DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus More on Musk

There are some things I like about it. It rides well and "Everything's computer!" The low maintenance costs on it and the fact it is ready every morning is nice, too. But some of the features are so damn cheap, and the heating/air is horrendous. Tech-wise it's probably more advanced.

Musk really started to torque me off though - before he even got into politics - when he kept making false promises (at best) and/or outright lies (at worst) about the product when it came to capabilities, milestones, etc. Left me feeling duped.

Then other EVs started catching my eye. The Lyriq is probably my forerunner now if I had to switch.

Like I said, the form-factor of the Y was really enticing. I ended up deciding that not having anything except a touchscreen and leather upholstery instead of an interior was going to bug me.


The Musk-effect would give me more pause today than it did a year ago, but I was truly out to get the car that best fit what I needed.

Well we don't want to hear about any other "Burning feelings" you got after you had urges

Who cares if Tesla received subsidies? They were obviously given to companies to further the agenda.
He is the one who won that race.

It was all good while Musk was perceived as a Green dealer. Now that he is aligned with Trump in an effort to cut government spending, he is the boogie man.

I think it is possible he can be both a concerned citizen for the environment and our countries financial health.

This flip flop by the left might be the swiftest and biggest flip flop in recent times.

It was actually Elon who flip flopped in his own stances by quite a wide margin, admittedly on his part.

I also do question his actual motivation to cut Government spending. A lot of what he has shared so far has been inaccurate and he, again by his own admission, has made some significant mistakes. Some of the first cuts also occurred in areas where he himself and/or his companies benefitted.

I think the thing that irks me most about this whole process is that the Constitution plainly says that Congress has the spending power and no money shall be spent unless appropriated by Congress. Now Congress is pointing the finger at the agencies for often times expending funds in the manner in which they were appropriated........by Congress. And now we have quite a few reps in Congress who are basically saying "Thank goodness DOGE is here!"

Hey, numbskull, it's your job (numbskull/your meaning Congress). And when you capitulate your role to the executive or to one person who's....well, nothing really.... we start really veering away from our Constitutional construct in the name of desperation. Bad things happen under that dynamic, historically.

The other part of it is the question of "How effective is DOGE at saving money?" A lot of misinformation, overstatements and arguably lies have been spread about what they have done. I think we - myself included - need to keep our eyes on three things: expenditures, revenue and deficit. If, after all this bluster, those needles move in the right direction - and no games are played with the numbers - then okay, maybe something good is being done. If those needles move in the wrong direction, I would hope those who have become engrained in the hype about how great this setup has been would be able to open up their eyes.

One of the other big problems I have with the approach, and this is another area I feel like I'm screaming into the void, is that they are targeting areas they blatantly don't care about with a hatchet. Waste/abuse - and even fraud - data has been out there in droves for decades now when it comes to large corporation direct recipients of Government contracts spanning the sectors, mine probably being at the forefront. This is relatively low-hanging fruit, too, with rather easy ways to at least begin fixing it.

Our government chose to take penalties that were imposed on auto companies not reaching fuel standards and funnel that money to EV manufactures. That money could have been used by our government for any number of other things. Instead they used it to subsidize EV's. That's the bottom line here no matter your desire to twist it to the contrary. None of that is difficult.

When the government makes a determination of where that money went they made the decision to take money that could have been used for other things and subsidize EV's with it.

Now your frame is that the government coulda done something with the money but decided to do something different? You don't say!

And my aunt coulda been my uncle, but she was born without the family jewels.


You win, Pit. This starts to feel like plucking the wings off a butterfly after a while. You'll die on any and every hill, no matter how many times you have to change your story or create false narratives. I'll let you make a fool out of yourself in some other threads now, I'm sure I speak for everyone when I say this one is turning into a real yawner.

That topic would be huge and would cause MAGA insecurity… best not to share. I can’t stand seeing grown ass men cry.

I'm sure it is. Somehow you just can't admit that giving credits to EV makers to funnel those fines to EV makers isn't a subsidy. Instead you use personal attacks like a child in response. But that is after all the trumpian way. I never expected you to describe yourself as a butterfly however.

Elon is giving out a million dollars as a prize to some of those who supported his petition against judges in Wisconsin. I know how I feel about it, but does anyone support this?

It's a big fat WHO. CARES. to me.

I just can’t get behind it. That’s regardless of who it is. I feel like we have been slipping down a slope so badly for decades now when it comes to money controlling politics and it seems to be exponentially worse. I wouldn’t want this to become ubiquitous whether it’s Musk, Soros, Koch’s, or whoever.

Don't really have time today, but I have a few thoughts on this. Later...

This Republican tried to impeach a judge. Guess which billionaire cut him a check?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opin...utions-republicans-congress/82601318007/

Elon Musk Revealed Why He’s Spending Millions to Flip the Wisconsin Supreme Court

It’s all about preserving gerrymandered districts that lock in Republican power.

https://www.motherjones.com/politic...e-court-gerrymandering-crawford-schimel/

The $100 a pop to voters is the tip of the iceberg. He's spending $18 million through various political groups—a record for any donor in a Wisconsin judicial contest—to elect Schimel and flip the ideological majority of the court.

So you're saying that if Soros (or pick any GOP boogieman) through a TON of money into an election who's candidate is SUPPOSED to be apolitical, you would have zero problem with it?

While that person was actively working for a president to use spending cuts to further their agenda at the very same time.

I'm pretty sure I said I don't care. And you're reframing the conversation... again. DL asked something totally different.

Here's what's going on and crybabies on the left are just mad because they didn't think of it first. Crazy-azz-Elon was talking to Trump after assassination attempt #1 (insane as that sounds) and said "why don't I just give the money to real people. All these millions spread out in pacs, superpacs and fake organizations that promise results that can't be tracked, may as well give it to patriots". Trump: "Elon, that's a great idea. I can't do it but you can."

Before the next election, lefties will be doing the same -- then you'll all tape it shut and act like it's a good idea. Mark my words and start the countdown.

So again, I don't care. Elon outsmarted the left and the bogus system that allowed someone who would be better candidate as non-verbal to raise 1-freakin-billion dollars.

I don’t see any of that as good though and I don’t want to speak for Oober, but I think you can count on either one of us hating that prospect of direct mega-donors to people for the sake of buying votes, quite literally.

I abhor super-PACs regardless of power and I abhor the notion of buying voters directly. Both of those are additional stones on the foot path away from a democratic republic that I can espouse.

Regardless of who’s outsmarting who in terms of tactics, it can still be bad.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alison...mp-3-to-1-with-last-pre-election-report/

Libtard tears about Musk ring hollow. You have dirt on your own hands.

Trumptard says: gobble gobble gobble. Blah blah blah.

They are now advocating paying off voters like just another third world country. Murica! Freedumb!

Yes, this!

One person got a million dollar check from Musk in Michigan.

One person got a million dollar check from Musk in Pennsylvania.

Elon "bought" two votes.


Trump won those states by over 250,000 votes, setting a record in Pennsylvania.

The Harris campaign spent over 400 million dollars in those two states alone.


Damn near a half billion dollars in two states -- got curb stomped. Keep preaching!

Yeah, he now upped it to 2 million and you approve. Putting money directly in the hands of voters to sign what you want them to. Somehow I don't think you even believe what you're posting.

I didn't say I approve, I said I don't care. When I look at the entire landscape of how money buys favor in politics and how the two are inextricably intertwined, I care less about Musk's million dollar checks than the ant I just killed in my kitchen. I'd roll my eyes the same way if it were Soros. And like I said -- you and yours are just pissed that you didn't think of it first.

If you're more concerned with Musk writing checks to individual voters than lobbyists spending millions to buy influence and promising endorsements from unions that represent tens of thousands of workers, you're the one that's morally bankrupt, not me.

So in trumplandia spending money on a campaign is the same as putting money directly in the hands of voters?

I'm not "more concerned by it". Musk donated almost 200 million to the trump campaign, has now donated over 18 million to swing the Wisconsin supreme court conservative AND has put money directly in the hands of voters. Musk is currently the biggest lobbyist there is and he's part of the government too. That's a lot more than just paying for influence. But I'll I've heard from you is silence about any of it.

I haven't been silent, I said I don't care. This is the fifth time I've said it. You also heard nothing about Soros spending 170 million on midterms alone in 2022. And you'll continue to hear nothing about that -- I guarantee it.

Get your LWL.

What government office or function does Soros hold? It's sad that when you know you can no longer defend Musks actions so you resort to your typical childish BS.

Musk bought his way into a very powerful position in our government and there is no comparison to be made anywhere else. I know, you don't care.

Good dawgie. 🐕‍🦺

Wisconsin attorney general sues Elon Musk to block $1 million payment offers

That raised questions about whether the petition violated Wisconsin law, which makes it a felony to offer, give, lend, or promise to lend or give anything of value to induce a voter to cast a ballot or not vote.

https://apnews.com/article/wisconsin-supreme-court-elon-musk-trump-d75807980ac311b87606fb4ec58cc466

Lawsuit claims Elon Musk stiffed canvassers who helped his 2024 campaign efforts

A new lawsuit filed Tuesday accuses tech billionaire Elon Musk and his super PAC of failing to pay canvassers who helped his pro-Trump political operation in 2024.

During the final stretch of the 2024 campaign, Musk and his political group, America PAC, offered $100 to registered voters in battleground states who signed a petition supporting free speech and gun rights, and another $100 for every additional voter they convinced to sign the petition. The goal was to excite conservative voters and elect then-candidate Donald Trump – who narrowly won Pennsylvania in November.

A man from the Philadelphia suburbs – who filed the lawsuit anonymously because he says he fears retribution – claims he is owed $20,000 for gathering signatures in Pennsylvania. The lawsuit claims there could be at least another 100 victims of Musk’s alleged breach-of-contract. This comes after press reports about allegedly late or missing payments from the super PAC around the presidential election.

“This lawsuit is about keeping promises,” the man’s attorney, Shannon Liss-Riordan, told CNN. “He was expecting to be able to pay his bills because of this promise. He was pounding the pavement during the campaign because Elon Musk asked him too. He believed in Elon Musk.”

America PAC spokesman Andrew Romeo denied wrongdoing when asked about the lawsuit.

“America PAC is committed to paying for every legitimate petition signature, which is evidenced by the fact that we have paid tens of millions of dollars to canvassers for their hard work in support of our mission,” Romeo said in a statement, adding that the pro-Trump group is “committed to rooting out fraud” and has “the right to withhold payments to fraudsters.”

In the past week, Musk revived his 2024-style giveaways in Wisconsin, offering $1 million cash prizes as he campaigned in support of a conservative candidate for the state Supreme Court.

Musk and his super PAC denied claims during the 2024 campaign that their cash giveaways to voters violated federal laws against vote-buying or that it operated an illegal state lottery.

The Justice Department warned the super PAC in October about its $1 million sweepstakes for registered voters. And the Philadelphia district attorney, a Democrat, tried and failed in state court to get the daily giveaways shut down because, he claimed, it was an unlawful operation.

Liss-Riordan, who filed the latest lawsuit Tuesday in Pennsylvania federal court, has previously sued X, the Musk-owned social media platform formerly called Twitter, in a case about Musk’s takeover of the company. She was also involved in an unsuccessful effort to remove Trump from the 2024 ballot in Massachusetts because of the US Constitution’s “insurrectionist ban.”

For more CNN news and newsletters create an account at CNN.com

https://www.aol.com/lawsuit-claims-elon-musk-stiffed-012036720.html

Putting this here mostly because of Musk's involvement and not wanting to make another thread.

https://apnews.com/article/wisconsin-supreme-court-elon-musk-81f71cdda271827ae281a77072a26bad

Musk dumped a ton of money into this Wisconsin SC race only to have the liberal judge win by over 10 percentage points. Wisconsin voted for Trump (albeit narrowly) in this past election, so I wouldn't say this is some sort of larger indication of people's view of Trump and MAGA.

I do choose to think it's a message on how voters feel about someone like Musk coming in and trying to buy an election.

How much did Musk dump?

Looks like he is tied to $20+m in donations. That $20m-$23m total figure is repeated in a couple articles, but it's broken out a little here.

https://apnews.com/article/wisconsin-supreme-court-elon-musk-trump-2aae240fc9fd0b1d996b7aa644397fa1


Looks like at least $3m came straight from him, while at least $19m came from groups that he funds.

Damn, that's a crazy amount of money for a Wisconsin SC race.

I'd tend to agree that it's hatred toward Musk, but not so much because he tried to buy the election. Musk 3 million / Soros and Prickster 3.5 million

I gotta admit, I had only heard the $20+ million number until I just now skimmed a handful of articles and found the one I linked that broke it out. I'm going to stick to my original point that he was, by far, the single largest contributor in that race, but the fact the vast majority of those $$ came from his groups makes the whole thing murkier. It's not clear if all of those dollars can be traced back to him (not looking to get into the ol' SuperPAC debate in this thread).

Bro, he bought the presidency. You should know he’ll keep trying to buy political wins for his X MAGA cult. Trump’s days are numbered in power, Elon’s are not.