’d hate to own any stock in a media company or a polling company. Their nonsense didn’t fly.

    Young people I talk to seem pretty brainwashed – like the totally ‘Non-Conformist’ kids of my generation where every single one had to wear a Jean Jacket.

    But just like my time, there are some who can see through all of this.

    Trump will have a really hard time when the Bond market collapses. It would have done so under Clinton, but perhaps not as soon.

    When this happens I’m sure Trump will be threatened with Impeachment.

    At that time, all the stuff you have will be of little value, and all the stuff you need will get very expensive.

    1. Scott Franco says:

      Protesting AGAINST Obama would have been racist. Protesting AGAINST Trump is against racism. See how neatly that works? You don’t even need black people involved to make it work.

      1. Bill Howland says:

        I’m not going to put it here, but look up the comic strip “Make the First Lady great again!”. I can’t put it here because everyone will have a heart attack.

        It killed joan rivers a few weeks after she mentioned it, just a coincidence, of course.

        The question she was asked was “Do you think we will ever have a Gay president?”

        1. Scott Franco says:

          Not sure where the strip was going with that. Frankly, both the current and next first ladies are way hotter than the former batch.

          1. Bill Howland says:

            The comic strip was a comment on Joan River’s Comment. Look up Joan Rivers Gay.

      2. Tim says:

        Uh, lest one forget (which obviously has happened) when Obama was elected people didn’t go out and protest…

        They bought guns in record numbers, bunkers, and invested in gold.

        Is it intentional memory loss?

        Public protest actually has a very specific purpose and clear impact on ensuring an uncomfortable environment for those in charge. Vietnam protests were never carried out by anywhere near the majority, but it’s a little silly to deny they didn’t move public sentiment and impact public policy.

        1. Scott Franco says:

          Crud, I was supposed to get a bunker! That wasn’t in the brochure….

      3. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ sven says:

        Here’s a lovely example of Hillary’s supporters embracing the longstanding American tradition of a peaceful transition of power following a Presidential election. 🙁 Where, oh where, are the social justice warriors, Hillary Clinton, and Nobel Peace Prize winner Barrack Obama to condone the actions of these Hillary supporters? 🙁 Eight years after Obama promised us hope and change, it’s pretty obvious that he failed miserably. 🙁

        https://twitter.com/kmscodi/status/796554667748716545

    2. Kdawg says:

      I remember when the KKK threw a victory parade when Obama won… oh wait…

    3. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      Bill Howland said:

      “Hopefully he’s just dumb about them.”

      I don’t think it’s that Trump is dumb. It’s that he simply chooses to ignore reality and facts which he finds inconvenient. Like the fact that his last campaign manager, Stephen Bannon, is among the more influential promoters of the white supremacy movement.

    4. Ambulator says:

      I have a hard time seeing how a bond market collapse could be grounds for impeachment, at least for the President. Congress, maybe…

  11. Bill Howland says:

    Is anyone else getting a ‘Page Not Found’ error when clicking on “Automakers ask Trump”?

    1. Rich says:

      Bill, I’m getting the same 404.

      Jay, the “Automakers ask Trump” article on IEVs is broken.
      http://insideevs.com/automakers-ask-trump-to-ease-emissions-rules-ev-mandates-get-ready-for-a-war/

      1. Jay Cole says:

        Sorry, I’m not sure what you mean? That story (“Automakers ask Trump…) isn’t linked in this story, and the link you posted above works for me no problem/has many new comments posted in it in the past few hours.

        1. Jay Cole says:

          Random update: It seems like certain US IPs/networks couldn’t access that story for some reason – made a slight alteration to the URL and seems to be ok now.

  12. Intrepid says:

    As a millennial depicted in this article, I must disagree on a few points. First off, regardless of political party, we are concerned with the environment and despite what regulations are placed on cars, will demand increasingly more environmentally friendly vehicles and even welcome electrification.

    Not all millenials or uneducated voted for Hillary.. I am currently seeking my master’s and voted for Trump, not because I think he’s racist or condone his past behavior, but because I feel he will bring econonmic stability to the country for all.
    Although Elon and Donald won’t see eye-to-eye on everything. Tesla will thrive under the Trump administration, it is a fully American company, hiring thousands every time I look and committed to building more infrastructure in the US. There will be plenty of opportunity for Tesla to succeed.

    I probably make enough to afford a Model S, but ended up leasing a 330e because it suits my driving pattern very well and costs significantly less to lease. I am fortunate enough to work for a forward thinking company which provides incredible incentives on eco friendly cars and in 3 years time, when the Model 3 is readily available, my money is going to Tesla.

    1. ffbj says:

      ..and then there is the real world.

    2. Kdawg says:

      Excuse me if I don’t share your confidence in a man who’s gone bankrupt 4 times and has 75 lawsuits against him.

      Be thankful you have a job now, but when the economy goes, we all go down together.

      1. Intrepid says:

        I suppose we will have to wait and see but I have 401k that’s been doing quite well since Trump’s election and work for the company that makes the devices most people are viewing this article on, so I think I’ll be fine.

        1. Kdawg says:

          Ha.. so you did well in a 3 business days. Yay.

          How did the great depression/recession go for everyone? What about sending your kids to war? What’s the 401K value of that? Let’s see how your taxes are affected. Or the taxes of your fellow citizens.

          What happens when the rest of world views us as backwards, and we have a huge brain-drain from foreign countries? We are already falling behind, despite what the American exceptionalism people like to tout.

          I’m willing to give Trump a chance, but based on history, the odds aren’t good.

          1. Intrepid says:

            401k rate of return is up 3% in the last week and the tech stocks I shorted are paying off nicely, so thank you.

            It’s a bit far fetched at 24 to think my children would be sent off to war because of anything the Trump administration enacts, but if duty were to call, I would die for this country.

            There are lessons to learn from history and although many suffered during the Great Depression, others hedged their bets and a few even became very rich, i.e. Dillinger and Hughes. I won’t formulate a comprehensive treatise on financial diversification for you, but safety nets can help to combat the effects of recession.

            Despite what many in the news media claim, the sky is not falling and there’s not going to be a mass exodus of people from the US. Most of the students in my master’s program are foreign and come to this country to learn, all the while paying tuition at a public school and contributing to our economy.

            The rest of the world already sees us as backwards, but that hardly impedes the spread of western culture like wildfire. It’s up to you to seize the opportunities presented before you, but you can’t blame others for those you’ve missed. Don’t ever doubt the tenacity of the American spirit or you will be remiss.

            1. Kdawg says:

              Um, nice cliches and all, but you didn’t really say anything of value. What I gathered from is; other people’s kids/lives don’t matter. Other people’s financial well-being doesn’t matter. You got yours so all’s good. Me me me. Where have I heard talk like this before?

              Also, would you die for your country, in a war you didn’t agree with? Or would you suddenly develop heel spurs?

              1. Intrepid says:

                Every word of my post is an original thought.

                I may have what I need now, but it hasn’t always been that way. Regardless of if I agree or not, I would fight to protect my loved ones if my country called on me.

                Open your mind to alternate possibilities, just because you fear aberration doesn’t mean you should launch personal attacks against one’s character.

                1. Kdawg says:

                  “Most of the students in my master’s program are foreign and come to this country to learn, all the while paying tuition at a public school and contributing to our economy.”
                  ——–
                  Let’s check the stats again after a few years of a Trump presidency. Did you think all of the students were going to pack their bags and leave on Nov 9th? These types of changes have long lasting effects, some of which we won’t see for years from now.

                  Again, you spew more cliches. Does “fighting for your loved ones” include corporate interests?

                  Enjoy your Randian life, while the rest of us make the world go round.

    3. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      Intrepid said:

      “I… voted for Trump… because I feel he will bring econonmic [sic] stability to the country for all.”

      I’m sure that a businessman who created and managed a large-scale “Trump University” scam, who managed to lead no less than three Atlantic City casinos to bankruptcy, who has made a habit of refusing to pay construction contractors for work done, and who now gets most of his income from merely licensing the name “Trump” on buildings and products, will do a fine job of improving the American economy, especially since we all know that the President has so much control over that.

      Oh, wait…

      And “congratulations” on falling for Trump’s Big Lies. Something that I suspect you won’t be proud of in coming years.

      1. Intrepid says:

        Not every business is successful, but bankruptcy is a legal procedure and Trump has merely used the system to his advantage. I’m pursuing an MBA and can see the logical reason for many of his business decisions, they may not be ‘right’ but it’s business.
        As to a president’s control over the economy, the Obama administration has let the national debt grow almost 50%.. We now have a Republican president, majority congress and senate with intentions of lowering taxes and creating jobs to help bolster our economy and provide incentives for businesses to want to do business here.

      2. Mister G says:

        Intrepid was 11 years old when we invaded Iraq and only 9 years old on 9/11..cut the kid some slack, remember Intrepid is in the “invincible and know-it-all” stage of life lol

        1. Kdawg says:

          Yes, I’m noticing the total lack of perspective. Also going for an MBA with a “business/money”-first, vs. “what’s right” – second attitude explains a lot.

  13. flmark says:

    One basic premise here, I believe, is a fallacy- that he will worry about getting any votes NEXT time. There was MUCH discussion whether Trump truly WANTED to be President. Even just the other day, Colbert joked about Priebus making the comment about Trump being ‘very serious’ about the job…and liking it to a plane’s pilot telling you over the intercom… “I am taking this very seriously”.

    I believe we are looking strongly at a one term President here- BY CHOICE. I think his ego pushed him to assume he could be elected emperor- or however he envisions the job. I doubt he has the interest or sincerity to actually work for the American people, and could care less about any group’s voting tendencies.

    1. Scott Franco says:

      Nope. Trump will be a two termer. One termers are the ones who fail at something major. Since the economy will rebound because of lower taxes and regulation, that will justify a second term.

      You liberals need to stick with your strengths, mainly coming up with reasons in 8 years why the economy getting better was not really because of the Republicans.

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        Scott Franco said:

        “Trump will be a two termer.”

        Only if he leaves the running of the Executive Branch to those actually qualified to do so. For instance, people whose attention span is longer than just a few minutes.

        http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/07/25/donald-trumps-ghostwriter-tells-all

      2. flmark says:

        Re: ‘You liberals’

        You really are an inflammatory a-hole, aren’t you??? You know nothing about me, especially if you read JUST what I wrote above. I made little value judgment in my statements above…but you certainly did. I merely reiterated a number of opinions that were stated previously…

        …and I invite you to read Trumps OWN WORDS during his acceptance speech:
        ‘I look very much forward to being your president, and hopefully at the end of two years or three years or four years, or maybe even eight years. . .’

        MY WIFE, ALSO NOT A LIBERAL, is the one who caught this…WHY would a president elect state TWO YEARS or THREE YEARS???????? YOU DON’T GET IT DO YOU??? These are NOT the words of someone who is excited about the job. Either he expects to be impeached or quit apparently. Or he is just soooo politically inept that he doesn’t know the term of a US President!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

        When my wife told me about the two year thing, I thought maybe he expects Congress to flip and be against him in two years. But when he said THREE YEARS… that is NOT another election he is pointing to.

        HE DOESN’T REALLY WANT THE JOB.

        I am beginning to get more annoyed with Trump supporters NOW THAT THE ELECTION IS OVER.

        1. flmark says:

          …and I don’t get why the ‘liberal media’, allegedly so against Trump, didn’t jump all over this two year three year thing. To me, it’s huge…even if it’s just some sort of Freudian slip.

        2. ClarksonCote says:

          I think where says 2 years or 3 years, etc. he isn’t referring to how long until he gets the boot… He is referring to how long before measuring substantial progress… But then he kind of transitioned halfway through his sentence to be talking about terms.

          It’s evident when watching the speech, to me, anyway…

          1. flmark says:

            Read it again…and read it IN REVERSE
            ‘…or…maybe…EVEN…eight years’- this is NOT a sense of accomplishment…repeat ‘EVEN’
            This is a statement on DURATION. You are not following his mindset if you conclude that he started the sentence with what he will accomplish, if he can use the word ‘EVEN’ before he finishes the sentence. No one can say for sure what was going on his mind…but the context and placement and usage of words falls much more to what I am describing…than what you seem to be HOPING for.

            And there is also that little part about his first days and hours in office…ALL that he expected, and promised, to achieve in very short order. These are words from a man who now faces the reality of getting what he said he wanted…but maybe never really did. Reread it again without emotion…just wordsmith the blasted phrasing. And I STARTED by discussing other people’s opinions…so here is some mental floss
            http://www.politicususa.com/2016/07/20/donald-trump-doesnt-president-united-states-attention.html
            http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/08/us/politics/donald-trump-president.html
            http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ralf-michaels/donald-trump-does-not-wan_b_9285638.html
            http://www.nationalreview.com/article/440638/donald-trump-does-he-really-want-presidency

            1. Kdawg says:

              Hey, but now he’s taking the job *seriously*. LOL

              I like how Colbert put it. It’s like if the pilot on the airplane announced to the cabin “I want to let you guys know I’m taking my job seriously”.

        3. Scott Franco says:

          Wow you so need valium…

      3. Get Real says:

        LMFAO Scott Franco!

        You mean like how your man George the dumber’s tax cuts (stacked towards the ultra rich like Trump) and regulations cuts did to the economy as shown here:

        http://politicsthatwork.com/democrats-create-more-jobs.php

        In fact, Democratic Presidentials on average OVER TWICE AS MANY JOBS AS REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTS with less debt added to boot.

        Why? Easy, because the policies that Democrats use create much more wealth and jobs then those Republicans pursued.

        BTW, does anyone REALLY think that a psychopath with serious anger-mangement problems like Trump won’t start another war or wars when the inevitable confrontations start.

        My bet is we sill be at war with Iran within the year.

        1. Scott Franco says:

          I believe you can now express your desire for peace by going out and setting fire to things and rioting, like most of the other peace loving folks in the street right now.

          1. Kdawg says:

            If you’re going to generalize the majority of voters, who didn’t vote for Trump that way, can we do the same for those that did?

            I that case I assume you all will be attending the KKK rally in NC, after painting swastikas everywhere.

    2. Kdawg says:

      I’m reading he doesn’t even want to stay in the White House. Talk about disrespect. I think he’s trying to figure a way out of actually having to do the work of being President.

  14. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

    It never ceases to amaze me when people suggest that Trump will do something because it’s logical, or because it’s simply common sense.

    How is it that so many have never actually listened to all the crazy and often self-contradictory stuff that keeps coming out of Trump’s mouth? Do they never watch the news? Do they not understand that facts, truth, and reality are irrelevant to Trump?

    We can only hope that Trumpian advisors will yank the reins of power from his grasp, and keep him as a mere figurehead while wiser heads actually run the Executive Branch. Sadly, muzzling him seems rather unlikely.

    1. Kdawg says:

      Well so much for electing an “outsider” who was going to “drain the swamp”. We’re stuck with same crooked career politicians that have been there for years. I don’t even know how I would feel about a Trump impeachment, because then we’d be stuck with even more ass-backwards Pence.

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        I think you’re being rather unfair to Pence. He actually lives in the real world, where facts and reality matter. Trump doesn’t.

        1. Kdawg says:

          Pence lives in the real world where facts matter? He doesn’t even believe in evoltion!? He thinks conversion therapy works!?

          1. Priusmaniac says:

            Pence don’t believe in evolution!

            Perhaps he can follow a therapy that works for that like visiting all the natural history museums and looking into Darwin’s work.

            Climate change denial by self interest is bad but understandable if ones revenue depends on not recognizing it, but denying evolution and remaining stuck in dogmatic religism is even more questioning.

            I wonder what shock and awe he will have when the first sentient AI start to talk to him.

            1. pjwood1 says:

              I’ll soon stop generalizing, but Pence and Indiana right now make me think of economies that wouldn’t survive without things to take from the earth. That “the planet is ours to exploit” attitude looks as free-loader to me, as any picture Fox has painted of the Democratic electorate.

      2. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ sven says:

        @Kdawg
        It appears that the first casualty of Trump “draining the swamp” is New Jersey Governor Chris Christy, Trump’s transition team chairman. (Good riddance!) Apparently, “Trump is so disgusted with Chris Christie’s handling of the Bridgegate scandal that he’s kicking the New Jersey governor out of his inner circle.”

        “Trump thought it was shameful that Christie didn’t take the fall for [convicted aide] Bridget Kelly,” said a source close to the transition team. “Trump is really angry that Christie is sending a soccer mom to jail. He believes 100 percent that Christie was behind it all.”

        “’Trump really doesn’t like it when married women with kids get hurt in politics,’ said the source. ‘Trump was pretty disgusted with Christie.’”

        “Christie’s failure to take responsibility for Bridgegate was the final straw. . .”

        “Christie was formally pushed aside Friday as chair of Trump’s transition team and the job given to Vice President-elect Mike Pence. . . . Christie retains a token title of vice chair but no real role going forward, sources said.”

        “’They want to drain the swamp, and having Christie there is just plugging it up,’ the source said. ‘He was tolerated in the past because he was viewed as a kind of nice Tony Soprano. But now that Trump is the president-elect those days are over.’”

        http://nypost.com/2016/11/13/trump-is-dumping-christie-over-bridgegate-insiders/

        1. Kdawg says:

          Now get rid of Giuliani, Reince Priebus, Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, Rick Scott, Joe Arpaio, and esp Myron Ebell.

  15. William says:

    A newly elected President Trump does have 535 voting members in Congress. This is where Tesla and Elon get their legislation done. There is no way, The Donald can get around “the swamp” as he so eloquently puts it. He can try to drain it, but what that will get him, is running for dog catcher in four years, like H.W. Bush back in 1993. There is a huge component of national security for The Republican War Machine, that needs energy independence, as demonstrated by the snake pit that has become the greater Middle East. This Nations energy independence and security depend on barrels of imported oil. This is the truth, until oil companies become more renewable energy companies. The Saudi Monarcy is still our master, until further notice.

  16. speculawyer says:

    Kentucky and West Virginia need to realize that coal is dead whether Trump is in office or not.

  17. Priusmaniac says:

    I think there will likely be more shared interest in space than on electric vehicles. Trump is not so much in ev but he grew up at the very start of the US space program. With Space X going to Mars it is close to impossible that Trump would not be interested in that. Elon will find himself in a Cornelian situation when money for Mars is supported by Trump. Note that Trump will find his own Cornelian situation when Elon ask money to develop an electric rover for Mars.

    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      While I very much would like to see a manned expedition to Mars in my lifetime, SpaceX talking about missions to Mars does not equal SpaceX actually sending a man to Mars.

      * * * * *

      “The purpose of spaceships is to actually travel across space and go to new worlds. Not to hang out in space and observe the health effects of doing so.” — Robert Zubrin

      1. Priusmaniac says:

        Elon will find a way.

        Thanks for the saying. I love Robert Zubrin. Here is another quiet pragmatic one.

        “If we were sending smokers to Mars, without their tobacco, they would actually have less cancer risk from radiation than if they had been left smoking on Earth.”

        Robert Zubrin.

        1. Scott Franco says:

          I think radioactive cigarettes should certainly be outlawed.

  18. Anon says:

    And this just in:

    10 Headlines From the White House’s New Chief Strategist on Science and Tech

    http://gizmodo.com/10-headlines-from-the-white-houses-new-chief-strategist-1788935071

    So, the EPA, Tech and Science, are F’d. Among countless other national interests.

    Thanks Trump / GOP!

    1. pjwood1 says:

      Carbon might get priced, after all. A positive price because, heck: “It’s a harmless trace gas that is actually an essential nutrient for plants.” Kathleen Hartnett-White, direct from our White House team.
      http://tinyurl.com/zr29vkg

      1. ffbj says:

        But Nathan says he knows that:

        1. Bill Howland says:

          Hummm Looked like Martin Short…

          Well these comics all said “Haha what a joke that Trump is running” – and a lot of millenials laughed and snorted and we got alot of GROUP THINK at work.

          Then Trump won, and we have people Crying, and having consuling sessions and protesting (some of it real, some of it orchestrated)

          “He’s not MY PRESIDENT!!!”.

          Same as this issue: I’ve mentioned before

          THE LEAD AUTHOR OF THE REPORT OF THE IPCC SAID “The most important Green House Gas is Water” – and there is no one disputing this unimportant characteristic.

          (There is dispute as to whether the amount is 91 or 95 % in importance – but that leaves CO2 in either case as a minor contributor).

          I then listed several climatologists with PROVEN records of accomplishment – one of which explained how the ‘2500 of the Top Scientists’ was a bogus construct.

          AND THIS GUY IS ONE OF THE 2500!

          Meanwhile real HEALTH AFFECTING Polution is totally ignored by “Those in the KNOW”.

          Looks like before too long half the kids are going to get Autism if the current trend continues – and nobody cares in the slightest what may be exaccerbating that – so lets attack VILE, DANGEROUS plant food instead.

          Maybe, they’ll need some crying sessions or diapers when reality starts dawning on people.