Presidential cognitive issues

TheGreat wrote:

Thank you for proving my point for me.  I see once again MAGA only cares about "states rights" every now and then. 

T-MAC wrote:

Unless it goes against Fed initiatives, such as the Texas Dreamers Act I brought up a couple pages back. In this instance, it doesn't matter what...

Unless it goes against Fed initiatives, such as the Texas Dreamers Act I brought up a couple pages back. In this instance, it doesn't matter what the state wants, several decades bipartisan agreements be damned.

They seem to be cherry picking things, especially with states that have substantial pull. Gotta flex that Federal power and control. Granted I don't particularly agree with this EV mandate CA had. Most folks that need to commute to work couldn't afford a new EV. Most folks I know with EVs have a few other cars too, including big gas guzzling rigs.

Consistency is important. Which is what makes it hard for companies (and countries) to navigate this administrations efforts in a sensible way also.

Last2Stroke wrote:

EVs are cheap in other countries...https://electrek.co/2025/04/08/byds-low-cost-seagull-ev-now-starts-under-8000-china/

EVs are cheap in other countries...

https://electrek.co/2025/04/08/byds-low-cost-seagull-ev-now-starts-under-8000-china/

T-MAC wrote:

Unless it goes against Fed initiatives, such as the Texas Dreamers Act I brought up a couple pages back. In this instance, it doesn't matter what...

Unless it goes against Fed initiatives, such as the Texas Dreamers Act I brought up a couple pages back. In this instance, it doesn't matter what the state wants, several decades bipartisan agreements be damned.

They seem to be cherry picking things, especially with states that have substantial pull. Gotta flex that Federal power and control. Granted I don't particularly agree with this EV mandate CA had. Most folks that need to commute to work couldn't afford a new EV. Most folks I know with EVs have a few other cars too, including big gas guzzling rigs.

Consistency is important. Which is what makes it hard for companies (and countries) to navigate this administrations efforts in a sensible way also.

Last2Stroke wrote:

EVs are cheap in other countries...https://electrek.co/2025/04/08/byds-low-cost-seagull-ev-now-starts-under-8000-china/

EVs are cheap in other countries...

https://electrek.co/2025/04/08/byds-low-cost-seagull-ev-now-starts-under-8000-china/

SEEMEFIRST wrote:

I'll bet that's a gem.

Gworm wrote:

You mean win legitimately?

You’ve got me so confused, Dave. 

ThatOneMXGuy wrote:

Oh look the cult member can’t admit his sexual predator cult leader lost in 2020. You need serious help. Keep defending this man with every fiber...

Oh look the cult member can’t admit his sexual predator cult leader lost in 2020. You need serious help. Keep defending this man with every fiber of your being! You’re being a good little boy. Do what NewsMax tells you and lap up that propaganda!

Gworm wrote:

You are unhinged. You seriously need to take a break or get some help. 

T-MAC wrote:

Also, look how densely populated and focused Chinas communities are by and large. Most commuted by bicycle because they live close to where they work. As...

Also, look how densely populated and focused Chinas communities are by and large. Most commuted by bicycle because they live close to where they work. As they started earning more, they bought cars. EVs slot in beautifully to how they have structured their society.

In the US, we built the suburbs, and spread out from each other (families and work). This was freedom for us, but it actually makes a lot of things more challenging. Most people have a decent commute to work, especially in CA where lower wage workers have to live further from where they work to afford it. EVs don't slot in to how we've structured our society here very well. 

I think we need to spend a bit more time at the drawing board before mandating shit.

Look at NYC subway, it is ancient, but still does an incredible job moving massive amounts of people around. I commuted on it for two years when I worked at MakerBot in Brooklyn.

Look at LA, it is a newer city with a terrible public transportation system. And CA is obsessed with building a shiny new bullet train. For what? For who? It doesn't address the root cause issues in the slightest. But CA loves innovating, which is great, let's make sure it makes some fucking sense though...

CA tries to be a leader, and these are the examples. Force EVs down peoples throats where it doesn't make sense, nor does a damn bullet train.

Ford Maverick is a good example of US company making sensible progress. Affordable, small, good on gas, etc. 

T-MAC wrote:

Unless it goes against Fed initiatives, such as the Texas Dreamers Act I brought up a couple pages back. In this instance, it doesn't matter what...

Unless it goes against Fed initiatives, such as the Texas Dreamers Act I brought up a couple pages back. In this instance, it doesn't matter what the state wants, several decades bipartisan agreements be damned.

They seem to be cherry picking things, especially with states that have substantial pull. Gotta flex that Federal power and control. Granted I don't particularly agree with this EV mandate CA had. Most folks that need to commute to work couldn't afford a new EV. Most folks I know with EVs have a few other cars too, including big gas guzzling rigs.

Consistency is important. Which is what makes it hard for companies (and countries) to navigate this administrations efforts in a sensible way also.

Last2Stroke wrote:

EVs are cheap in other countries...https://electrek.co/2025/04/08/byds-low-cost-seagull-ev-now-starts-under-8000-china/

EVs are cheap in other countries...

https://electrek.co/2025/04/08/byds-low-cost-seagull-ev-now-starts-under-8000-china/

SEEMEFIRST wrote:

I'll bet that's a gem.

T-MAC wrote:

Unless it goes against Fed initiatives, such as the Texas Dreamers Act I brought up a couple pages back. In this instance, it doesn't matter what...

Unless it goes against Fed initiatives, such as the Texas Dreamers Act I brought up a couple pages back. In this instance, it doesn't matter what the state wants, several decades bipartisan agreements be damned.

They seem to be cherry picking things, especially with states that have substantial pull. Gotta flex that Federal power and control. Granted I don't particularly agree with this EV mandate CA had. Most folks that need to commute to work couldn't afford a new EV. Most folks I know with EVs have a few other cars too, including big gas guzzling rigs.

Consistency is important. Which is what makes it hard for companies (and countries) to navigate this administrations efforts in a sensible way also.

RichieW13 wrote:

California did have a mandate for 100% of all new car sales to be zero emissions by 2035.  Though the US Senate recently blocked that mandate...

California did have a mandate for 100% of all new car sales to be zero emissions by 2035.  Though the US Senate recently blocked that mandate, so we'll have to see how that goes.  Yes, that would have only applied to California, but California buys so many cars that manufacturers could base their national sales plan on what California law requires.

https://calmatters.org/environment/2025/05/california-electric-car-mand…

TheGreat wrote:

Thank you for proving my point for me.  I see once again MAGA only cares about "states rights" every now and then. 

TeamGreen wrote:

Does the state have the right to regulate this issue beyond the federal mandate? 

TheGreat wrote:

Thank you for proving my point for me.  I see once again MAGA only cares about "states rights" every now and then. 

T-MAC wrote:

Unless it goes against Fed initiatives, such as the Texas Dreamers Act I brought up a couple pages back. In this instance, it doesn't matter what...

Unless it goes against Fed initiatives, such as the Texas Dreamers Act I brought up a couple pages back. In this instance, it doesn't matter what the state wants, several decades bipartisan agreements be damned.

They seem to be cherry picking things, especially with states that have substantial pull. Gotta flex that Federal power and control. Granted I don't particularly agree with this EV mandate CA had. Most folks that need to commute to work couldn't afford a new EV. Most folks I know with EVs have a few other cars too, including big gas guzzling rigs.

Consistency is important. Which is what makes it hard for companies (and countries) to navigate this administrations efforts in a sensible way also.

Last2Stroke wrote:

EVs are cheap in other countries...https://electrek.co/2025/04/08/byds-low-cost-seagull-ev-now-starts-under-8000-china/

EVs are cheap in other countries...

https://electrek.co/2025/04/08/byds-low-cost-seagull-ev-now-starts-under-8000-china/

T-MAC wrote:

Unless it goes against Fed initiatives, such as the Texas Dreamers Act I brought up a couple pages back. In this instance, it doesn't matter what...

Unless it goes against Fed initiatives, such as the Texas Dreamers Act I brought up a couple pages back. In this instance, it doesn't matter what the state wants, several decades bipartisan agreements be damned.

They seem to be cherry picking things, especially with states that have substantial pull. Gotta flex that Federal power and control. Granted I don't particularly agree with this EV mandate CA had. Most folks that need to commute to work couldn't afford a new EV. Most folks I know with EVs have a few other cars too, including big gas guzzling rigs.

Consistency is important. Which is what makes it hard for companies (and countries) to navigate this administrations efforts in a sensible way also.

Last2Stroke wrote:

EVs are cheap in other countries...https://electrek.co/2025/04/08/byds-low-cost-seagull-ev-now-starts-under-8000-china/

EVs are cheap in other countries...

https://electrek.co/2025/04/08/byds-low-cost-seagull-ev-now-starts-under-8000-china/

SEEMEFIRST wrote:

I'll bet that's a gem.

MPJC wrote:

Now I see what you’re talking about. I didn’t watch any videos and it’s something the anchor said on the air. I only looked at the...

Now I see what you’re talking about. I didn’t watch any videos and it’s something the anchor said on the air. I only looked at the written story, so it’s no wonder I didn’t  know what you referring to. I didn’t deny that they’d said it. I just hadn’t seen it. I certainly wasn’t  suggesting that you’d misrepresented it. “I don’t see it” is very different from “it never happened”. 

It was a boneheaded statement and there was no reason for it. I never denied that CNN says boneheaded things (and it’s just my luck that my example of something they get right contains a glaring example of one - I deserve to be laughed at in this case). I’ve criticized them many times in the past. They’re not the worst offenders. MSNBC strikes me as worse. Morning Joe is like nails on a chalkboard with Mika sounding little Helen Lovejoy from the Simpsons with her ridiculous faux moral indignation whenever they discuss Trump. But I’m sure they get some things right. Even just by sheer probability, if you say enough things some of them will be correct. And at the end of day, they’re humans, just like you and me, doing their best to make sense of the world. That might be overly generous but I can’t go through life assuming the worst of people with whom I disagree. We’ve disagreed here but I bet that if we met at a motocross and struck up a conversation we’d have a great time and each leave thinking “what a nice fellow”. That’s pretty much what always happens when I meet someone at a motocross track. 

If you think for yourself, using your own critical faculties, you’re not likely to disagree with everything someone else says, whoever they are. It seems like both the left and the right want to demonize the other side and demand strict adherence to their orthodoxy with no dissent permitted. Intelligent people shouldn’t be bound by such things. What I’m objecting to is this all or nothing thinking - which is what I saw in your comment about CNN. The world and the people that inhabit it are more nuanced than that. Remember, only a Sith deals in absolutes. 😛 

I think we’ve largely talked past each other than to each other in this conversation and I own my part in that. If you disagree with things I say, it’s okay (and that’s sincere). I have no problem with good faith disagreements. I may have been a bit pedantic as well -  I pay extremely close attention to details like the use of “some” vs “all”. I’m a bit of an odd duck and am used to people wondering what the heck I’m going on about (I wonder that myself sometimes). 

MPJC wrote:

Now I see what you’re talking about. I didn’t watch any videos and it’s something the anchor said on the air. I only looked at the...

Now I see what you’re talking about. I didn’t watch any videos and it’s something the anchor said on the air. I only looked at the written story, so it’s no wonder I didn’t  know what you referring to. I didn’t deny that they’d said it. I just hadn’t seen it. I certainly wasn’t  suggesting that you’d misrepresented it. “I don’t see it” is very different from “it never happened”. 

It was a boneheaded statement and there was no reason for it. I never denied that CNN says boneheaded things (and it’s just my luck that my example of something they get right contains a glaring example of one - I deserve to be laughed at in this case). I’ve criticized them many times in the past. They’re not the worst offenders. MSNBC strikes me as worse. Morning Joe is like nails on a chalkboard with Mika sounding little Helen Lovejoy from the Simpsons with her ridiculous faux moral indignation whenever they discuss Trump. But I’m sure they get some things right. Even just by sheer probability, if you say enough things some of them will be correct. And at the end of day, they’re humans, just like you and me, doing their best to make sense of the world. That might be overly generous but I can’t go through life assuming the worst of people with whom I disagree. We’ve disagreed here but I bet that if we met at a motocross and struck up a conversation we’d have a great time and each leave thinking “what a nice fellow”. That’s pretty much what always happens when I meet someone at a motocross track. 

If you think for yourself, using your own critical faculties, you’re not likely to disagree with everything someone else says, whoever they are. It seems like both the left and the right want to demonize the other side and demand strict adherence to their orthodoxy with no dissent permitted. Intelligent people shouldn’t be bound by such things. What I’m objecting to is this all or nothing thinking - which is what I saw in your comment about CNN. The world and the people that inhabit it are more nuanced than that. Remember, only a Sith deals in absolutes. 😛 

I think we’ve largely talked past each other than to each other in this conversation and I own my part in that. If you disagree with things I say, it’s okay (and that’s sincere). I have no problem with good faith disagreements. I may have been a bit pedantic as well -  I pay extremely close attention to details like the use of “some” vs “all”. I’m a bit of an odd duck and am used to people wondering what the heck I’m going on about (I wonder that myself sometimes). 

ToolMaker wrote:

So to recap, your whole disagreement was that I used the word "all"?So before I start, I haven't posted in quite a while, I don't recall...

So to recap, your whole disagreement was that I used the word "all"?

So before I start, I haven't posted in quite a while, I don't recall any interaction with you in the past.

I really don't care that we disagree on "ideas", I think it makes for healthy discussion. I don't consider myself the smartest person in the room. I like to discuss ideas and debate content of posts, not the quality of the poster. In this particular case I'll tell you where I'm coming from. I thought it was a very petty thing of you to want to debate. Why? You want to dismantle my statement for using the word "all" as an absolute term while you use the term "perfect" (to be fair you actually used "perfectly well". Mind you, without the qualifier of "some basic news". Perfect is just as absolute as all. So you want to hold me to a standard that you don't practice yourself. Then you make the point about being "pedantic". Again, I gave you a quote and your response was "I don't actually see what you're referring to. " If you were truly "pedantic" you would have written "I didn't see..." which is entirely different than having a closed mind to not acknowledge the quote. Yes words have meaning, and using the right word changes the meaning. Having said all that, my grammar is shit, Falcon can back me up on that one. Of course CNN puts out a nugget of truth here and there, but, by and large they have gone from a "news" reporting outlet to a public influencing outlet driven by leftist ideology which is typically at odds with reality. And you helped make my point with your example, thank you.

Pretty sure we could have reasonable discussion. We all good?

TM

T-MAC wrote:

Also, look how densely populated and focused Chinas communities are by and large. Most commuted by bicycle because they live close to where they work. As...

Also, look how densely populated and focused Chinas communities are by and large. Most commuted by bicycle because they live close to where they work. As they started earning more, they bought cars. EVs slot in beautifully to how they have structured their society.

In the US, we built the suburbs, and spread out from each other (families and work). This was freedom for us, but it actually makes a lot of things more challenging. Most people have a decent commute to work, especially in CA where lower wage workers have to live further from where they work to afford it. EVs don't slot in to how we've structured our society here very well. 

I think we need to spend a bit more time at the drawing board before mandating shit.

Look at NYC subway, it is ancient, but still does an incredible job moving massive amounts of people around. I commuted on it for two years when I worked at MakerBot in Brooklyn.

Look at LA, it is a newer city with a terrible public transportation system. And CA is obsessed with building a shiny new bullet train. For what? For who? It doesn't address the root cause issues in the slightest. But CA loves innovating, which is great, let's make sure it makes some fucking sense though...

CA tries to be a leader, and these are the examples. Force EVs down peoples throats where it doesn't make sense, nor does a damn bullet train.

Ford Maverick is a good example of US company making sensible progress. Affordable, small, good on gas, etc. 

MPJC wrote:

The Ford Maverick is great. I've had mine for over 3 years and it's surprisingly capable if you need to move furniture or other modest tasks...

The Ford Maverick is great. I've had mine for over 3 years and it's surprisingly capable if you need to move furniture or other modest tasks, and it's great on fuel. 

Having a centralized government mandate things for a large, diverse country doesn't tend to yield sensible results. We feel that pain in Western Canada frequently, dealing with a Liberal federal government that seems to forget that Canada extends beyond Ontario and Quebec (though they remember us when they want our oil revenues to redistribute in equalization payments).  

T-MAC wrote:

Also, look how densely populated and focused Chinas communities are by and large. Most commuted by bicycle because they live close to where they work. As...

Also, look how densely populated and focused Chinas communities are by and large. Most commuted by bicycle because they live close to where they work. As they started earning more, they bought cars. EVs slot in beautifully to how they have structured their society.

In the US, we built the suburbs, and spread out from each other (families and work). This was freedom for us, but it actually makes a lot of things more challenging. Most people have a decent commute to work, especially in CA where lower wage workers have to live further from where they work to afford it. EVs don't slot in to how we've structured our society here very well. 

I think we need to spend a bit more time at the drawing board before mandating shit.

Look at NYC subway, it is ancient, but still does an incredible job moving massive amounts of people around. I commuted on it for two years when I worked at MakerBot in Brooklyn.

Look at LA, it is a newer city with a terrible public transportation system. And CA is obsessed with building a shiny new bullet train. For what? For who? It doesn't address the root cause issues in the slightest. But CA loves innovating, which is great, let's make sure it makes some fucking sense though...

CA tries to be a leader, and these are the examples. Force EVs down peoples throats where it doesn't make sense, nor does a damn bullet train.

Ford Maverick is a good example of US company making sensible progress. Affordable, small, good on gas, etc. 

MPJC wrote:

The Ford Maverick is great. I've had mine for over 3 years and it's surprisingly capable if you need to move furniture or other modest tasks...

The Ford Maverick is great. I've had mine for over 3 years and it's surprisingly capable if you need to move furniture or other modest tasks, and it's great on fuel. 

Having a centralized government mandate things for a large, diverse country doesn't tend to yield sensible results. We feel that pain in Western Canada frequently, dealing with a Liberal federal government that seems to forget that Canada extends beyond Ontario and Quebec (though they remember us when they want our oil revenues to redistribute in equalization payments).  

TeamGreen wrote:

From the Talking Heads...and put here with love and respect and an expectation for Canadians to get shit done and straighten Ottawa out, EH!!!Time isn't...

From the Talking Heads...and put here with love and respect and an expectation for Canadians to get shit done and straighten Ottawa out, EH!!!

Time isn't holding up, time isn't after us
Same as it ever was, same as it ever was
Same as it ever was, same as it ever was
Same as it ever was, same as it ever was
Letting the days go by, same as it ever was...

I have faith in Canucks like you...even if you do still have those royal fucks on your damn money! 🤣

ns503 wrote:

There is a cognitive possibility.

Also a possibility of just outright bullshitting.

Pick yer poison. 😬

TeamGreen wrote:

Wait one damn minute! 

Are you implying that there are times where Trump is completely full of shit?!

Jeffro802 wrote:

His entire campaign run was full of shit. The amount of outright lies he told is comical. The worst part is dumb fucks like you actually...

His entire campaign run was full of shit. The amount of outright lies he told is comical. The worst part is dumb fucks like you actually believe him. 😂

MPJC wrote:

Now I see what you’re talking about. I didn’t watch any videos and it’s something the anchor said on the air. I only looked at the...

Now I see what you’re talking about. I didn’t watch any videos and it’s something the anchor said on the air. I only looked at the written story, so it’s no wonder I didn’t  know what you referring to. I didn’t deny that they’d said it. I just hadn’t seen it. I certainly wasn’t  suggesting that you’d misrepresented it. “I don’t see it” is very different from “it never happened”. 

It was a boneheaded statement and there was no reason for it. I never denied that CNN says boneheaded things (and it’s just my luck that my example of something they get right contains a glaring example of one - I deserve to be laughed at in this case). I’ve criticized them many times in the past. They’re not the worst offenders. MSNBC strikes me as worse. Morning Joe is like nails on a chalkboard with Mika sounding little Helen Lovejoy from the Simpsons with her ridiculous faux moral indignation whenever they discuss Trump. But I’m sure they get some things right. Even just by sheer probability, if you say enough things some of them will be correct. And at the end of day, they’re humans, just like you and me, doing their best to make sense of the world. That might be overly generous but I can’t go through life assuming the worst of people with whom I disagree. We’ve disagreed here but I bet that if we met at a motocross and struck up a conversation we’d have a great time and each leave thinking “what a nice fellow”. That’s pretty much what always happens when I meet someone at a motocross track. 

If you think for yourself, using your own critical faculties, you’re not likely to disagree with everything someone else says, whoever they are. It seems like both the left and the right want to demonize the other side and demand strict adherence to their orthodoxy with no dissent permitted. Intelligent people shouldn’t be bound by such things. What I’m objecting to is this all or nothing thinking - which is what I saw in your comment about CNN. The world and the people that inhabit it are more nuanced than that. Remember, only a Sith deals in absolutes. 😛 

I think we’ve largely talked past each other than to each other in this conversation and I own my part in that. If you disagree with things I say, it’s okay (and that’s sincere). I have no problem with good faith disagreements. I may have been a bit pedantic as well -  I pay extremely close attention to details like the use of “some” vs “all”. I’m a bit of an odd duck and am used to people wondering what the heck I’m going on about (I wonder that myself sometimes). 

ToolMaker wrote:

So to recap, your whole disagreement was that I used the word "all"?So before I start, I haven't posted in quite a while, I don't recall...

So to recap, your whole disagreement was that I used the word "all"?

So before I start, I haven't posted in quite a while, I don't recall any interaction with you in the past.

I really don't care that we disagree on "ideas", I think it makes for healthy discussion. I don't consider myself the smartest person in the room. I like to discuss ideas and debate content of posts, not the quality of the poster. In this particular case I'll tell you where I'm coming from. I thought it was a very petty thing of you to want to debate. Why? You want to dismantle my statement for using the word "all" as an absolute term while you use the term "perfect" (to be fair you actually used "perfectly well". Mind you, without the qualifier of "some basic news". Perfect is just as absolute as all. So you want to hold me to a standard that you don't practice yourself. Then you make the point about being "pedantic". Again, I gave you a quote and your response was "I don't actually see what you're referring to. " If you were truly "pedantic" you would have written "I didn't see..." which is entirely different than having a closed mind to not acknowledge the quote. Yes words have meaning, and using the right word changes the meaning. Having said all that, my grammar is shit, Falcon can back me up on that one. Of course CNN puts out a nugget of truth here and there, but, by and large they have gone from a "news" reporting outlet to a public influencing outlet driven by leftist ideology which is typically at odds with reality. And you helped make my point with your example, thank you.

Pretty sure we could have reasonable discussion. We all good?

TM

MPJC wrote:

All fair points. There was a lot of unnecessary confusion about that CNN quote - I used present tense because I was reading the piece and...

All fair points. There was a lot of unnecessary confusion about that CNN quote - I used present tense because I was reading the piece and looking for the quote as I was writing. I should have made it clear that I wasn't disputing that they'd said it.

"Pretty well" would have been better than "perfectly well"

Yes, I do get hung up on words like "all", and it was petty of me to make so much of it. I try not to be a dick but don't always succeed. A more charitable reading would have been to interpret you as saying something along the lines of CNN having a flawed set of assumptions that inevitably tend to steer their narratives in the wrong direction. Would that be a fair reading of your post?

Your grammar isn't shit. I don't see anything wrong with it. 

All good. 

T-MAC wrote:

Unless it goes against Fed initiatives, such as the Texas Dreamers Act I brought up a couple pages back. In this instance, it doesn't matter what...

Unless it goes against Fed initiatives, such as the Texas Dreamers Act I brought up a couple pages back. In this instance, it doesn't matter what the state wants, several decades bipartisan agreements be damned.

They seem to be cherry picking things, especially with states that have substantial pull. Gotta flex that Federal power and control. Granted I don't particularly agree with this EV mandate CA had. Most folks that need to commute to work couldn't afford a new EV. Most folks I know with EVs have a few other cars too, including big gas guzzling rigs.

Consistency is important. Which is what makes it hard for companies (and countries) to navigate this administrations efforts in a sensible way also.

Last2Stroke wrote:

EVs are cheap in other countries...https://electrek.co/2025/04/08/byds-low-cost-seagull-ev-now-starts-under-8000-china/

EVs are cheap in other countries...

https://electrek.co/2025/04/08/byds-low-cost-seagull-ev-now-starts-under-8000-china/

SEEMEFIRST wrote:

I'll bet that's a gem.

Last2Stroke wrote:

EVs are cheap in other countries...https://electrek.co/2025/04/08/byds-low-cost-seagull-ev-now-starts-under-8000-china/

EVs are cheap in other countries...

https://electrek.co/2025/04/08/byds-low-cost-seagull-ev-now-starts-under-8000-china/

SEEMEFIRST wrote:

I'll bet that's a gem.

Last2Stroke wrote:

Ideal city car, where you are stuck in traffic jams and don't get over 30mph.BYD does make ICE vehicles, even a pickup...These are growing in popularity...

Ideal city car, where you are stuck in traffic jams and don't get over 30mph.

BYD does make ICE vehicles, even a pickup...

These are growing in popularity in Australia, build quality and price are better than Ford.

bonseff wrote:

I know for me, when Biden announced he and Harris were taking another run at the presidency, I was like, really, seriously? Y'all think that's a...

I know for me, when Biden announced he and Harris were taking another run at the presidency, I was like, really, seriously? Y'all think that's a good idea? LOL I'm sure I wasn't the only one. Then after the disaster debate with trump they pulled out the Harris/Walz ticket and I was like oh great, it's McCain/Palin 2.0. The DNC is a joke.

SEEMEFIRST wrote:

I'll bet that's a gem.

Last2Stroke wrote:

Ideal city car, where you are stuck in traffic jams and don't get over 30mph.BYD does make ICE vehicles, even a pickup...These are growing in popularity...

Ideal city car, where you are stuck in traffic jams and don't get over 30mph.

BYD does make ICE vehicles, even a pickup...

These are growing in popularity in Australia, build quality and price are better than Ford.

TeamGreen wrote:

BwaaaaaaaHaaaaaaaaHaaaaaaaaaBring that POS to Baja all loaded up and chasing us down the peninsula. Be sure to bring those awesome scooters in that ChiCom ad, too. BwaaaaaaaHaaaaaaaHaaaaaaaaGo...

BwaaaaaaaHaaaaaaaaHaaaaaaaaa

Bring that POS to Baja all loaded up and chasing us down the peninsula. Be sure to bring those awesome scooters in that ChiCom ad, too. 

BwaaaaaaaHaaaaaaaHaaaaaaaa

Go Team China

Dude, you’re priceless.

Go drive a Ranger Raptor…even the diesel with the mis-located steering wheel that you guys get…and then drive that ChiCom Piece of Shit and get back to us. 

BwaaaaaaHaaaaaaaaHaaaaaaaaHaaaaaaaaaa

Damn. You’re too fucking funny.

Last2Stroke wrote:

Ideal city car, where you are stuck in traffic jams and don't get over 30mph.BYD does make ICE vehicles, even a pickup...These are growing in popularity...

Ideal city car, where you are stuck in traffic jams and don't get over 30mph.

BYD does make ICE vehicles, even a pickup...

These are growing in popularity in Australia, build quality and price are better than Ford.

TeamGreen wrote:

BwaaaaaaaHaaaaaaaaHaaaaaaaaaBring that POS to Baja all loaded up and chasing us down the peninsula. Be sure to bring those awesome scooters in that ChiCom ad, too. BwaaaaaaaHaaaaaaaHaaaaaaaaGo...

BwaaaaaaaHaaaaaaaaHaaaaaaaaa

Bring that POS to Baja all loaded up and chasing us down the peninsula. Be sure to bring those awesome scooters in that ChiCom ad, too. 

BwaaaaaaaHaaaaaaaHaaaaaaaa

Go Team China

Dude, you’re priceless.

Go drive a Ranger Raptor…even the diesel with the mis-located steering wheel that you guys get…and then drive that ChiCom Piece of Shit and get back to us. 

BwaaaaaaHaaaaaaaaHaaaaaaaaHaaaaaaaaaa

Damn. You’re too fucking funny.

Last2Stroke wrote:

My neighbor's a builder, he had a Raptor, replaced it with the BYD, he's impressed, I'll take his word over yours since you haven't driven both.

Last2Stroke wrote:

Ideal city car, where you are stuck in traffic jams and don't get over 30mph.BYD does make ICE vehicles, even a pickup...These are growing in popularity...

Ideal city car, where you are stuck in traffic jams and don't get over 30mph.

BYD does make ICE vehicles, even a pickup...

These are growing in popularity in Australia, build quality and price are better than Ford.