I am telling the truth about my Tesla. On April 29, 2021, I paid $60,990 base price for my Tesla Model Y Long Range with FSD and upgraded paint color. Now it has 32,000 miles on it.
Look what a comparably equipped used Tesla sells for now, even with the same mileage:
Correction - what a comparably equipped used Tesla is SELLING FOR - not for what one sells for. I doubt anyone will pay that price. And do you know that used cars have gone up about 40% in the last 2 years. So a similar Tesla like yours might be selling for $30,000 if Biden and Mayor Pete ever get their sh*t together and get all the supply chain issues worked out. . Your Tesla might be a dinosaur soon.
You are wrong. Tesla does not haggle on prices. Not one penny. And you will see that every used car listed on their site will be sold in short order.
Yes, used car prices have gone up. But EVs have gone up a lot more than gas cars. Like mine, some EVs have gone up so much they are even worth more now than when purchased new.
Correction - what a comparably equipped used Tesla is SELLING FOR - not for what one sells for. I doubt anyone will pay that price. And do you know that used cars have gone up about 40% in the last 2 years. So a similar Tesla like yours might be selling for $30,000 if Biden and Mayor Pete ever get their sh*t together and get all the supply chain issues worked out. . Your Tesla might be a dinosaur soon.
You are wrong. Tesla does not haggle on prices. Not one penny. And you will see that every used car listed on their site will be sold in short order.
Yes, used car prices have gone up. But EVs have gone up a lot more than gas cars. Like mine, some EVs have gone up so much they are even worth more now than when purchased new.
You'd have to be REALLY stupid to pay more for a used car than the owner paid for it originally.
You are wrong. Tesla does not haggle on prices. Not one penny. And you will see that every used car listed on their site will be sold in short order.
Yes, used car prices have gone up. But EVs have gone up a lot more than gas cars. Like mine, some EVs have gone up so much they are even worth more now than when purchased new.
You'd have to be REALLY stupid to pay more for a used car than the owner paid for it originally.
But then, Tesla understands its customer base.
Tesla's customer base is wealthy, successful people who know good value when they see it. Tesla is now the top luxury car in America - by a lot!
If you’re searching for a luxurious car, a couple good brands to consider are Tesla and BMW. They are quite different. Tesla is more advanced with high-tech features, while BMW
"BMW is ideal for car owners who want better performance and handling, while Tesla is perfect for drivers who desire an environmentally-friendly, high-tech car."
Tesla's are for people who want to display how environmentally friendly they are and they're will to spend more for less to do it.
"BMW is ideal for car owners who want better performance and handling, while Tesla is perfect for drivers who desire an environmentally-friendly, high-tech car."
Tesla's are for people who want to display how environmentally friendly they are and they're will to spend more for less to do it.
What a joke. So you present an old article from a site nobody ever heard of. Then the article lists the specs of Tesla vs. BMW, and Tesla wins in every category, including price and performance.
The only category where they say the BMW wins is handling, but they don't define what they mean by handling. "Handling" is subjective.
A Tesla handles far better than a BMW gas car. EV's handle better because they are bottom-heavy and the weight is evenly distributed. Acceleration is smoother, which also aids handling.
For instance, Consumer Reports says this about the Tesla Model 3: "Our testers found the Model 3 to be fun to drive, thanks to the superb handling and immediate thrust from the electric motor."
"BMW is ideal for car owners who want better performance and handling, while Tesla is perfect for drivers who desire an environmentally-friendly, high-tech car."
Tesla's are for people who want to display how environmentally friendly they are and they're will to spend more for less to do it.
What a joke. So you present an old article from a site nobody ever heard of. Then the article lists the specs of Tesla vs. BMW, and Tesla wins in every category, including price and performance.
The only category where they say the BMW wins is handling, but they don't define what they mean by handling. "Handling" is subjective.
A Tesla handles far better than a BMW gas car. EV's handle better because they are bottom-heavy and the weight is evenly distributed. Acceleration is smoother, which also aids handling.
For instance, Consumer Reports says this about the Tesla Model 3: "Our testers found the Model 3 to be fun to drive, thanks to the superb handling and immediate thrust from the electric motor."
You like Teslas. We get it. That doesn't mean reality stops existing.
BMW's aren't Chevy Cavaliers... BMW's being better doesn't mean Teslas are trash anymore than girl who's a 10 makes a 9 ugly.
"BMW is ideal for car owners who want better performance and handling, while Tesla is perfect for drivers who desire an environmentally-friendly, high-tech car."
Tesla's are for people who want to display how environmentally friendly they are and they're will to spend more for less to do it.
What a joke. So you present an old article from a site nobody ever heard of. Then the article lists the specs of Tesla vs. BMW, and Tesla wins in every category, including price and performance.
The only category where they say the BMW wins is handling, but they don't define what they mean by handling. "Handling" is subjective.
A Tesla handles far better than a BMW gas car. EV's handle better because they are bottom-heavy and the weight is evenly distributed. Acceleration is smoother, which also aids handling.
For instance, Consumer Reports says this about the Tesla Model 3: "Our testers found the Model 3 to be fun to drive, thanks to the superb handling and immediate thrust from the electric motor."
You know, Fat Hurts, I'm not trying to tell you what to do, or anything, but.....you appear to be the one non-moran hold out. If you stopped going in an infinite, useless, utterly futile round-and-round with the morans....SOME of those folks might have more time to get their errands done for their disappointed moms and/or (even more) disappointed long-suffering wives. Just a thought.
What I’m learning from the modern era is that the general population will believe just about anything if you package the lie just right.
"Packaging." That's one of the things that makes Trumpism that much worse, and massively embarrassing for this country. No subtlety, no charm, no pretending to be a gentleman or a statesman or someone who cares about others; not much hiding of anything. Just in your face, "I'm an as***** who clearly only cares about myself. But please love me." And a good 30-40% of our country said, "Yes!" And ANOTHER 10-20% said, "We don't love him, but we'll vote for him.
As many have alluded to, with just a LITTLE bit of the "packaging" one might normally expect from a politician, and he'd probably still be president.
I think you meant to say "10% of our country said 'Yes!' and another 30% of our country said 'We don't love him, but we'll vote for him (or against Clinton)'" ... Trump only got 14 million votes in the primaries, and ~129 million voted in the election.
As for whether it's better that a politician pretends to care when they don't, or don't even bother to pretend ... I'll leave that for you to debate, because neither situation is good for the country because the result is the same: the person in charge doesn't actually care about others, and as such will be acting in their own interests rather than the nation's.
"Packaging." That's one of the things that makes Trumpism that much worse, and massively embarrassing for this country. No subtlety, no charm, no pretending to be a gentleman or a statesman or someone who cares about others; not much hiding of anything. Just in your face, "I'm an as***** who clearly only cares about myself. But please love me." And a good 30-40% of our country said, "Yes!" And ANOTHER 10-20% said, "We don't love him, but we'll vote for him.
As many have alluded to, with just a LITTLE bit of the "packaging" one might normally expect from a politician, and he'd probably still be president.
I think you meant to say "10% of our country said 'Yes!' and another 30% of our country said 'We don't love him, but we'll vote for him (or against Clinton)'" ... Trump only got 14 million votes in the primaries, and ~129 million voted in the election.
As for whether it's better that a politician pretends to care when they don't, or don't even bother to pretend ... I'll leave that for you to debate, because neither situation is good for the country because the result is the same: the person in charge doesn't actually care about others, and as such will be acting in their own interests rather than the nation's.
I think Trump loves America. He loves himself more but he wanted America to do well because it makes him look better which is good for him.
Biden doesn't even know what country he lives in. When his brain was still somewhat functional Biden didn't give a damn about anything but Joe Biden and making the family rich off of his corruption.
"Packaging." That's one of the things that makes Trumpism that much worse, and massively embarrassing for this country. No subtlety, no charm, no pretending to be a gentleman or a statesman or someone who cares about others; not much hiding of anything. Just in your face, "I'm an as***** who clearly only cares about myself. But please love me." And a good 30-40% of our country said, "Yes!" And ANOTHER 10-20% said, "We don't love him, but we'll vote for him.
As many have alluded to, with just a LITTLE bit of the "packaging" one might normally expect from a politician, and he'd probably still be president.
I think you meant to say "10% of our country said 'Yes!' and another 30% of our country said 'We don't love him, but we'll vote for him (or against Clinton)'" ... Trump only got 14 million votes in the primaries, and ~129 million voted in the election.
As for whether it's better that a politician pretends to care when they don't, or don't even bother to pretend ... I'll leave that for you to debate, because neither situation is good for the country because the result is the same: the person in charge doesn't actually care about others, and as such will be acting in their own interests rather than the nation's.
"Packaging." That's one of the things that makes Trumpism that much worse, and massively embarrassing for this country. No subtlety, no charm, no pretending to be a gentleman or a statesman or someone who cares about others; not much hiding of anything. Just in your face, "I'm an as***** who clearly only cares about myself. But please love me." And a good 30-40% of our country said, "Yes!" And ANOTHER 10-20% said, "We don't love him, but we'll vote for him.
As many have alluded to, with just a LITTLE bit of the "packaging" one might normally expect from a politician, and he'd probably still be president.
I think you meant to say "10% of our country said 'Yes!' and another 30% of our country said 'We don't love him, but we'll vote for him (or against Clinton)'" ... Trump only got 14 million votes in the primaries, and ~129 million voted in the election.
As for whether it's better that a politician pretends to care when they don't, or don't even bother to pretend ... I'll leave that for you to debate, because neither situation is good for the country because the result is the same: the person in charge doesn't actually care about others, and as such will be acting in their own interests rather than the nation's.
No, I used the numbers I meant to use. It's debated, of course, but I think that his "base" is usually estimated in the 30-40% range. And we know that he got ~47% of the vote in 2020.
About pretending, if a populace doesn't see through a bad person competently pretending to be decent, it's not really much of hit on them. They were fooled by a good actor. OK. Nice if we could always elect decent folks, but there are good actors/politicians in the world.
But when 47% of a populace sees a person who doesn't even pretend to be decent, and still wants him to be their leader for another 4 years, you've got a real freakin' problem with your populace.
Lastly, a bad person pretending to be decent IS usually better than a bad person not pretending. Trump's COVID response is an absolutely perfect example. In most pre-Trump worst case scenarios, you might have a fairly uncaring president (or leader of any kind) who simply goes through the motions to say roughly the right things, and indifferently tell his experts/subordinates to do what they think is best. As in, "Yeah, yeah, do that stuff, fine. What's the next meeting? When is lunch?"
Trump managed to make such a response look GREAT. He knew it was bad, and pretended that it wasn't (Woodward interview). He made absolutely absurd (and it turned out, completely dishonest) predictions about it going away right after it started. He mocked masks regularly. He hid his own vaccination(s). He hid the severity of his bout of COVID. He said incredibly stupid things at the podium daily, until he was finally convinced to stop talking (and since he wasn't going to talk, we heard from the experts dramatically less following it....because it always has to be about him). He wanted cruise ships to stay at sea so as not to "hurt his numbers." He held large, largely mask-less rallies in the midst of a pandemic (...and got beat by a guy who had essentially none....so at least there was SOME good in it!!). Etc., etc., etc.
So, yeah, pretending to be decent (and other good things) certainly ain't ideal, but it can be a LOT better than not pretending. Fat a** couldn't EVEN get over the very low bar of kinda pretending.
I think you meant to say "10% of our country said 'Yes!' and another 30% of our country said 'We don't love him, but we'll vote for him (or against Clinton)'" ... Trump only got 14 million votes in the primaries, and ~129 million voted in the election.
As for whether it's better that a politician pretends to care when they don't, or don't even bother to pretend ... I'll leave that for you to debate, because neither situation is good for the country because the result is the same: the person in charge doesn't actually care about others, and as such will be acting in their own interests rather than the nation's.
No, I used the numbers I meant to use. It's debated, of course, but I think that his "base" is usually estimated in the 30-40% range. And we know that he got ~47% of the vote in 2020.
About pretending, if a populace doesn't see through a bad person competently pretending to be decent, it's not really much of hit on them. They were fooled by a good actor. OK. Nice if we could always elect decent folks, but there are good actors/politicians in the world.
But when 47% of a populace sees a person who doesn't even pretend to be decent, and still wants him to be their leader for another 4 years, you've got a real freakin' problem with your populace.
Lastly, a bad person pretending to be decent IS usually better than a bad person not pretending. Trump's COVID response is an absolutely perfect example. In most pre-Trump worst case scenarios, you might have a fairly uncaring president (or leader of any kind) who simply goes through the motions to say roughly the right things, and indifferently tell his experts/subordinates to do what they think is best. As in, "Yeah, yeah, do that stuff, fine. What's the next meeting? When is lunch?"
Trump managed to make such a response look GREAT. He knew it was bad, and pretended that it wasn't (Woodward interview). He made absolutely absurd (and it turned out, completely dishonest) predictions about it going away right after it started. He mocked masks regularly. He hid his own vaccination(s). He hid the severity of his bout of COVID. He said incredibly stupid things at the podium daily, until he was finally convinced to stop talking (and since he wasn't going to talk, we heard from the experts dramatically less following it....because it always has to be about him). He wanted cruise ships to stay at sea so as not to "hurt his numbers." He held large, largely mask-less rallies in the midst of a pandemic (...and got beat by a guy who had essentially none....so at least there was SOME good in it!!). Etc., etc., etc.
So, yeah, pretending to be decent (and other good things) certainly ain't ideal, but it can be a LOT better than not pretending. Fat a** couldn't EVEN get over the very low bar of kinda pretending.
.....but make no mistake, that's JUST "personality" stuff. His POLICIES were AWESOME. He's a policy genius (and lots of other kinds of genius). Just ask him. And the 30-40% of Americans who are dumb enough to agree.
I think you meant to say "10% of our country said 'Yes!' and another 30% of our country said 'We don't love him, but we'll vote for him (or against Clinton)'" ... Trump only got 14 million votes in the primaries, and ~129 million voted in the election.
As for whether it's better that a politician pretends to care when they don't, or don't even bother to pretend ... I'll leave that for you to debate, because neither situation is good for the country because the result is the same: the person in charge doesn't actually care about others, and as such will be acting in their own interests rather than the nation's.
No, I used the numbers I meant to use. It's debated, of course, but I think that his "base" is usually estimated in the 30-40% range. And we know that he got ~47% of the vote in 2020.
He only got around ~33% of the votes in the primary backing him until it was down to 3 late in the primaries (Trump, Cruz and Kasich -- he did crest 40% during the second Super Tuesday when Rubio was still in it, though that was mostly due to his landslide victory in his homestate), and when you add in independents and democrats there is no way that 30-40% of the entire country really wanted him as their first choice as president rather than just voted for him due to his not being Clinton or his being the GOP candidate. Wherever you're sourcing 30-40% of the entire nation wanting him as the nominee let alone president, you and they are wrong. My best guess is that when you are referring to his "base", your source is probably actually referring to the amount of registered Republicans (which, like Democrats, tends to vary between 30-40% of the registered voting population, with the remaining 30-40% being Independents or registered third party voters).
No, I used the numbers I meant to use. It's debated, of course, but I think that his "base" is usually estimated in the 30-40% range. And we know that he got ~47% of the vote in 2020.
He only got around ~33% of the votes in the primary backing him until it was down to 3 late in the primaries (Trump, Cruz and Kasich -- he did crest 40% during the second Super Tuesday when Rubio was still in it, though that was mostly due to his landslide victory in his homestate), and when you add in independents and democrats there is no way that 30-40% of the entire country really wanted him as their first choice as president rather than just voted for him due to his not being Clinton or his being the GOP candidate. Wherever you're sourcing 30-40% of the entire nation wanting him as the nominee let alone president, you and they are wrong. My best guess is that when you are referring to his "base", your source is probably actually referring to the amount of registered Republicans (which, like Democrats, tends to vary between 30-40% of the registered voting population, with the remaining 30-40% being Independents or registered third party voters).
sorry, correction: it was the week after the second Super Tuesday when he was over 40% due to New York, but he did also get 40.6% on the second Super Tuesday as well - led by Florida's 49%, and every other state around 38-40% except the territory of the North Mariana Islands).
The Biden administration has said that record-breaking gasoline prices are due to Russia. The claim is false and "laughable," economists told the Daily Caller.
