That's exactly it. Everyone cheers it when it's their guy, without realizing that a relatively weak executive branch is one of the best safeguards we have against tyranny. Expanding that power sounds great for now, but if Trump takes office again, do we want him having the power to spend on whatever he wants without congressional approval?

Every time I leave my house, I see dozens of Teslas driving around. If they're not profitable, then they're horrifically bad at making money. They're ubiquitous. Pretty impressive market penetration for a business run by people who don't know what they're doing.

This is such a dumb sentence...

I think what the other user is asking is, have any of his rooms gone differently than you'd expect from someone with his constitutional philosophy. Saying, "He ruled in favor of a friend," is significantly different than, "He ruled in favor of a friend with a ruling that's very out of the norm for how he typically rules."

If two things lead to the same result (in this example, neither asking the questions nor not asking the questions get us closer to the answer), then isn't the lesser effort option optimal?

This is true but misleading. When Musk invested in Tesla and became chairman of the board, they hadn't even begun development on a vehicle. They just had an idea and had talked with Lotus. There's plenty to dislike about Musk. You don't need to mislead.

Yeah, someone from the UK lecturing Americans on how EV infrastructure is just fine is rich. There are EVs capable of getting them pretty much anywhere in their country on a single charge. Meanwhile, I wouldn't be able to visit my parents two states away without needing to charge halfway through. And the options if you have a family are even fewer and more expensive. There are six of us in our household. Which EV should we drop 6 figures on to get us and our luggage 600 miles away for the holidays?

It's wild to me how many people on here refuse to acknowledge this kind of thing.

When the Democrats decided they wanted to be the "Urban Elite Party" and paint the Republican party as the "Rural Uneducated Party", they basically threw away Iowa. Iowa is as middle class plain-folk as you can get, so they will naturally align in opposition to the Urban Elite. That was a tactical error in how the Democratic Party formed its identity.

You're aware that leftists can also be authoritarian, right?