Cite?

That seems extremely unlikely.

All of the other strategies for responding to Trump have failed. Outrage at his antics (which is, granted, the most sensible response) just encourages him and his supporters. Ignoring his behavior just normalizes and enables it. Mockery works best, but direct mockery hasn't been very effective because the GOP leadership and his supporters simply pretend that his comments and language are normal and that the people making fun of him are being elitist. What Newsom is doing actually does work, because they can't ignore either the message or the mockery, but they also can't really attack it because that would obviously and implicitly criticize Trump, too.

The only other option I see is passively waiting for Trump's bad policies to convince the voters that he's an idiot. In fact, they're not going to be convinced until they see the results, but the Democrats need to do something to make it clear that he is an idiot with bad policies so they're positioned to capitalize on souring sentiment, and the normal ways of doing that aren't working. Voters are getting quite angry about Democrat passivity. Ridiculing Trump in this way is working, at least for now, similar to but better than Walz' comments about how Trump and Vance were weird. The effectiveness may fade, and Newsom will stop. Or maybe it'll keep being effective as long as Trump keeps posting his incoherent rambling, which isn't going to stop until Trump himself is no longer relevant. But either way, it will stop being effective, and continuing after that would just make Newsom look like an idiot. There is no way Democrats are going to adopt Trump's style as the new thing, though I hope they will take the hint to move away from repetition of carefully-wordsmithed and thoroughly focus group-tested talking points and toward something a little more authentic.

-- because a person has unfettered access to the digital content for an extended period of time.

Here's the problem. It isn't just a word, it's the fact that the seller wants the buyer to assume that the period is "forever". In many cases, the actual period can't even be determined at the time of sale. It would have to be changed to something like "You are purchasing the right to view this media item until we decide to stop paying royalties for it. Also, you need to keep paying a monthly fee, or you will then lose access to anything purchased through this service. We make no guarantees that this period will even be long enough for you to finish watching it, but it may end up being for your entire lifetime. We also make no guarantees that the membership fee will remain the same price, or even that membership will be available. Good luck!"

Once the proper words are filled in, it will be obvious that the consumer isn't even aware what they are paying for... and that is worthy of a class action suit.

I may or may not be to the right of you. I'm a classical liberal, what some call a neoliberal, and I usually describe myself as a pragmatic libertarian.

Indeed.

And yet they never seem to see the humor in it!

I think a lot of us are just waiting for MAGAts to realize that the corrupt, fascist, populist regime they've chosen is really not what they wanted. They won't listen to us until they come to that realization on their own, and until they do, the GOP is just going to continue its slavish devotion to Trump.

Uh, no. I, for one, am writing a lot of emails and letters to my (GOP) representatives, trying to remind them that the Constitution they've sworn to uphold really matters and that they shouldn't just let Trump walk all over it. They're ignoring me, and I'm sure they'll continue to do so until their constituents wake up. I'll keep sending the emails and letters, though.

Newsom isn't turning himself into a clown show, he's just playing, to shine a light on how big of a clown show Trump is. As soon as everyone stops ignoring the Trump's illiterate and incomprehensible posts, Newsom will stop, because for him it's just a performance to poke fun at Trump. For Trump, it's who he is.

Newsom's posts say nothing one way or the other about whether he can beat Trumpism, nor whether he would be a good president. But he's doing a public service by highlighting the way Trump gets sanewashed by the media and his idiocy ignored by his followers.

Welcome to my Foe list. Not because you disagreed with me, heck you might even have had some good points. But you chose ad hominem rather than productive engagement, which makes you not worth talking to, so I'll just have /. hide your posts from me.

How about a one-year study instead?

Seems like there might be some downsides to that. We should probably understand those first.

Put your route in while you have Internet. It'll continue providing directions, including to charging stations if required, without Internet. Many areas I drive regularly don't have Internet. Works fine. Alternatively, this is the one case where you might actually have to plan recharging yourself. Unlike with ICEVs, where you always have to do it yourself.

But, yes, if you regularly drive 500 miles, without stopping, through an Internet desert, uphill both ways, then an EV probably isn't for you.

Nah, both are concerns. Neither is actually a large problem in most cases, but both are actual concerns. If you don't have a good way to get a charging cable out to where you park your car, the home charging concern is actually the bigger one. For those with garages, or even driveways, it's not really an issue.

Somewhat, though you don't actually need 240V. 120V is sufficient for most people, as long as there's a fast charger in the area for the occasional top-up when they have a few consecutive days of heavier-than-normal driving. 8 hours plugged into an L1 charger will put ~40 miles into the battery, which is enough to cover 280 miles per week of driving. That's quite a bit more than most people do when not taking a trip. Those who drive more than that on a regular basis need a 240V L2 charger.

So it's more about whether they can get a charging cable out to the car at all, not so much about whether they can specifically get 240V out there. If you're parking on the street you probably can't run an extension cord over the sidewalk, even an ordinary 15A @ 120V cord.

The pinching shouldn't be a significant problem. Garage doors should have a bottom seal that can deal with 3/4" or so of variation in height and still be able to seal well. Just make sure the cable is stout enough (most L2 cables are plenty strong), and if the garage door springs are correctly adjusted it shouldn't have to take too much weight anyway. If counterbalance springs aren't mostly offsetting the weight of the door a typical 1/3 or 1/2 HP garage door opener won't be able to lift it anyway.

Really, if that's the way you want to live, I say have at it. Other people having the option to live differently isn't going to stop you. It'll be decades before it starts getting hard to find gas stations, and by then EVs will have more range than you can handle.

An ICE maybe requires less planning if you can't charge at home, but the driver has to do that planning. With an EV, what planning must be done is done by the car, so it's less effort. Well, the driver does have to get into the habit of using the nav system so the car knows where you're going. For daily driving my car is really good at predicting where I'm going so picking the location is two taps, one to open the destination list, one to pick the top item in the list (or one button then speak the destination aloud). And doing that has additional benefits because the car has real-time traffic data and can route around problems.

For people who can charge easily at home, an EV requires far less planning than an ICE. You plug in when you get home, you unplug when you leave. No thought required. The battery is just always full, you never think about refilling. It's still a good idea to use the nav system for optimal routing... and so you can completely ignore the charge state, letting the car manage it entirely.

It is pretty hard not to respond to the pure BS that anti-EV types spout. I know it rubs you the wrong way, but the alternative is to let people who don't know what they're talking about dominate public perceptions.

I wouldn't claim EVs are for everyone, but for many of us they are extremely convenient and economical to run. The corner cases where ICE is clearly more convenient are not a concern for everyone, and not a concern for a multi-car household considering making one of their cars an EV. We have an EV and a plug-in hybrid that runs as an EV probably 80% of the time. We hit the gas station with the plug-in about once every six weeks.

You definitely don't need (and couldn't even use) all 200A for the car. L2 chargers max out at 80A, most only use either 30A or 40A, and even that much is actually not necessary.

Look at it this way: You only need to be able to replace your average[*] daily driving distance in 8 hours. Suppose your uses 250 Wh/mile, and you average 40 miles per day. That means you need to be able to replace 10kWh in 8 hours, which means you need to charge at 1.25kW, plus a bit for charging losses, so call it 1.4 kW. At 220V, that's 6.4A. You probably wouldn't actually do that, you'd instead set it to charge at 30A so you'd charge at 6.6kW and replace your mileage in an hour and change, but 6.4A is all you'd need.

But, wait... notice that 15A @ 110V is 1.65kW. So, in the hypothetical above, your needs are actually covered by an L1 charger, e.g. a typical wall outlet, which you already have in your garage and many other places! This is the case for the large majority, all they really need is a standard wall outlet 95% of the time. Sure, they might have to spend 10 minutes at an L3 charger once every few months if they happen to have a few heavier-than-usual driving days in a row, but that's still actually less time wasted than going to a gas station every week.

(Note in both of the above paragraphs I'm assuming 220V or 110V, but in practice your power is probably closer to 240V/120V, so you actually get a bit more for the given amperage.)

The erroneous belief that they need to be able to install an L2 charger deters a lot of people, and it really shouldn't. If you can run an extension cord from an ordinary outlet to where you park, and there's a fast charger that you can go to in the relatively rare instance you get low (fast charging is maximally efficient and minimally wearing when the battery is low), you can happily drive an EV.

I've done around 20k miles in long distance road trips all over the western US in the last 8 years and never had to wait to charge, not once. I have a handful of times gone to different charger than the one optimally located for my route because there weren't many chargers available at the optimal location. But my car handled that for me automatically because it knows in real time how busy each charger is, and also knows the historical usage patterns at each.

OTOH, about one time in 20 when I go to refill my diesel pickup I end up waiting for a pump. Maybe less than 1:20; confirmation bias may be kicking in here. But it definitely happens sometimes, and it's never happened to me when fast-charging my EV.

[*] Average case, not worst case. The car's battery acts as a buffer to cover occasional heavy driving days, this is the same reason you don't have to get gas daily.