Market politics

[wdolson]

No. Unfortunately, Democrats and Republicans both play useful idiots in the pro-Establishment fight against innovative anything and especially against clean energy. We've seen that over and over.

Every single political move by Democrats in California has actually impeded clean energy and promoted dirty energy. They just know how to lie lie lie. Democrats were front and center in complicitness in killing the electric car in the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s.

Elon Musk's most brilliant value is calling all their damned bluffs. Quixotically, they have little choice, just running around trying to save what's left of their houses of cards. The best thing is improvement for the future, and Elon could bestow upon them forgiveness for their sins due to the directionality of that improvement of the future.

The way I think you mean "impeachment" (Trump's removal from office and the success of Communism taking over the world), Communists do not care about clean energy. They would slow down innovation. The fastest way to fix problems is through a sensible free market (light regulation in the right places).

(For the ignorant: Impeachment means a great trial where the Senate gets to put a lot of Democrat-supporters in jail, and Trump will be wildly vindicated, and furthermore, his supporters will be very motivated to vote for him. His removal from office would similarly compel our country to be even more strong against Communism. The dirty status quo is being fought most by Trump and the pro-Trumpers, however, many of them remain useful idiots against innovation. Furthermore, everything is very confused by issues of scope: nearby, we need coal, and far out, we will only have solar. 2030 is a fake deadline invented by Communists attempting to steal power and money, not clean energy. The boats shipping Chinese products to USA pollute more than every car and truck in existence. Now recalculate who really cares about conservation of humans and the environment and stopping pollution. Elon Musk cares. Chairman Xi, Putin, and the Iran Mullahs do not.)

Huh? How is impeachment of a president linked to communism? Or is this supposed to be funny?

I see signs that a number of Republicans in the Senate are preparing to get rid of Trump. The Syria thing was the last straw for a number of them. Ultimately Republicans will do whatever they think will get them re-elected. If enough of the public is calling for Trump's removal, they will dump him like a hot potato.

There is a handful of people in the House who actually like Trump, but the Republicans in the Senate loath him and just kiss up to him to mollify his base. Mitt Romney can afford to be anti-Trump because Trump is not popular in Utah.

As for the original question about removal of Trump, renewables, and Tesla... Short term I doubt it will have any effect at all. It could contribute to a Democratic landslide next fall which will probably help green energy some. Probably not as much as the eco voters want, but Democrats are generally more positive about green energy than Republicans. As @Ulmo pointed out Democrats record on actual green energy policies misses the mark for quite a few eco voters, but their record is generally better than Republicans.

In the short term, the entire market would tank.

I doubt it. The economic types have been very nervous about Trump from the beginning. Trump had to go all the way to the bottom of the barrel to find an economic advisor who agreed with him (Peter Navaro). The rest of the economic world think Navaro is a nut job. The economy right now is weakening and Trump's trade policies are contributing. If Trump was out and Pence made moves to reverse Trump's more controversial moves like the tariffs, the market would likely surge on the news.

Short term markets are driven by emotion and the emotion on Trump's removal will be relief. Longer term markets are driven by what' going on in the world and there are things in motion (some caused by Trump, some not) that could send the markets down.

A major war in the Middle East is more probable now than it has been in decades, that could send oil prices skyrocketing and cause major damage to economies around the world. It would also likely get consumers thinking seriously about electric cars. High oil prices would hurt Tesla production, but would boost demand to heights never seen before.

The trade war with China is hurting both the US and China. The US is getting hurt more. There are exports from the US that may not recover for decades, if ever. The Chinese were buying a lot of food from the US, but they went elsewhere. The fires in the Amazon are in part because the Chinese are buying more ag products from Brazil and farmers are clearing more land to grow food for China. If the trade war ends, China isn't necessarily going to come back to American farmers and if they do they will want lower prices because the world market is bigger now.

Something happening completely separate from Trump is Brexit which could destabilize the EU and the UK. Nobody is sure what the impact of that will be. Economists in the UK have estimated that the result could range from moderate damage to the UK economy to complete collapse in a worse case scenario. Any major economic impacts on Europe will ripple throughout the world economies.

 

[Norbert]

Furthermore, everything is very confused by issues of scope: nearby, we need coal, and far out, we will only have solar. 2030 is a fake deadline invented by Communists attempting to steal power and money, not clean energy.

If you put the deadline at 2040, nothing will happen for 10 years, and then the same argument will be reiterated.

How is that "anti-establishment" positions usually result in no practical proposal at all? Maybe because they have no valid scope or context.

 

[JRP3]

Could a sucessfull impeachment of Trump have a positive effect on renewables and Tesla?

Of course it would. It's no secret that Trump and his administration are hostile to Tesla's entire reason for existing. Ignore the rantings of those pretending otherwise and talking about communism

 

[EVNow]

Of course it would. It's no secret that Trump and his administration are hostile to Tesla's entire reason for existing. Ignore the rantings of those pretending otherwise and talking about communism

There is no reason to believe any other Republican administration would be less hostile to Tesla. Republican party has long been a wholly owned subsidiary of Houston.

 

[JRP3]

There is no reason to believe any other Republican administration would be less hostile to Tesla. Republican party has long been a wholly owned subsidiary of Houston.

Probably true, but I was thinking more that removing Trump would obviously remove any possibility of him winning the next election.

 

[EVNow]

Probably true, but I was thinking more that removing Trump would obviously remove any possibility of him winning the next election.

Either way it would be difficult for Republicans to hold the White House. Impeachment would likely damage the brand quite a bit.

 

[wdolson]

Either way it would be difficult for Republicans to hold the White House. Impeachment would likely damage the brand quite a bit.

After Watergate the Republicans lost big in the midterms. One of the bigger wave elections of the last century was 1974 (48 seats in the House). Though the 1932 wave was the biggest (97 in the House, after a 53 seat loss in 1930).

Trump has set many things in motion that could come home to roost before November 2020. War in the Middle East and/or a big hit to the economy could make 2020 a historic election with a shift on par with 1932. If that happens the Republicans may finally be forced to face the truth of what they have become. It needs to happen if the US is going to survive.

 

[Intl Professor]

When you get a chance, check out Obama's full eulogy at the Elijah Cummings memorial service today. You will understand why Trump stayed away; it was a complete summary of what it means to be an honorable man, a strong man.

As it happens my wife is struggling with an assignment for her gerontology class to summarize an article on the importance of legacy as a measure of the value of a life. It includes the dialogue between the old and young where empirical studies chronicle the advantages of longer more meaningful lives for the aged and stronger educational advance for the young when the two are in conversation with each other. That is why we pay tribute to honorable people, even the young like Greta Thunberg.

Speaking of legacies, we see these days the dominance of shortsville times at the top and not just in the financial markets. Our prez wants legacy without the work to earn it. His legacy will prove an inspiration to those who do good for its own reward and let legacy take care of itself. That requires a lot less effort than evil-doing and its coverup twin. The half-steppers who follow him are the least reliable; they will become full-stabbers as his weakness reveals no clothes, no honor, no strength—only fear. As his frenzied attacks on Republicans in the Senate will eventually achieve the required super-majority for conviction, he will achieve what he already knows to his core, "there's no there there."

 

[Norbert]

Could a sucessfull impeachment of Trump have a positive effect on renewables and Tesla?

It's the other way around: Climate change denial makes you weak.

EDIT: (I actually wrote that before reading Intl Professor's post.)

 

[JRP3]

Stable genius moves Colorado to the Mexican border

 

[Norbert]

Stable genius moves Colorado to the Mexican border

Second line defense, inspired by "The Walking Dead".

 

[UncaNed]

Beside I never engaged in any discussion with TESLAQ at Twitter and most who know me are aware I don't insult people or even write with emotions, I feel like I should probably be proud to be on that block list where I can't see anything what they are writing but just responses.

Faithful trolls and Fudsters who used to attack me every day got lost somewhere in the last weeks and some of them may realize how wrong they have been but its human not to acknowledge that easily therefore most of them will call this just a fraud again. Few will believe them though considering the almost perfect ER.

Frankly I don't care that much not been able to read their posts because I never seen a logic argumentation or proved solid chain conclusion that made sense to me or could be used for me to validate or even dismiss my own thesis and conclusions.

Many attacked my articles in the past and likely will do in the future though but again thats okay and did never bother me.

The true Fraud that happened with TSLA is indeed the heavy manipulation that created a virtual reality which did not exist but believed by many who followed their "leader". Now since the first are loosing all their life savings and I predict many will follow next weeks they will try to find someone guilty for it and of course it can't be in their understanding be TESLAQ.

What often happens is the illusion that 'what happened can't be true' and needs to be turned around and people may invest now their last money in shorts in order to win back what they lost. Losses weight emotionally stronger then wins so they will try to get rid of that pain like one who lost a fortune at the casino asking you for funding because he know now is the moment and he will win all back + more.

Thats the worst mistake of all as people may have lost a lot but not all of it yet but I predict the worst is still to come for many of TESLAQ.

Maybe you describe the same disconnect from reality that propagates in the world of Trump supporters and religious people.

 

[avoigt]

Maybe you describe the same disconnect from reality that propagates in the world of Trump supporters and religious people.

It is the same pattern and you see it with Brexit too.

 

[Paracelsus]

 

[Paracelsus]

 

[Singuy]

Note ...

The plan is contingent on Democrats winning the Senate in 2020.​

If the democrats haven't noticed, Trump will leave the WH with a -1 trillion dollars deficit during a bull market. Anything that cost money such as the proposal above will be stone walled by the opposing party pointing to over spending.

This is why I feel like all this Medicare for all and UBI are just pipe dreams. Could be a reality if spending or revenue is under control, but not one person was ever asked about deficit reduction as if it doesn't matter.

 

[jerry33]

If the democrats haven't noticed, Trump will leave the WH with a -1 trillion dollars deficit during a bull market. Anything that cost money such as the proposal above will be stone walled by the opposing party pointing to over spending.

This is why I feel like all this Medicare for all and UBI are just pipe dreams. Could be a reality if spending or revenue is under control, but not one person was ever asked about deficit reduction as if it doesn't matter.

I expect it to be worse because the first year of any President's term runs on the budget created by the last President. I wouldn't put it past Trump and company to insert a poison pill budget and then blame it on the next President.

 

[wdolson]

I have seen people here and other places discussing the best Democratic challenger for 2020 and many Democrats think the candidate needs strong policy positions. I made up a chart of presidential elections in the media age (since 1960). For re-election campaigns, the president's approval rating is a major factor. Carter over performed his approval rating by a bit (but he was polling around 35%) and Clinton under performed (because of Perot taking 8.4% of the vote). But in most elections the president pretty much gets their approval rating on election day. In contested elections the better campaigner tends to win.

Donald Trump has never cracked 50% approval. Fivethirtyeight has a running average of polls and his best was on Jan 23, 2017 at 45.5%. His first days in office were the only period of his presidency where the approval was higher than the disapprove. His disapproval hit 50% in March 2017 and has never dropped below that. Average approval today is 40.7% and falling. With an OK Democratic nominee, that's a recipe for GOP disaster. Re-elections are always first and foremost a referendum on the incumbent and Trump is failing today.

There is an increasing chance Trump won't be on the ballot in November 2020, which would make it more of an open race, but the GOP will likely have a reputation problem if Trump leaves in disgrace.

 

[EVNow]

Of course there may be a few conscientious Republican senators who would be willing to vote for this proposed bill promoting the purchase of electric vehicles.

I believe they have all retired or retiring. TN Senator Alexander retiring was a big loss - but as every sane Senator has found out, they can't compete against Trump in the primary. Almost as soon as they say something against Trump, they also announce retirement.

TALLAHASSEE ― U.S. Rep. Francis Rooney has joined a long list of Republican congressmen who will not run for re-election in 2020, and his decision has opened the door to a number of potential candidates who could try to win the heavily GOP seat in Southwest Florida.​

Rooney, a Naples Republican who recently refused to rule out a vote to impeach President Donald Trump, announced his retirement during a Fox News interview on Saturday.​

 

[Mike Smith]

Trump will address the nation Sunday morning with a 'major statement' after cryptic tweet

China deal signed? That would keep the rally going