By on March 8, 2012

Chevy Volt – Building a Better Tomorrow from Ben Howe on Vimeo.

 

Our very own Ed Niedermeyer was on CNN today talking about the Chevrolet Volt, and in honor of his appearance, we present to you a satirical Volt ad that is sure to incite untrue accusations of political bias among TTAC staffers. In other news, vote Lyndon Larouche 2012.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

44 Comments on “Chevrolet Volt – Building a Better Tomorrow Via Satire...”


  • avatar
    jhott997

    oh boy. This is going to be good.

  • avatar
    VanillaDude

    In five years, when he is no longer president, Mr. Obama is going to buy a Volt. He promised. And you know how valuable those promises have been over the past few years.

    Right after he shuts down Guantanamo, he is going to buy a Volt.

    You can take that promise right where all he promises have gone – right to Lehman Brothers, where it could be banked, if it wasn’t closed.

    • 0 avatar
      mike978

      Just like the promise to not raise taxes on those earning less than $250,000. Oh right that ones been kept.

    • 0 avatar
      retrogrouch

      Gitmo, check.

      With that said, the great decidinator, Bush, let Lehman fade away. There is plenty of stuff to complain about. Try to keep those complaints to things that actually happened.

    • 0 avatar
      Pch101

      Lehman exited Chapter 11 two days ago.

      http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/06/us-lehman-idUSTRE8250WY20120306

    • 0 avatar
      Franz K

      Of course ObamaClaus is gonna buy a VOLT VanillaDude . But to replace his current Golf Cart , not to drive on the road that is . Seeing as how thats all the VOLT is really good for

      Odds are in five years ( assuming ObamaClaus wins in 2012 ) other than used , there won’t BE any new VOLT’s to be had . With any luck !

  • avatar
    nickeled&dimed

    I saw that clip – and was going to search for the last Volt article to bring it up… I thought Ed made some good points and was pretty darn realistic about the Volt’s chances and GM’s obvious over-estimation of demand for the car.

    Can’t see the satirical ad… I’ll have to check that out later.

    Vote Larouche forever!

  • avatar

    I gotta say, this video is the kind of emblematic of the self-destructive bent that Volt-bashing is taking. There are so many valid critiques of the policies supporting the Volt, but criticism always seems to come down to a cheap shot about fires. It’s irresponsible fearmongering, and it gets in the way of a real discussion about the market response to a technology that is supported by taxpayer money at every stage, from development to production to consumption.

    I was recently quoted in a TalkingPointsMemo piece on the subject, which argued that conservative critiques are self-defeating because they attack American manufacturing. To the extent that thesis is true, it’s because the critics don’t have a focused message and indulge in misleading attacks like the fire danger FUD. Obama is certainly promoting the Volt and its relevant government subsidies to the point where he invites a healthy policy debate, but all we’re getting is hollow wisecracks like this video.

    http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/03/are-gopers-being-driven-into-another-limbaugh-trap-in-a-chevy-volt.php

    • 0 avatar
      Pch101

      “this video is the kind of emblematic of the self-destructive bent that Volt-bashing is taking.”

      I think that you’re going a wee bit far with that.

      The problem with it is that like a lot of conservative “humor”, it’s weak. It started out well, but then it keeps going, and going, and going, with the pithy subtitles and closing ensuring that it plays well only to the converted. Someone such as PJ O’Rourke, who actually is funny, would have done a better job.

      Pounding on the Volt is one thing. Beating it like a dead horse is another. The red staters and some of the TTAC audience have taken the dead horse, run the carcass through a chipper, then ran those bits through a grinder — twice — and have now taken a baseball bat to the miniscule bits of ground meat and sludge that remain. At this rate, fart jokes seem funny by comparison.

      • 0 avatar
        noxioux

        You forgot the part after the baseball-batting, where we. . .

        . . .light the sludge on FIRE!!!

        But you’re dead on. Continuing car-b-que jokes are now officially as tired as ye olde spontaneous acceleration Audi jokes were back in the day.

        Plenty of other reasons to hate the Volt.

    • 0 avatar
      Franz K

      Well .. so its some valid , non Car-BQ critiques you’re wanting … ehh ?

      Here’s my take on the VOLT

      First a caveat . I am not , nor have I ever been a Conservative and especially not a Neocon .

      So here we go ;

      #1 The VOLT is in fact losing GM between $10K and $120K per unit sold , depending on whether you factor in all the development costs ( $120K ) or the actually per unit manufacturing cost ( $10K )

      #2 We Tax payers are in fact making up that lose with our hard earned dollars , along with all ongoing development costs etc ….

      #3 ….. while also subsidizing the Sale of each and every VOLT sold , currently to the tune of $7500 in tax credits , with ObamaClause now vying for a cash $10,000 Government paid for rebate

      #4 The VOLT has in fact been a string of broken promises and lies from Day One , with the most current being the SAE /Edmunds / CA DOT etc all proving point blank the VOLT is in no way shape or form an E/V . Its a Hybrid plain and simple . Over complicated and overweight … but a Hybrid

      #5 ….. and to # 4 the VOLT is also excessively over priced , despite Chevy taking a lose on every unit sold , and especially in light of the VOLT being based on a Bargain platform ( Cruze )…..

      #6 …….yet despite that high price the VOLT’s materials and workmanship are sub par for a car of its price . The Wheels alone are an utter abomination , belonging on some $15K sub compact and not a $41K automobile

      #7 The problems with Li battery use in an Automobile are well know / have been for years / as well as well publicized , yet GM chose to continue on with a battery technology they KNOW is not in fact suitable for use in any road going vehicle

      And thats just the start of what i could easily place in a ten page essay format if i had the time or desire to do so .

      That more what you’re after ?

      • 0 avatar
        Dr. Kenneth Noisewater

        So waitasec, you mean that I could buy a car that’s worth up to $150k or so for $35k? Sounds like a hell of a bargain to me.

        Kinda how you can get a $15k/yr education for your kid for $3.5k/yr worth of property tax in some states..

      • 0 avatar
        CJinSD

        Dr. Kenneth Noisewater,

        And it is high quality thought like yours that has us printing or borrowing 44 cents of every dollar the federal government spends. There will be a price paid for your bargains. We can’t all be on the take, and chances are that very few of us should be. Eventually, it will be apparent to all that producing fiat currency instead of goods does not an economy make.

      • 0 avatar
        gslippy

        Disagree on #7 – lithium ion batteries have limitations, but the Nissan Leaf and Tesla Roadster are doing just fine with them.

        Safety-wise, I’d rather take my chances on lithium ion than with gasoline in an accident.

      • 0 avatar
        shaker

        My taxes have been spent on far worse things than the Chevy Volt. Conservatives beat on it like a red-headed stepchild because they’re running out of targets.
        Two unfunded wars in a knee-jerk overreaction to 9/11 have finally destroyed our economy, and neocons think that big oil/big gas are going to pull us out of recession by doing the same crap that they’ve always done, with even less government regulation.
        Way to go backwards, boys.
        Yes, government is too big, but the rampant greed and pursuit of wealth at all costs is the disease, and “big” government is just the pain and swelling in reaction to said ailment.

      • 0 avatar
        Ed S.

        Franz K: “The VOLT is in fact losing GM between $10K and $120K per unit sold , depending on whether you factor in all the development costs ( $120K ) or the actually per unit manufacturing cost ( $10K )”

        How many years was the Prius imported at a loss? R&D costs are always amortized of the lifetime of the platform. Do you think it makes business sense to sell the first Volt at like $800M and the rest at just the cost of production + margin?

        Also, it’s clear that you have strong feelings about the Volt (“…a string of broken promises and lies…”) but most people don’t get so worked-up about other manufacturers “lying” about cars (they just stop buying from them). Cars are appliances, after all. Designed to make our lives a bit easier by reducing the amount of walking we have to do. They are not curing cancer, they aren’t even alive (although corporations are people)! So, tell us why you are projecting all of these feelings onto the Volt and then we can have a conversation about those issues on the merits. If your issue is with Obama then maybe… IDK, just stop muddying this discussion with those feelings.

    • 0 avatar
      charly

      Manufacturing is were unions are. Conservatives hate unions and there is no unions without manufacturing

      • 0 avatar
        gslippy

        I don’t know where you get this. Unions can serve a good purpose; a good example is the airline pilots union, which helps protect pilots as well as the flying public.

        But if you mean the UAW, then you can look at the transplants to see that the UAW has outlived its purpose.

        As a conservative who works in manufacturing, I assure you I don’t hate manufacturing.

      • 0 avatar

        “there is no unions without manufacturing”

        Manufacturing accounts for a very small portion of union membership. The majority of union members in the US are now government employees.

        http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm

    • 0 avatar
      redav

      I’m conservative, and I don’t bash the Volt.

      I don’t think it will be successful as currently offerred and I think GM is botching its promotion, but that’s a business assessment, not a bash.

      I don’t see the bashing as cons/lib issue. But then again, I don’t blame either Bush or Obama for all the world’s problems, so I must not be on the same page as everyone else.

  • avatar
    rwb

    Read as “Building a Better Tomorrow Via Sartre,” was confused.

  • avatar
    SherbornSean

    From the quality of production, it’s obvious that someone spent a lot of money on a video that at heart just isn’t funny. I wonder if it’s one of the 3-4 zillionaires who stand in the way of Romney buying the nomination.

    What I don’t understand about the “Tea Party” backers is that they are so offended that Obama (and Bush!) spent money to save US auto manufacturing and to promote green energy, but when you point out that we spend 20X that amount on the war in Iraq to continue oil imports, well, that’s attacking the military, which is makes you unamerican.

    • 0 avatar
      noreaster

      Maybe because “the war in Iraq to continue oil imports” is simply untrue. The Iraq invasion of Kuwait had two likely outcomes, baring US intervention: one, a “new normal” would have taken hold, and oil production would have resumed with only the briefest hiccup; or the entire region would have gone up ion flames. While the later would have disrupted oil production, only a maniac would consider that the worst consequence. Everything after that was simply reaction, back-and-forth, to that first decision to intervene: the attempted genocide of the Kurds, the no-fly zone, the embargo, the Oil-For-Food corruption, the attempts to enforce the Iraqi terms of surrender. Yes, the Middle-East is, as Jimmy Carter proclaimed, of Vital National Interest, but you make it sounds like we were stealing the pennies off of dead men’s eyes.

      • 0 avatar
        Dr. Kenneth Noisewater

        WTF does America have a national interest in that region?

        If we didn’t crave their sweet tasty oil, would we keep multiple aircraft carriers and an entire branch of the US Military (CENTCOM) on standby at extreme cost to intervene? Or would we just leave them to roger their camels in peace, barring the occasional reprisal strike?

    • 0 avatar
      noreaster

      Maybe because “the war in Iraq to continue oil imports” is simply untrue. The Iraq invasion of Kuwait had two likely outcomes, baring US intervention: one, a “new normal” would have taken hold, and oil production would have resumed with only the briefest hiccup; or the entire region would have gone up in flames. While the later would have disrupted oil production, only a maniac would consider that the worst consequence. Everything after that was simply reaction, back-and-forth, to that first decision to intervene: the attempted genocide of the Kurds, the no-fly zone, the embargo, the Oil-For-Food corruption, the attempts to enforce the Iraqi terms of surrender. Yes, the Middle-East is, as Jimmy Carter proclaimed, of Vital National Interest, but you make it sounds like we were stealing the pennies off of dead men’s eyes.

    • 0 avatar
      jeano

      Strawman arguments are really old, Sherborn.

  • avatar
    Zackman

    I still like the Volt and would consider buying one if it were less expensive and I was in the market.

    I just think all the nay-sayers are jealous.

    Now watch me wind up with a Prius some day, anti-Toyota (tongue in cheek) guy I am…

    • 0 avatar
      noxioux

      Jealous? Of a Volt? (insert laughter until pants are peed in)

      • 0 avatar
        LectroByte

        You never know. Having lived through the oil shocks of the 1970’s, I can well remember plenty of gas stations with “No Gas” signs, but I don’t recall the electricity being off much at all. A mishap in the Straits of Hormuz (sp?) and the Volt could be the most desirable car in America.

      • 0 avatar
        gslippy

        @LectroByte: I lived through that time, too. And when the price of gas goes up, people will have less disposable income and will NOT gravitate toward $44k economy cars.

  • avatar
    THE_F0nz

    I have a a bit of an emotional response to this kind of stuff:

    I haven’t read a bad review of this car. I can recognize a fluff piece when I see it, and for the most part they have been. When I see a real concrete review it still comes out positive. Please point me to one when you find one (a bad review). People like bashing and sensationalizing, so I’m sure one exists.

    In short, it is a nice, cutting edge car that happens to be over priced like most cutting edge things are on their first iteration. Is it jealousy that only wealthy people can buy the cutting edge tech-laden car? How is this new?

    I’m in my mid to late twenties. I don’t know anyone of my friends who dislikes this car for political or any other reasons. It solves a problem: A person that wants an everyday electric car for a commute, but a viable option for a weekend road trip. I can’t afford it now, but my parents and I have both said that the next iteration will probably be the one to have.

    If the bailout didn’t happen, the government would still be behind it. You don’t like it? Write your congressman/woman. Protest. Do something besides spread rumors and crap like this. You wish the bailout didn’t happen? How is THIS kind of attention going to assist in the government getting its money back. Cynical about that topic? Explain how being a cynic helps anything.

    OK rant over.

  • avatar
    Crabspirits

    I would love to be on the other side, wishing this car death, laughing at it. That would be easy to do if it sucked. But it doesn’t, it’s a good car. It works, it does it’s job well. If I owned one, it would run off the battery 100% for my daily commute.

    My uncle has one, he loves it. I know a guy at GM involved with it. I enjoy hearing his amusing stories, poking fun at GM’s ineptitude. None of these stories involve this car (aside from the terrible P.R.). He has only good things to say about it.

    I thought the commercial was funny btw.

  • avatar
    TheHammer

    The piece is typical snarky anti-GM nonsense that is so prevalent here. I guess I might air it here as you know it will surely “sell” to this crowd.

  • avatar
    kvndoom

    I’m not a Volt fan or hater, although I despise some of the politics behind it. Still, that video was not even remotely funny. If it were a radio ad, you could just substitute Rush Limbaugh’s voice.

  • avatar
    daviel

    I want to see Volt succeed.

  • avatar
    joeaverage

    The video isn’t that funny.

    What is funny/odd is how we Americans talk about being a world leader but have no interest in things our own economy builds. I don’t like GM and the stupid decisions GM has made along the way. I do like this car and hope they sell tens of thousands of them. I want to see this car lead to more new ideas and new products. I want to see GM spark competition with similar products from other brands.

    I want America to get back to designing and building stuff the rest of the world marvels at.

    I want a full electric but having driven this car, I would have to take a serious look at it if I had that kind of cash laying around for a car. I support all the electric cars but especially Tesla, Fisker and GM b/c these are American products.

  • avatar
    gslippy

    I am an official Volt Hater, but the video is just satire. Big deal. It could have run as an SNL joke in between skits poking fun of Republican candidates. Can’t anyone take a joke any more?

  • avatar
    shaker

    It’s a good joke, for the first 20 seconds – then it devolves into a poorly made propaganda piece, full of desperate hyperbole.

  • avatar
    Franz K

    @ gslippy

    ” Disagree on #7 – lithium ion batteries have limitations, but the Nissan Leaf and Tesla Roadster are doing just fine with them.

    Safety-wise, I’d rather take my chances on lithium ion than with gasoline in an accident ”

    Really ? You actually believe that about Li ? Haven’t heard about the Multitudes of TESLA roadsters doing the Car-BQ thing ? Haven’t read the fact that each and every EV/Hybrid w/Li batteries is mandated to be treated as a Bio Hazard when involved in an accident ? Missed out on the new Li ‘Bricking ‘ revelations ? Not seen the First Responder mandates on them yet ?

    Here’s the current short list as it stands on as I’ll call it , with Li’s in Hybrids /EV’s

    10,000 Ways to Leave Your Driver ( when you’re an Li equipped auto )

    Li’s can ;

    1) ‘ Brick ‘ you ( yes the LEAf can do it also as well as any cars using Li’s )
    2) Electro- shock you ( w/300+ volts )
    3) Electrocute you ( see above )
    4) Car-BQ you
    5) Allow you to become your own personal Bio Hazard
    6) Cost you upwards of $40K for replacement , not if , but when they die , which will be sooner than later

    etc etc . Where’s this info coming from you ask ?

    SAE -ASE – First Responder Mandates in dealing w/ EV’s & Hybrids – EPA mandates in the treatment of damaged/crashed EV/Hybrids ….. and oh yeah …. from the multitudes of advice/ warnings that was given by Silicon Vally engineers when automakers first considered using Li’s … including those at Apple .

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • brn: I wish others the best of luck. For me, it’s not worth getting on yet another marketing distribution for...
  • bufguy: Cite your source for that statement. Short of natural disasters, power on the east coast is very reliable
  • bullnuke: On my ’75 Scirroco, that was the issue – the carburetor. The service techs could never get it...
  • Inside Looking Out: It will produce too much greenhouse gases.
  • EBFlex: “ Like I said…call me when you really can’t buy a gas powered car anymore. I’ll probably be dead by then,...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber