By on November 3, 2020

No-Mad/Shutterstock.com

Buckle up kids — it’s Election Day in America, and we’re about to get political.

Before we do, some rules. Don’t follow them, and the merciless banhammer will find you.

The rules, in no particular order: Stay on topic. No flaming or personal attacks. No hatred or bigotry. Keep it civil. Don’t whine if you get caught breaking these rules.

Basically, play nice or be gone. Just like the sandbox back in elementary school.

OK, that taken care of, let’s get into this. Whether you’ve voted yet or not, I am curious — which candidate do you think will be best for the automotive industry?

Joe Biden? Donald Trump? Jo Jorgensen or Kanye West or a write-in vote for “yo mama?”

Again, this is SPECIFICALLY about the automotive industry. Keep your comments on topic, and do not bring in immigration, taxes, foreign policy, or whatever other topic unless it’s relevant. If you can’t abide by this simple rule, don’t comment.

Will a Biden presidency usher in a rush towards more green vehicles, including EVs? Will a second Trump term loosen regulations involving the industry, including fuel economy, in a way that’s good for business? Will either man’s ability to manage the pandemic and/or overall economy be good/bad/indifferent for the automotive industry?

Discuss among yourselves. Presumably, you’re all adults. So act like it.

Once again: Keep it civil. And go vote if you’re an American and haven’t already. Whether you’re ridin’ with Biden, you want to Keep America Great, or you vote outside the two parties, just do it.

And no matter what happens, don’t blame me, I voted for Kodos.

[Image: No-Mad/Shutterstock.com]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

137 Comments on “QOTD: Which POTUS Candidate Would Be Best for Autos?...”


  • avatar
    R Henry

    “we’re about to get political”

    Thanks for nothing! I have had more than enough already, Mr. Healey. I come here to escape it.

    • 0 avatar
      Arthur Dailey

      I agree. Today we should recuse ourselves from political discourse.
      Instead I hope that the USA does not experience civil disobedience or violence of any kind, and that the fundamental tenets of the democratic system are obeyed by people of every political persuasion, regardless of the voting results.

    • 0 avatar
      Tim Healey

      Believe me, I thought about not posting this. But I am curious as to how y’all think, and well, you don’t have to read the post or the comments if you don’t want to. I do, because it’s in my job description, but you can blissfully go about your day if you like.

      • 0 avatar
        R Henry

        “you can blissfully go”

        I am always surprised to receive such comments from managers of commericial enterprises. In my business, we do EVERYTHING to exceed the expectations of our clientele, knowing that a dissatisfied client/customer results in nothing good. Is this internet publishing concern lucrative enough to be able to shed readers without concern?

        • 0 avatar
          Tim Healey

          I didn’t mean don’t read TTAC at all! Just don’t read the posts or comments you’re not interested in.

          I read certain sports blogs and when soccer comes up I just scroll right by and click on the next MLB or NHL post.

          We’d love for you to read every article! But blogs are just like newspapers in that we print/publish lots of topics to appeal to a wide audience while knowing some people will skip some content they aren’t interested in.

          Do you read every article in the newspaper?

          Again, we’re glad you reach each post. But if you want to avoid politics today, we have plenty of car content.

          • 0 avatar
            R Henry

            “The Truth About Cars”

            –I just double checked. Nope, no metion of politics…on election day…when the Western World is hopelessly polarized, and violence a distinct possibility in many cities.

            I yearn to have an online home that floats above it all. It is VERY disappointing to learn that such a place could exist, but doesn’t…for no good reason.

        • 0 avatar
          Nick_515

          R Henry, it’s not like you’re saying “I don’t wish to talk about politics here,” which you could control easily by what you read, what you ignore, who you engage with, etc.

          What you’re really saying is, “I don’t wish YOU to talk about politics here, because I don’t like it.” Even though such a thing was never promised to you, implicitly, or explicitly, and even though politics clearly intersects with cardom, as has been made clear time and again.

          • 0 avatar

            Well said, sir! As Mr. Healey said (in my words) no one has a gun to your head to force you to read something you have no interest in. That’s what freedom is all about to me.

      • 0 avatar
        Steve Biro

        Honestly, Tim, I think the question you raise in your piece is irrelevant.

        Firstly, that ship has already sailed. Without any public discussion, the government bureaucrats and the automotive industry have decided what our future will be: Electric and full of autonomous technology that really doesn’t work and nobody asked for. And we will be expected to be excited and grateful.

        Secondly, the stakes we are playing for in this election push cars and trucks way down on the list of importance. Like it or not, it’s still true. A good chunk of the population is still in denial about how important this election really is. But they are about to get a rude wake-up call.

        On the upside, it appears voter participation is higher than ever.

        • 0 avatar
          Old_WRX

          Steve Biro,

          “the stakes we are playing for in this election”

          Yup, what is at stake this election may well be just about all of life as we’ve known it here in this country.

    • 0 avatar
      Pig_Iron

      “I come here to escape it.” A lot of folks feel that way about the COVID too.

    • 0 avatar

      The best way to escape politics is to not participate in political debate and to not comment in this thread.

  • avatar
    Victor

    I’m not a US citizen, so I don’t get to vote. But judging by what’s been said and by what Trump has been doing so far, i’d say Trump. I don’t know, Biden just looks more like the kind of guy that would push for EVs, autonomous vehicles, etc.

  • avatar
    Imagefont

    I actually think Biden will be better for the auto industry and the economy in general. All industries benefit from consistency and predictability. If they know what the rules are and what they will be they can plan ahead and plan accordingly. Trump tends to telegraph contradictory messages, and makes pronouncements all the time that are outside his realm of authority. He is the opposite of consistency and stability, it’s virtually his trademark. My 2 cents.

    • 0 avatar

      I’m amazed how well business did under Trump (I mean yes tax cuts and ignoring environmental laws I’m sure helped) . Some of it was in-spite of him to be sure. I’m curious for what could have been, Clinton was pretty big biz friendly, so we may have been in the same place in an alternate universe.

    • 0 avatar
      slavuta

      Biden will be decommissioned in a month or 2. Then you will get people who will pack you in 3cyl small cars

      • 0 avatar
        Old_WRX

        “Then you will get people who will pack you in 3cyl small cars”

        More likely they’ll let you take public trans. Even three cylinder cars would be only for inner party members.

      • 0 avatar

        “Biden will be decommissioned in a month or 2”

        I agree. He will be replaced with the new model that functions on new generation of Intel processors. His current behavior demonstrates advantage of nanometer semiconductor chips over CPUs based on thermionic valves.

        • 0 avatar
          Old_WRX

          Inside Looking Out,

          Obviously you’re no audiophile if you are touting semiconductors over thermionic or Fleming valve.

          • 0 avatar

            We are talking about CPU model circa 1942. Regarding audio amplifiers, I have Benchmark AHB2. It is semiconductor Class A amplifier (feed forward error correction with class A reference amplifier) that beats tube amplifiers. And very small size, reliable and runs slightly warm.

    • 0 avatar
      Old_WRX

      Inside Looking Out,

      As long as we’re being snooty:-) My amplification is courtesy of Conrad-Johnson — Premier 17LS-2 and MF2500. So I do both: valves and semiconductors.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      @Imagefont – Agreed. Stability in policy and leadership is more beneficial for business.

      Various business journals have studied which party tends to be better for business and that happens to be Democrats.
      “A study from the National Bureau of Economic Research found that Democratic presidents since World War II have performed much better than Republicans. On average, Democratic presidents grew the economy 4.4% each year versus 2.5% for Republicans.”

      If you enact policies that lift up the lower and middle class, they have money to spend. The next point is self evident: If people fell more safe and secure, they are more likely to make long term purchases i.e. buy new vehicles. That fits the old saying, “The rising tide lifts all boats.”

      • 0 avatar
        slavuta

        Please, don’t mix democrats of the passed with today’s party. In fact, GOP today looks like Dems 50 years ago.

        • 0 avatar
          Schurkey

          “GOP today looks like Dems 50 years ago.”
          Yup. Largely for reasons I’m not allowed to discuss here.

          Clearly Trump will be better for the auto industry, industry in general, and for America.

          The jack-boots of CAFE and emissions-control have trampled sales of “American” cars, and destroyed consumer freedom-of-choice. CAFE should be outright eliminated; but even a half-hearted reprieve back to the mileage requirements of several years ago is helpful. Emissions-Control is absolutely essential–but they’ve gone too far particularly with Diesel emissions which manufacturers have to cheat in order to sell Diesel vehicles. Roll-back Diesel emissions requirements to Model Year 2005–2006. Roll back gasoline emissions requirements to…perhaps 1996, the onset of OBD-II. (As far as I’m concerned, roll-back to 1990; but retain OBD-II.)

          That’ll NEVER happen under President Harris. The Greenie/Socialists that own today’s Democrat Party will do everything possible to crush industry under the weight of environmental regulation.

          Trump has already taken action to roll-back CAFE, and he’s made progress with reining-in an out-of-control EPA. Both reforms desperately needed, and both reforms haven’t gone far enough–but Politics is about what can be achieved today. Given the pushback from the Greenies and Socialists, I’m surprised at Trump’s successes.

  • avatar
    jkross22

    Any stateside automakers would likely prefer Trump because all they’d have to do is lavish him with praise and they’d get a shot at what they want.

    With Biden, they’d probably have to write big checks for a similar result.

    As for what’s best for the other 98.5% of the population not involved with vehicle design and manufacturing, picking someone other than these 2 fossils will get us better governance.

    Wait, did I just violate the rules? The term fossil wasn’t meant as name calling so much as it is a descriptor.

    • 0 avatar
      Tim Healey

      You weren’t calling another commenter a fossil. You’re good.

    • 0 avatar
      Matt51

      Yes, but Biden would be pushed aside if he wins, so the question should be, would Kamala Harris be “good” or “bad” for the auto industry? She is no fossil, and she taught Willie Brown a thing or two – in the bedroom.

      • 0 avatar

        I don’t think Biden is that much of a push over. That said I’m pretty sure the unspoken plan is for him to only be one term and let Kamala or some one else run after him. Of course alot of this depends on getting wealthy donors onboard who put Biden in the seat instead of someone younger in the first place.

        • 0 avatar
          Lorenzo

          One full term or maybe he resigns with half a term left. If Harris takes over with less than half of Biden’s term left, she can complete his term and run twice more. If there’s more than two years left in Biden’s term, it counts as a full term and she can run again only once.

        • 0 avatar

          “to only be one term”

          You are optimist though. It is like saying that Mitsubishi will run 200K miles with no problems.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            “You are optimist though.”

            It looks like the Senate will remain under Mitch McConnell’s control so that means Biden will be unlikely to get anything done in his first two years in office.

    • 0 avatar
      slavuta

      Nothing will be ever good for people. The point is – Trump is trying to save US as sovereign national state where people and not money elect representatives. Bide is in China camp. These are globalists who want money rule America. They will simply buy all representatives and media. And we will end up with some people, somewhere affecting US policy on everything. If these people will decide that they cam make money by canceling our oil infrastructure and building electric one, they will push their anti-oil candidates that will cancel our v8 engines, etc. you have the picture.

      • 0 avatar
        Zipster

        Slavuta:

        It is quite remarkable how your comments are always directed to support the goals of Putin. Will the psychopath reward you with a nice job in his Moscow hotel when it is built?

        • 0 avatar
          slavuta

          Zipster,

          if Putin will reward me, I am fine. It will be like the Nobel prize. You just work on something and if there is prize for that…

          But I don’t know how my comments correlate with Putin’s goals. May be you think that my wish of driving v8 car supports Putin’s goal to sell some oil? Russia already selling millions of tons of oil to US. Go check, which oil refineries on Gulf coast use..

          But you might be right. Trump and Putin work on exactly same issue – don’t let globalists to take over the country. Nothing wrong with this – I support. I don’t want some secret society to decide, what is good for US or Russia, or any other country. I am big fan of each country authenticity and originality. So when you go there you get to experience the real culture. I don’t want to see McDonald’s in Rome or Barcelona.

        • 0 avatar
          slavuta

          Zipster,

          let me also tell you one story. This one dude, originally from Moscow, goes to Alabama. A local man asks him:
          – what is that funny accent you’re having?
          – this is russian accent, I am from Moscow
          – good. good that you aren’t Yankee.

      • 0 avatar
        Old_WRX

        Skavuta,

        “They will simply buy all representatives and media.”

        Will? Haven’t they already?

        • 0 avatar
          slavuta

          Old_WRX

          not yet. As it is unfolding right now, $100M dumped in NC to defeat Graham did not work. $100M Bloomberg money in Fla. not likely to work.

          When what I said will really happen, both candidates will be representing same interest.

  • avatar
    JMII

    Biden drives a classic Corvette. Trump only knows what the back seat of limos and SUVs look like.

    • 0 avatar
      teddyc73

      So, what’s wrong with having a driver? Also, if you think ole Joe is just an everyday guy you haven’t been paying attention. He’s filthy rich. cough China cough

    • 0 avatar
      Art Vandelay

      Trump owned a Ferrari as well. I don’t think either is allowed to drive nowadays. Joe drove on Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee with Seinfeld, but he pointed out the secret service typically won’t let him. Trump will likely be the same now.

    • 0 avatar
      ToolGuy

      On the topic of Biden and motor vehicles:
      https://www.biography.com/news/joe-biden-first-wife-daughter-car-accident-story

      • 0 avatar
        ToolGuy

        The U.S. just elected (trust me) an individual whose family was pretty effectively wiped out by motor vehicles. He was angry at the time (read the article) – is he angry now? How long does he hold a grudge? (How long would you?)

        The new Vice President is likely to play a significant role in setting policy, and has some new and interesting views surrounding the motor vehicle industry compared with most of her predecessors. Here is a good primer:
        https://tinyurl.com/y6flg2ue

    • 0 avatar
      Schurkey

      Slick Willie Clinton had a “classic” Mustang. What good was he to us?

      For that matter, The Governator, Ahnold Schwarzenegger, drove a GM-“prototype” Hummer with a Corvette gas engine in it. What good was he to the rest of us “car guys”.

      Just because a politician owns an “interesting” car, doesn’t mean that anti-car dirtbags can’t bribe them to toss us under the bus.

  • avatar
    Land Ark

    Neither of them are going to do anything about the 25 year import rule – so neither of them will work to change what I consider to be the most important injustice in human history… of cars.

    I think Biden could probably be useful helping me work on the Land Ark but he’d probably grumble about anything made after 1975 as impossible to work on and not even try.

    Trump likely wouldn’t want to get his hands dirty and would be utterly useless with a wrench.

    Trump is more valuable to the auto industry as he more closely supports loose business rules. Though the writing is already on the wall and the future is not the status quo so the industry will continue to work toward a more strict future.

  • avatar
    FormerFF

    In the short term, I think Trump would be better for the automakers, because he will let the carmakers do anything they want. Long term, that won’t work, because we will have to decarbonize our energy use, and he’ll let us get way behind on that.

    I just went out and got the mail. In it was a card from the state Republican party. The headline of their message was “Are you better off now than four years ago?”, and went on to tout how low unemployment was, stock market strength, etc. No mention of a pandemic, or that millions have been thrown out of work. What planet are these clowns living on? Do they actually believe Trump when he says the pandemic is over when we are averaging one new case every second?

    • 0 avatar
      Imagefont

      I’m 58 years old and I have a good friend my age who lives in Denver and he sent me a message Monday before last that he had tested positive. He was supposed to quarantine at home for 14 days. On the following Thursday he sent me a picture of himself in the hospital, he and his girl friend had been admitted. He just got out, he was in for 6 days and his girl friend is not doing nearly as well and is still in ICU after getting a convalescent transfusion (recovered persons anti-bodies). So fun fact: those 6 days were the longest he’s ever spent in a hospital. It’s serious business, not to everyone, but it can kill otherwise perfectly healthy people. The messaging on the virus has been all over the map and totally inconsistent. I run into people all the time that think it’s practically a hoax, but of course they haven’t caught it. Yet.

      • 0 avatar

        I’m 68 and already had COVID back in late Jan/early Feb. A friend who used to work for the state DCI told me his wife (68-70 yo) tested positive (this was about 5 weeks ago). She felt like crap – fever, extreme fatigue, etc. My friend had done the research in looking up treatment regimens for COVID. When his wife tested positive he asked if she wanted to try what he came up with. She agreed. After one day the fatigue was gone and she felt better; in 2 more days she was symptom free. His approach was vitamins, probiotics and using a nebulizer for 3 to 5 min. every hour. His daughter tested positive also. So far, he is in fine health as he takes many of the vitamins already. He majored in biology and has a good understanding of nutrition and the body – how they can and do work together. A co-worker (58) tested positive about a month ago. He said he had colds that were more severe than what he had. For me the issue is folks not educating themselves on the “facts”. I rely on the CDC and medical journals for much of my info. Did you know that in May 2020 the CDC issued a doc on various mitigation efforts which found that 14 RCTs showed that surgical masks were”ineffective in slowing the spread of a viral infection”? I printed the thing out and it’s not fake. Same with a doc on cloth masks (July 2020 preprint) which said cloth masks provide “a false sense of protection” due to the general public not using them correctly – not sanitizing them daily, not touching them while wearing them, not removing them properly, etc. And yes, I know they recommend to wear a mask. A friend asked a few months back, “If masks are so effective, why hasn’t COVID faded into the land of bad dreams?” His conclusion was they don’t work as well as the folks touting their use tend to proclaim. We all tend to believe whatever supports our personal feelings on a subject – myself included. Educate yourself using very good sources so you can help yourself and others to respond well to the pandemic.

        • 0 avatar
          mcs

          @THX:

          There is overwhelming evidence that masks do in fact help reduce covid transmission. You are not relying on medical journals for your information or are misinterpreting what they are saying. The articles and research I’ve seen support their use. There are even studies using high-speed photography that confirm their effectiveness.

          Sure, you can cite some individuals that had mild covid and I know a few as well, but there are over 200,000 individuals that died from it.

          • 0 avatar
            slavuta

            mcs,

            I call it bull on 200K people. There are few issues with it – hospitals benefit from writing COVID as main reason for death even if person was already half dead. Because they get more money if person is treated under COVID label. Doctors reported on this long ago but fascist media would block this info.

            Fro the mask, it is true but only if this is a proper mask, the one that makes breathing harder. Mask mandates on another hand have not slowed spread by any number. All Euro countries that having spikes right now, have them after masks were mandated.

          • 0 avatar
            mcs

            @slavuta: “Because they get more money if person is treated under COVID label.”

            That’s untrue. Doesn’t even make sense. Where’s the evidence? Why would you get more money for COVID treatment?

            Furthermore, if someone that dies from getting hit by a car has diabetes and obesity, do you attribute the cause of death to diabetes and not the car hitting them. Makes no sense.

            “, the one that makes breathing harder.”

            No, that’s not true either. I have meetings at a research facility that’s in the middle of a major hospital treating covid patients. I’m issued a mask each time I walk in the door and have no problem breathing through it. I’ve been fine. One of the research groups I work with gave me some nice washable multilayer cloth masks. I have no trouble breathing through those. I also have masks 2 grades above those. One is 95% and the other is higher. I’m okay with both of those even though breathing does get harder. After a couple of minutes you forget you have it on. It’s all about reducing the viral load. It doesn’t have to be 100% reduction to help.

            Here’s a video with visual evidence and expert commentary:

            youtu.be/gZ66wJFD3bs?t=278

            Full Video:
            youtu.be/gZ66wJFD3bs

          • 0 avatar

            @mcs: Quote from the CDC doc: “We did not find evidence that surgical-type face masks are effective in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza transmission, either when worn by infected persons (source control)or by persons in the general community to reduce their susceptibility.” 2 paragraphs later quote: “Evidence from RCTs of hand hygiene or face masks did not support a substantial effect on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza, and limited evidence was available on other environmental measures.” Quote from an earlier paragraph from the same CDC doc: “Disposable medical masks (also known as surgical masks) are loose-fitting devices that were designed to be worn by medical personnel to protect accidental contamination of patient wounds, and to protect the wearer against splashes or sprays of bodily fluids. There is limited evidence for their effectiveness in preventing influenza virus transmission either when worn by the infected person for source control or when worn by uninfected persons to reduce exposure. Our systematic review found no significant effect of face masks on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza.” Here is the link (if they let this be shown here):https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article

          • 0 avatar
            slavuta

            mcs,

            what do you mean, “not true”? CDC Director said this. There is video on C-SPAN.

            “There is monetary incentive for hospitals to report deaths as COVID-19 (C-19) even when the actual cause is not C-19. This type of inaccurate number reporting has also happened in the past with HIV/AIDs per CDC director.”

            Also, Medicare spokesperson said that hospitals get reimbursed more for ventilator use. So, this is simple. List as COVID, get ventilator money. I have relatives working at the hospital. Even in dental offices here, they are now allowed $10 surcharge to insurance per patient for protective devices.

            I know, this is hard to find good info on this because gugl and utube been squeezing out stuff.

            Go deep into searches and find this:

            “New data made available by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) shows hospitals across the country, including 55 in Georgia, received billions of dollars in aid following their treatment of COVID-19 patients.”

          • 0 avatar
            slavuta

            “Studies do show masks can help in the case of direct respiratory droplets, which would matter if somebody is coughing, breathing, or sneezing directly on your face. That happens normally in a tight and highly confined space.

            But the plentiful evidence we have indicates masks would not meaningfully help with aerosol transmission, where two people are just in the same area, or even the same room. This is because the two people end up breathing the same air, with or without a mask, as visually demonstrated in this video.”

            thefederalist.com/2020/10/29/these-12-graphs-show-mask-mandates-do-nothing-to-stop-covid/

          • 0 avatar
            mcs

            THX1136/slavuta:

            “@mcs: Quote from the CDC doc: “We did not find evidence that surgical-type face masks are effective in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza transmission, ”

            Really? You mean this guy and these quotes:

            https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-face-mask-protection-vaccine-cdc-director/

            https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2020/p0714-americans-to-wear-masks.html

            “List as COVID, get ventilator money. I have relatives working at the hospital. Even in dental offices here, they are now allowed $10 surcharge to insurance per patient for protective devices.”

            That has nothing to do with listing someone as having covid in order to make more money. BTW, not only do I have friends and family that are doctors at a major teaching hospital, I have co-workers and professors that are at a major teaching hospital as well.

          • 0 avatar
            slavuta

            With all said and done, you did not see the video from March or April where docs said, “they make us write death reason – COVID”

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            @THX1136 – Your excerpt from the CDC talks about influenza. SARS-CoV-2 is a corona virus. SARS-CoV-2 can be airborne but is primarily droplet transmitted.

            Another point is simply the fact that most people don’t understand the reason for wearing a simple face/surgical mask. Your excerpt correctly points out that surgical masks protect others more than the wearer. If you wear a surgical mask or face covering you reduce the amount of aerosolized particles that you produce when breathing, coughing and talking. You combine a mask with social distancing and you markedly reduce the risk of disease transmission.

            It is a rather simple concept but unfortunately has been politicized and grossly misunderstood.

            “Educate yourself using very good sources so you can help yourself and others to respond well to the pandemic.”

            That would be health care professionals like Dr. Fauci.

            If you access the CDC or other reputable sites, it is of little benefit if one misunderstands what they read or only data mine what fits their preconceived notions.

        • 0 avatar

          @Lou_BC: https://www.cdc.gov/flu/symptoms/flu-vs-covid19.htm
          This seems to indicate, as far as how the 2 spread, that they are quite similar with COVID being faster and more contagious. I totally agree with your last point also. Thanks for your response and I appreciate your input Lou.

    • 0 avatar
      Old_WRX

      @mcs,

      I, too, have seen the info about hospitals getting more money for CV patients. And, more money yet is they put that CV patient on a respirator. Also, I have seen an the CDC website the pre-covid directions for filling out death certificates, and the amended instructions specific to CV. The criteria prior to CV would have meant that the vast majority of “Covid” deaths (under the new citeria) would NOT have been been listed as Covid deaths.

      Statistics to be comparable have to be calculated by a consistent method. Since, the CDC changed the way they are calculating deaths due to CV, comparing death numbers from pre-CV era and CV era would be difficult at best. Simply taking the numbers for deaths reported in the media for pre/during CV is nonsensical.

      • 0 avatar

        @mcs: My apologies to you. I used the word “doc” in my reply as short hand for “document”. Didn’t even consider that my usage could be taken as “doctor”. It was not intentional on my part. I also wanted to add to my original reply to you that I may be missing something in my understanding of the CDC document I quoted from. If you take the time to look at the document itself, perhaps you can see where I might be in error. To me, the language the CDC used is fairly clear, but I can misread/misinterpret stuff like anyone else. Also, thank you for engaging in this discussion. I sincerely appreciate your take on this.

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          As far as hospitals and medical staff making more money from a COVID-19 diagnosis, that is more likely related to the complexities associated with treating a patient. A critically ill patient costs more to treat than a minor illness. “For Profit” facilities bill for diagnostics and treatment. A complex patient consumes more resources.

    • 0 avatar
      Old_WRX

      Lou_BC,

      “That would be health care professionals like Dr. Fauci.”

      Um, no. Fauci is not “a very good source.” In vetting sources one must look for conflicts of interest. Fauci worked for Gates for many years. Gates is obsessed with vaccinations. He has also made endless end-of-the-world alarmist predictions that have not come true.

      The pay for Covid scam in hospitals is documented here (if the URL doesn’t get removed):

      globalresearch.ca/hospitals-getting-paid-more-label-cause-death-coronavirus/5709720

      But, I know people will go on believing whatever. As the old saying goes, “Don’t confuse me with the facts; I have my mind made up.”

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        @Old_WRX – I don’t see Dr. Fauci as being “in conflict”. I don’t know of any epidemiologists who are anti- vaxers. I don’t work in “for profit” health care but I’m sure some abuse the billing system.

        “Globalresearch” is a disinformation site with ties to Russian disinformation trolls.

        • 0 avatar
          Old_WRX

          ““Globalresearch” is a disinformation site with ties to Russian disinformation trolls.”

          According to whom?

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            USA State Department identified site as major ‘Kremlin-aligned’ proxy.

            The Canadian Security Intelligence Service was looking into this site since the owner is a Canadian citizen.

            “The platform, Global Research, features a Canadian domain name and offers an ever-expanding collection of conspiracy theories, such as the myth that the 9/11 attacks and COVID-19 pandemic were both planned in order to control the population.”
            CBC Canada.

            One should always verify the authenticity of anything posted on the web. If it isn’t mentioned by reliable “known” sources then one should as a rule disregard the content.

    • 0 avatar
      Old_WRX

      “USA State Department identified site as major ‘Kremlin-aligned’ proxy.”

      Sorry, but this is getting too ridiculous for words. The fact that the US gov and Canadian gov want to shut it down only lends the site more authority. If what was on there was wild “conspiracy theory” (and hence harmless nonsense) then they wouldn’t be so worried about it. That “conspiracy theory” label is about the silliest thing I ever heard. It’s right on the level of the old playground, “did too; did not; yes hunh…). The rich and powerful throughout history have conspired, but we’re supposed to believe that our current leaders would never stoop to such a thing… LOL

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        @Old_WRX – I didn’t say that they wanted it shut down. It is a known disinformation site.

        I guess it’s easier to slag
        two government’s security services than admit that you were suckered by a bullsh!t web site.

        • 0 avatar
          Old_WRX

          Lou_BC,

          “I guess it’s easier to slag
          two government’s”

          I guess it’s easier and requires less courage to keep believing the dreck rags like CNN and NYT foist on the public than to notice that the MSM is lying to you. The disinformation is all over the place. Any source that speaks any truth is slagged with the childish taunt of “conspiracy theory”. The fact that they use such a childish term as “conspiracy theory” to attempt to shout down the truth is just another tell that they are full of it.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            My career is based upon trust but verify. Part of that is knowing how to research and determine if information is valid. I don’t trust information without finding several collaborative sources along with checking the reliability of those sources.

            When it comes to things like the medical profession, I’m on the inside so any sketchy practices tend to work their way through the grapevine.

            The USA is very politicized so I can see why you are skeptical but that isn’t the case in Canada so if a site is reported as a disinformation site then there isn’t any real reason to doubt the veracity. If I see other information on that site is obviously “tin foil hat” crowd sourced, that then casts a pall on anything that is posted on that site.

    • 0 avatar
      Old_WRX

      Lou_BC,

      “tin foil hat…”

      That is a risk. Some of what is out there is sure in that category. I am extremely skeptical about what I read in general. It can take me several months of reading, digging and reflection before I form a tentative opinion. And, I don’t go for stuff that claims that we have been invaded from outer space by shape-shifting reptiles:-)

      Sorry about the somewhat snide “courage” remark I made.

      I guess, maybe, we can just agree to disagree?

  • avatar
    teddyc73

    Trump. He knows how business works. He can make deals. He knows how to get the economy booming. He cares about the workers building the cars. That’s just the tip of the iceberg. Joe, um, well…does he even know what day it is?

    • 0 avatar
      Mike Beranek

      Yeah, he made some great deals with his steaks, his university, his line of silk ties…

      • 0 avatar
        slavuta

        Possibly Trump made some business mistakes but TODAY, Biden is shot. I don’t know what medicine he gets before debates. May be ADHD medicine which improves mental sharpness. But I was listening to several Biden’s speeches in the last 3 days. He did not know that jacket he was wearing was UD, not Eagles. He called Barak his “running mate”. He said, he was a husband of Joe Biden. He said words nobody could understand. He called numbers like “one thousand hundred eighty six thousand…” And this is the guy to be in charge of nuclear football? I would revoke his driver license, if he still has one.

    • 0 avatar
      Imagefont

      And he made some great deals on his taxes. He didn’t pay them…

      • 0 avatar
        slavuta

        you peddling lies posted by yellow press without any backing source.

      • 0 avatar
        Lorenzo

        It’s perfectly legal to use every deduction to lower your taxes to the minimum. That’s why those provisions are in the tax code. It’s not unpatriotic to pay as little in taxes – legally – as possible.

        • 0 avatar
          slavuta

          Lorenzo,

          just like everything else, this tax story is fake. How NYT could obtain Trump taxes? They had a new story every week. Russian bounties. Only stupid would even think that was true. Taliban takes bounties for the Allah-given order to ki|| the enemy? This sounds like chop off your wrist under Sharia law. Only people who don’t understand Taliban movement could believe this. These people are bad dudes but they have some strict rules. And the amounts mentioned? Taliban can make huge on hashish and will pack some Americans for the love of Allah. Don’t make mistake about that.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            “this tax story is fake”

            Yup, Trump the king of “reality” TV has altered “reality” in real time.

            Just….wow!

            Trump is an amazing CON man.

  • avatar
    retrocrank

    I doubt it makes any difference. The automotive industry and its supply line are to critical to the Murkin lifestyle and economic engine that neither party nor candidate will want to rattle that cage, regardless of the party’s ideas about the interaction of gov’t and citizen.
    There can be no doubt that personal automotive transport is not sustainable. It doesn’t matter Left or Right, whether one believes the most fervent Warmers or just thinks a little about unavoidable consequence of continued displacement of what’s underground into the atmostphere to fuel a consumerist culture and the associated obesity epidemic. A real revolutionary candidate would be advocating building an infrastructure that discourages anything other than walking, bicycling, and mass transit. Roads will always be needed, but as a gov’t provided facility can be tolled no different than paying for any other gov’t service (like fire departments and schools)at a sufficient rate to discourage use for routine transport. I don’t see anybody on the current stage standing up for such a sustainable platform.

    Lest the reader think I’m anti-automobile, not hardly. I’ve got a barns- full of interesting cars old and new, am an avid driver, have been successful in the competition, teach on the HPDE scene, and immensely enjoy wrenching. But I’m also old enough to see the havok wreaked by the de facto right to drive by the untrained and uninterested burning cheap fuel whether in the car’s engine or at the power plant. That can’t go on. Real leadership will eventually have to restrict it, but where are those eventual leaders?.

  • avatar
    Art Vandelay

    Jo Jorgensen. As the Libertarian approach is typically “Let the market decide” I can’t see how she wouldn’t be a win for the industry. Of course “The Industry” under such an administration would likely include fewer bailouts and/or subsidies all around because Libertarian so while I think the industry as a whole benefits long term, I am not sure the current producers benefit as they all seem to love them some government cheese.

  • avatar
    DenverMike

    We’ve already seen Trump battle against the CAFE, the CARB, and auto tariff/non tariff barriers around the world.

    But I just have a bad feeling Biden will go on permanent medical leave once elected.

  • avatar

    I think a conservative president will always be better for automotive. Less regulations always means cheaper cars means more sales. I think a liberal president will be innovative and push the boundaries and really get the connected autonomous shared and electric revolution moving quickly with government money, and really it’s where it needs to go. But for the industry specifically, I’m going to go with the conservative candidate. I hate to think what electronics I’ll be making if we get a regulation like dual battery safety disconnect breakers or in battery flame retardants or something mandated in the US. And I don’t even want to ponder what regulations will be thrown at in field software updates with a liberal president.

  • avatar
    Mike Beranek

    Only one candidate has a midyear ‘Vette with a 350-horse 327 and a 4-speed.

  • avatar
    thegamper

    I have a lot to say on this issue, but doubt any of you care to hear it, wont try to listen or understand and have made up your minds on who you are voting for anyway.

    My gift to all of you on election day. I will just STFU and let the chips fall where they may.

  • avatar
    epc

    I consider the editor’s question in terms of tailpipe emission regulation. Since Industrial Revolution, when humans started discharging massive amount of waste into air and water, there has not been an instance of a company on its own initiative curbing its discharge for the good of environment. Only governments acting on behalf of a concerned citizenry have been able to regulate the businessmen. Some governments are better at this than others, and you can see this difference by looking across the globe; there are countries you’d rather your kids not grow up in, and vice versa. Therefore, if you want your kids to grow up in a cleaner world than the one you grew up in, you have to choose the government that’s willing to regulate for the protection of the environment, even at the expense of some production efficiency or profit margins. The US EPA did not come into being because Exxon or GM advocated for its creation. And the US EPA is why we are not breathing the air that’s being inhaled by Chinese and Indians. I leave it for the reader to decide which party might do this better.

    • 0 avatar
      retrocrank

      But ultimately the party or the president don’t really matter. Nobody can reign in the industry surrounding personal private motorized transport (including the automotive and petro-industries, ICE and EV makers, and their suppliers) and remain electable. What’s been done so far only forestalls the inevitable. The band said they’d play 20 dances. So do you want all 20 in an hour, or spread over 4 hours? It’s still 20 dances.

  • avatar
    millerluke

    If I were American, I’be voting for Alice Cooper and the Wild Party. As he’s said, he can do nothing just as well as anyone else! Plus, I have a feeling a rocker would pass legislation requiring all vehicles must offer a V8 as an option

  • avatar
    boxcarclassic

    My question why is it every election cycle do we have millions of American jobs on the line. Fracking no fracking,build a green car or non green. I mean constitutionally if you follow it.The gov does not have the right to tell us what we can make to sell or not. The EPA at first did the fuel saving because of the oil embargo.Now its turned into a crusade against cars,trucks. So the entire premise is flawed!

    • 0 avatar
      slavuta

      Karl Marx explained the best about fluctuations of the capitalist economy. His solution was communism. But the fact is, he understood capitalism. Hence, he explained why we are constantly in job/economy situation. Jobs are always the issue since great industrialization. Because at one point, some smart people in America did this – lended money to factory workers, who built the homes and settled in them. That was a way to ensure that these workers will come back to work at the factory because they need to re-pay their loans. But things did not go very smooth, not for factory, not for workers. Since Americans today are in debt all over the place, having a job and being able to pay a loan is the most important thing.

      • 0 avatar
        Old_WRX

        “having a job and being able to pay a loan is the most important thing.”

        Also known as wage slavery.

        • 0 avatar
          slavuta

          Old_WRX

          I recently came across this thought:

          slavery – bring cheap labor to the production site
          globalization – bring production site to the cheap labor

          Globalization = slavery

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          Tennessee Ernie Ford sang about this in “16 Tons”.
          Business and banks have just become more subtle in their approach. Instead of owing our soul to the company store, we owe our soul to Visa and Amazon Prime!

          • 0 avatar
            Old_WRX

            Lou_BC,

            And, don’t forget the credit bureaus. People talk about how China has some kind “social” rating on everyone. But, we have the credit score. Bad credit score? Can’t get a decent job (at least as a professional), can’t rent a decent home, can’t get a mortgage…

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            @Old_WRX – the system wants us indebted up to our eyeballs.

    • 0 avatar
      Old_WRX

      “the system wants us indebted up to our eyeballs.”

      Wage slavery and the tyranny of credit scores is much better for business than outright slavery. Slaves that are owned have to be taken care of — if sick they can’t work; if they die it’s a loss of a sizable investment. Employees, meh, they come and they go and can always be replaced. (Though it is true that hiring, particularly professionals, can be a costly business.)

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    I am going to say that it doesn’t matter who is elected as much as when the unemployment rate goes down and consumer confidence goes up. Even if the Democrats win more seats it takes a while to pass laws and regulations and neither political party wants to hurt the auto industry especially with the number of jobs at stake.

  • avatar
    golden2husky

    Actually, I don’t think it will matter in the big picture. The difference will be in the level of regulation, or lack thereof. But if vehicles are needed, they are needed. Regulations may change the variables of them – more/less efficient, fuel type, etc. but they will not dampen the need for them. What company(ies) benefit will depend on the mix of vehicles they produce. Toyota would do well no matter what because they are a full line manufacturer. Prius to Tacoma, they have a vehicle for most needs/tastes. Those who focus only on a given segment might have more of a problem. But that is a byproduct of poor product planning. They would suffer the same fate if consumer tastes changed and they failed to see it coming.

  • avatar

    Kamala-khanum will do better than Trump. She will finally put the end to madness known as ICE. Defund ICE!

  • avatar
    -Nate

    I’ll be happy as long as they don’t take my car/truck/Motocycle away .

    Saying America doesn’t need personal transportation means you’ve never seen much of it, I have .

    Not having a job and not paying any bills means you’re a _BUM_ .

    -Nate

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    “Actually, I don’t think it will matter in the big picture. The difference will be in the level of regulation, or lack thereof. But if vehicles are needed, they are needed. Regulations may change the variables of them – more/less efficient, fuel type, etc. but they will not dampen the need for them.”

    Agree I don’t see either candidate in favor of eliminating vehicles. Regulations will change as they always have and the auto industry will be part of deciding what the regulations are. No politician wants to be responsible for destroying the auto industry.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    Here is an interesting link to Presidential candidates vehicle choices.

    https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2020/03/04/presidential-candidates-car-choices-make-statement/4863616002/

    https://motorheadmama.com/heres-the-deal-joe-biden-loves-cars/

    https://www.autosimple.com/blog/presidents-cars/

    https://www.motortrend.com/news/presidents-day-special-top-5-personal-presidential-vehicles-171305/

    I would like to see Ronnie Schreiber do a story on personal cars of the Presidents.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      Reagan owned a Brat? Golf clap!

      Obama’s last ride before he became president was a Chrysler 300C. Yes, it had a hemi.

      https://www.topgear.com/car-news/obama%E2%80%99s-old-v8-300c-sale%E2%80%A6

  • avatar
    FreedMike

    Well, tuning into this today and I’m surprised to see it wasn’t a total food fight.

    Having said that…

    1) From a certain perspective, I’d say that the “automobile owner bloc” might well be the largest single voting bloc in the country. The overwhelming majority of Americans own cars, and depend on them. That means that the policies the government pursues vis a vis automobiles had damn well better be amenable to voters. Any president who willy nilly ignores that is going to have a tough political battle.

    2) Given that, the person who has the greatest impact on cars doesn’t live in the White House, but rather in YOUR house. Regardless of what kinds of vehicles a president would *like* to see on our roads, the question is always what kinds of vehicles *we* would like to see on our roads. The government can suggest we all drive smaller or electrified/hybrid cars all it wants, and can even give people tax incentives to buy them, but if people don’t want to put them in their driveways, they won’t. Witness the mediocre market performance of vehicles like the Bolt, Volt, Leaf, Insight, et al. Meanwhile, the right kinds of vehicles – specifically, Tesla – will succeed. The market ALWAYS rules in the end, no matter what the government or president wants. Look for that to continue no matter who wins.

    3) Who’s more full of s**t – the guy who says that the car hater is the candidate who drives a cherry ’67 Corvette convertible that bought new, or the guy who has owned a ton of exotic, expensive four-wheeled lookie-at-how-rich-I-am trinkets that he likely hasn’t been behind the wheel of since 2006? That’s a toss up in my book.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    I doubt either candidate is anti-car especially with the cars they have owned. People are going to buy the vehicles they want and need.

    • 0 avatar
      slavuta

      I disagree with this postulate. People well drive vehicles they have available for them. Gov can create any rule, and can change your behavior with a snap of the finger. In fact, I believe, UK already did this

      • 0 avatar
        Old_WRX

        Slavuta,

        Agree with this. I’ll stick by my comments (above) about three cylinder cars.

        The government will decide this, and I doubt it will be in favor of giving motorheads much in the way of free rein. Of course, they will be kind enough to let us know that they are only thinking of what is best for us.

        • 0 avatar
          -Nate

          Interestingly ;

          The three cylinder econoboxes were incredibly popular, I knew folks who bought them and loved the high fuel economy , fun to drive aspect and economy of ownership & operation .

          My self I thought them too crude even though I like cheap tiny little cars .

          For those here old enough to remember, the English cars that flooded out shores beginning in the late 1940’s weren’t forced upon any one ~ they were mostly fun to drive and incredibly economical to own and operate .

          The tiny aspect wasn’t any hinderence to those who tried them .

          The lack of build quality is what did them in .

          No one likes a cheap thing that needs constant maintenance .

          I don’t want any electric vehicle .

          I’d be O.K. with some little two seater that’s comfortable, reliable, economical and fun / easy to drive .

          -Nate

  • avatar
    pwrwrench

    “Employees, meh, they come and they go and can always be replaced. (Though it is true that hiring, particularly professionals, can be a costly business.)”

    This is why, in any “trade agreement” NAFTA, TPP, etc, that people that do manufacturing jobs are “thrown under the bus”, while Doctors, lawyers, architects, and upper level managers are not.

    Also Nate, Remember why the Brits never got much into making toasters, refrigerators, computers, and so on; They could not figure out how to get them to leak oil.

    • 0 avatar
      -Nate

      Yeah ;

      Warm beer too .

      And, the old LUCAS joke from the 1960’s ‘The English don’t make T.V. sets because transistors don’t leak oil’…..

      Still and all I’ve seen many well designed products come from Jolley Olde Englande .

      Plumbers are not a dime a dozen, finding a good one is tricky .

      -Nate

      • 0 avatar
        Old_WRX

        -Nate,

        “Still and all I’ve seen many well designed products come from Jolley Olde Englande.”

        I’d say it is more that they started a lot of really good designs. Finishing them is another thing. The 60’s Land Rover 110 my family had when we were in South America was a good case in point. In some ways it was a great vehicle — it was more or less unstoppable by bad roads and it had a certain quality feel to it that the Nissan Patrol we had before that just didn’t have. But, the 110 was plagued by: rear floating half shafts that broke from high cycle fatigue (introducing chips into the rear differential destroying it); a gear shift lever that broke off right at the bottom; an unspeakably undependable double ended electric pump (I got quite familiar with repairing it); and I forget what else. The special British touch to it was that they kept producing vehicles with the same problems year after year. Great concept, just never quite finished.

  • avatar
    -Nate

    To me that’s part and parcel of the almost total lack of initial quality control .

    I’m old to I remember the “British Invasion” very well, innumerable Ford Anglias, Hillmans, Austins, more sedans or shooting brakes (wagons to Yanks) than the seemingly endless Sports Cars .

    It seemed as though fully half of them had serious manufacturing defects and the other big failure was they couldn’t handle American road speeds for very long, engines failed of droves .

    If you like LBC’s then they’re great, otherwise they’re a bleeding hemorrhoid when your sitting in a wooden chair .

    ? Knowhutimean ? .

    There was a time when Japanese cars (and those tiny little pickups Datsun imported in 1958 >) were just as bad .

    Sadly the Brits never seemed to grasp that you need to BUILD IT CORRECTLY or the sales will dry up quickly .

    -Nate

  • avatar
    pwrwrench

    I think the Brits had some good engineering; Supermarine Spitfire and it’s Merlin engine, comes to mind. It seems as though they stopped developing things after the 1940s. I recall working on British cars in the ’70s and constantly shaking my head at the archaic stuff on them, yes you Lucas Electrics. This went along with the post WWII decline and loss of empire. Things started to improve about the same time that oil was discovered in the North Sea. Who knows where things would have been otherwise.
    As far as improvements go, I think of the Rolls RB 211 as one example.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • dal20402: ^ This is the future of driving for people without a private garage or driveway where a charger can be...
  • Featherston: I’d demur about feature content, but I think we fundamentally agree. Most interior features...
  • The_Imperialist: I’ve had my Venue since July and this review sums things up quite accurately. If I had to...
  • Diewaldo: That has to be the most ugly car of the year so far. It looks … just wrong from every angle. I have...
  • wolfwagen: While Going to HS in eastern Pennsylvania, we had a new girl that came from Bayonne, NJ. Pretty attractive...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

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