Guest Post by Eric Peters
Donald Trump has been denouncing the mandates forcing electric vehicles onto the “market” – in air fingers quotes to make a point of the absurdity of using that word to describe forcing people to buy things. In part by forcing things people want to buy off the market.
He’s right to denounce the EV mandates – this forcing off the market of vehicles people can afford and are willing to buy using their own money so as to force them into having no other choice but to buy an electric vehicle they don’t want and probably can’t afford anyhow (the average transaction price of an EV – one that isn’t a subcompact such as the Chevy Bolt – is nearly $50,000) using other people’s money to help pay for it.
It’s wrong in principle – and it’s disastrous in effect.
Like the ethanol mandates that Trump defended in the same mouthful.
“Biden’s insane electric vehicle mandates will totally decimate gas-powered cars and if it happens, Iowa ethanol is dead. You know, it’s sad. You’re not going to be needing ethanol. You’re not going to be needing gasoline and you’re never going to take a trip that’s more than twelve minutes from your house.”
And they ask me why I drink, said the Greaseman all those years ago.
How do you oppose mandates by endorsing them? Trump – like most Republicans – does not oppose mandates. In principle. He (and they) oppose mandates they do not approve of. 
The distinction is important because it explains why there has been no effective opposition to mandates – in principle.
If you support forcing people to buy ethanol – almost all of the “gas” sold in this country is actually adulterated gas that contains at least 10 percent ethanol alcohol, courtesy of federal mandates requiring it – then how do you take a stand against forcing people to buy EVs by mandating that most of the vehicles available for sale are EVs?
Trump says he opposes forcing people to buy EVs by leaving them no alternative – very much as people have no alternative but to buy “gas” that’s been watered down with ethanol alcohol, which not only increases the cost of this “gas” (if ethanol were cheaper, it would not have to be mandated) but also renders the “gas” less energy dense (ethanol has a lower BTU content than gasoline) the result of which is reduced fuel economy, a double whammy.
A triple whammy, actually – because ethanol is water-attractant, which accelerates the rusting of metal gas tanks and fuel lines not designed to handle alcohol-laced “gas.” It is the bane of outdoor power equipment and marine engines as well as of the fuel delivery systems of older vehicles made when gas was still gas; i.e., before the federal government began forcing Americans to buy (and pay for, in other ways) ethanol-laced “gas.”
But Trump also says the ethanol “industry” – in air-fingers quote marks to make a point of the absurdity of using that word to describe a make-work project that uses the government to force people to buy (and pay for, in myriad other ways) a product that few if them would freely choose to buy, if they were free to choose not to buy it – is good because that is what his audience wanted to hear.
Just the same as Biden’s audiences want to hear about EVs.
Neither audience is bothered by the mandating of their desideratum – the thing they want or benefit from and which they think it’s ok for the government to force other people to buy and to pay for.
This is why the ethanol mandated will never be repealed. It is why the EV mandates will proceed. There may be some tussle over the degree and pace of them. But there is no principled opposition to either of them. Trump will never say that it is wrong – that it is immoral – to force anyone to buy or subsidize the buying of anything, because if he said that, he would lose the political support of people who benefit from government mandates that force other people to buy (and pay for, in myriad other ways) the things they’re selling.
He will only oppose the things his political opponents say his political supporters must be forced to buy (and pay for, in myriad other ways).
Thus his opposition to the mandating of EVs by the mandating of there being (by 2030 or so) no alternative to them and – in the same breath – his defense of the mandating of ethanol that has left people no alternative but to buy it and pay for it in myriad other ways, such as reduced fuel economy and increased risk of corrosion-related problems in the fuel systems of older vehicles built when gas was still gas.
But Trump is just doing the same situational-benefit (and cost) thing Republicans have been doing for decades, which is why the country moves ever farther Leftward with the passage of time. “Don’t touch my Social Security” said Tea Party activists opposed to welfare grift they resented being forced to pay for. 
You cannot arrest the progress of Leftism by agreeing with it.
And that is why American elections are nothing more than a kind of advance auction of stolen goods, as H.L. Mencken put it almost a century ago. But it is worse than just that because it has morphed from mere theft – the transfer of wealth from “a” to “b.” It has become something delusional rather than merely cynical.
It is honest, in a way, to advocate for theft. But it is in a very real sense insane to defend it when you favor it while opposing it when you dislike it.
Orwell called this form of mental illness Doublethink. And you just read about Trump’s latest display of it.
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal
-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)
Saying : ” I never mandated the vaccine ” …. is not enough.
It’s TOXIC
Own It !
100% correct.
By saying it, he also presumes that he had the authority to do so.
Life long NYC liberal who has never understood the concept of limited government.
Very truthful to the point article. *****
A Trump, where’s that brain of yours you so brag about?
Where does RFK jr stand on these issues do you think? 🤔
What a shabbo goy piece of carnival barking shit.
So Trump is what you call a liar. He may or may not believe the things coming out of his mouth.
A bit of a confusing article. But if author feels its just as bad for Trump to mandate ethanol as EVs, he is right on that.
Ethanol is crap also. Reduced your horsepower. When the Ethanol mandates came in, there were food shortages in parts of the world. We have enough oil without having to add GMO corn to our fuel.
Ethanol is one of the biggest energy sinks there is. It’s more efficient to burn gas, pure, better mileage, less damage to the environment. The cost to grow corn process it into ethanol to add the gas transport. It it is much more efficient to just burn pure gasoline.
And here’s the worst thing the corn use for ethanol is not suitable for consumption. There are acres and acres of this stuff growing and it’s a virtual food desert. They don’t take care of the soil and they have to use petroleum products to get the fertilizer into the ground to grow it
The absolute worst thing is there depleting the aquifer that runs through the Midwest. It’s dropping precipitously and it cannot be replenished. We’re going to end up with a dust ball. That’ll make the 30s look like a joke.
But this is all being driven by agri industry paying off our congress clowns.
You are correct in everything you wrote. The corn they grow for ethanol is industrial corn not fit for human consumption. If they truly believe in ethanol there are much more efficient means of producing it instead of using corn. There’s a type of grass that grows naturally (unfortunately I don’t recall it’s name) that can be used. As you mentioned, it’s the ag industry that bought of the congressional clowns in using corn.
Using corn is quite stupid as sugar beets or sugar cane yield up to ten times IIRC more sugar per acre than corn and hogs can eat the remains of the beets just like corn. If someone made a dedicated ethanol engine with a high compression ratio over 20-1, pretty much diesel level compression, it would supposedly get better mpg than gasoline. Another funny thing about ethanol crazed Iowa, it is the only place I’ve been where you can buy gas with no ethanol in addition to two or three blends of gasahol. Most places there offer IIRC five or more choices from no ethanol to 85%.
Go figure.
I live in Wisconsin and every gas station I know of and visit sells non-ethanol gas. One reason is it is needed for small engines and outboard engines that will all be harmed by ethanol. We have a lots of lawn mowers and snow blowers where it runs to hot. In outboards some have plastic type parts that ethanol will damage. It does cost more, but I agree the gas mileage is better.
I do know of one station that took out mid-grade and put in E-85 instead of E-89, but you should have a flex vesicle to use that. Also we get extremely cold weather, so it is terrible for winter use because of th moisture.
Uniparty.
Poor ole Trump. I wonder sometimes if his mouth is controlled by AI, perhaps has no clue what he is saying because it’s AI talking.
Peters makes a good point and recently Trump was talking 15% ethanol to those corn farmers and that would be yet another “mandate” just like 10% now.
How do you oppose mandates by endorsing them? Trump – like most Republicans – does not oppose mandates. In principle. He (and they) oppose mandates they do not approve of
The distinction is important because it explains why there has been no effective opposition to mandates – in principle.
Trump’s main selling point is he is not Biden. Anyone is better than Biden. (With the exception of Harris)
“Poor ole Trump”
For ALL practical purposes?
Drumpf is a dolt…IN addition to being Part-n-Parcel.
I continue to ask the question: Why do a few relatively small states get to decide who will be on the presidential ballot and how much does it cost the average taxpayer for the politicians trying to win these states?
All mandates are bad. People should have the freedom to choose what to buy.
EVs are a pig in a poke as we say in the Midwest. I am not sure why demos are pushing them as they are doomed to fail. Why you ask? Grid will not support large numbers of EVs. Not enough rare earth minerals for required number of batteries for large numbers of EVs. The EV technology has plateaued contrary to what EV advocates say. Cost of EVs is too high for average Americans. There are other issues as well. However, none of this means demos will stop the EV mandates, at some point Americans will have to say no to EV mandates. First test case will be California.