A presidential purchase: “In a move aimed at shoring up Tesla’s embattled fortunes, U.S. President Donald Trump purchased a red Tesla from CEO Elon Musk during a high-profile event at the White House on Tuesday. The transaction, staged on the South Lawn with several Tesla models—including the troubled Cybertruck—was on display and was widely seen as a public endorsement of Musk and his company at a time when both were facing mounting opposition.”

Trump, visibly impressed as he settled into a Model X, admired the vehicle, declaring, “That’s beautiful.” Moments later, he pointed to a red Model S, confirming it as his purchase. Musk, who has taken on an increasingly political role as the head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), showcased Tesla’s latest offerings, including the Cybertruck’s bulletproof exterior.

The president’s embrace of Tesla comes as the electric vehicle maker battles a series of setbacks, including attacks, slumping sales, intensifying competition from Chinese rivals, and a sharp decline in stock value. Trump went a step further, vowing to classify recent attacks on Tesla dealerships as domestic terrorism, linking the vandalism to broader culture war grievances.

But it will not change anything for Tesla until Elon Musk understands his real “business bosses”: liberals who actually buy EVs and care about the climate. He used to be their #1 fan but recently, he switched, and now sees them as enemies. And when he took that position, they decided to do the only thing that can hit a rich person: go after the size of his pockets.

The liberals are cutting EV credits and those things will affect Tesla pricing competitiveness. Elon’s new bases of Alabama, West Virginia, etc do not see much value in his product. Good People, never allow a village to cook for you because if they do, it is all over. The liberals are cooking for Musk.

Get it from me: Tesla is in real trouble because Europe is switching off, and America blue states are making choices. If they continue for 3 quarters, Tesla will fade. So, besides a presidential purchase, Musk must modulate his public posture. Yes, you can do your thing but do not pick public fights with governors of California, MA, etc as those are the people who made you rich.

The British Columbia government has excluded Tesla from receiving rebates for electric vehicle chargers, Powerwalls, and inverters, citing the promotion of Canadian-made technology over foreign competitors. This decision was announced as part of a broader tariff response strategy, impacting Tesla’s eligibility for the CleanBC and BC Hydro rebate programs. Premier David Eby has clarified that this policy shift targets Tesla specifically, due to Elon Musk’s involvement. (Twitter)

Do you forget that California offered EV credits before the United States when you controlled 99% of the market? In other words, they subsidized Tesla, and transferred the commonwealth to Musk, and then, Musk did not ask California to cut the waste because it benefitted him! I am happy that states are cutting waste now by removing EV credits

Trump Purchased A $90,000 Tesla in Solidarity to Elon Musk, But Experts Warn It Could Backfire

In a move aimed at shoring up Tesla’s embattled fortunes, U.S. President Donald Trump purchased a red Tesla from CEO Elon Musk during a high-profile event at the White House on Tuesday.

The transaction, staged on the South Lawn with several Tesla models—including the troubled Cybertruck—was on display and was widely seen as a public endorsement of Musk and his company at a time when both were facing mounting opposition.

Trump, visibly impressed as he settled into a Model X, admired the vehicle, declaring, “That’s beautiful.” Moments later, he pointed to a red Model S, confirming it as his purchase. Musk, who has taken on an increasingly political role as the head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), showcased Tesla’s latest offerings, including the Cybertruck’s bulletproof exterior.

The president’s embrace of Tesla comes as the electric vehicle maker battles a series of setbacks, including attacks, slumping sales, intensifying competition from Chinese rivals, and a sharp decline in stock value. Trump went a step further, vowing to classify recent attacks on Tesla dealerships as domestic terrorism, linking the vandalism to broader culture war grievances.

“They’re bad guys. They’re the same guys who screw around with our schools and universities,” Trump said. “We’re gonna catch you, and you’re gonna go through hell.”

However, analysts warn that Trump’s direct intervention may do more harm than good.

“Tesla is becoming a political symbol of Trump and DOGE, and that is a bad thing for the brand,” said Dan Ives, a financial analyst at Wedbush Securities. “You think it’s helping, but it’s actually hurting.”

Trump’s backing appeared to provide a temporary boost. Tesla stock, which had suffered one of its worst single-day sell-offs just a day earlier, rebounded after the president posted on his Truth Social platform that Musk was “putting it on the line” for America. He blamed Tesla’s struggles on “Radical Left Lunatics” allegedly conspiring to “illegally and collusively boycott Tesla, one of the World’s great automakers, and Elon’s ‘baby.’”

The stock surged even further when Trump formally announced his purchase at the White House. “I don’t like what’s happening to you,” he told Musk before selecting a red Model S, retailing for $80,000. As he eased into the driver’s seat, he repeated, “Wow. That’s beautiful.” Tesla shares closed nearly 4% higher Tuesday, but the broader outlook remains uncertain.

Tesla has been pummeled by competition from Chinese automakers, and Musk’s political entanglements have further complicated matters. Tesla showrooms in the U.S. have been targeted by protesters, and some owners—keen to distance themselves from the controversy—have taken to placing bumper stickers on their cars reading, “I bought it before Elon went nuts.”

Despite Trump’s endorsement, Tesla stock remains down 45% in 2025. On Monday, it tumbled over 15% to $222.15, its lowest point since October, reflecting deepening pessimism about the company’s prospects.

That decline could have serious consequences. Tesla’s stock-based employee compensation model means that many workers who were offered shares at a discount last year now find those stocks trading below the discounted price, making the incentive worthless. Additionally, Tesla’s ability to raise money through new stock offerings is now limited. The company previously raised $12 billion in 2020 to fund expansion and research, but with slumping sales and a declining stock price, future fundraising efforts could yield far less.

Musk’s growing political profile is also hurting Tesla. As the face of Trump’s aggressive government downsizing efforts under DOGE, Musk has championed federal worker layoffs and drastic spending cuts. But his focus on politics has reignited shareholder concerns that he is too distracted to effectively run Tesla, especially as his other ventures face mounting challenges.

X, Musk’s social media platform, crashed multiple times on Monday, an incident he blamed on a “massive” cyberattack. But experts pointed to his deep workforce cuts at the company as a likely factor. Meanwhile, SpaceX has also suffered setbacks, with a rocket exploding over Florida last week, just two months after another launch failure.

While Trump’s Tesla purchase was intended to serve as a lifeline for the struggling EV maker, the political baggage it carries could further polarize the brand. Analysts believe that instead of reassuring investors and customers, Musk’s alliance with Trump may be driving away those who see Tesla as increasingly entangled in America’s divisive political landscape.

Meta has announced plans to launch Community Notes on its platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, and Threads, starting in the U.S. next week, specifically on March 18, 2025. The company is adopting a crowdsourced fact-checking model similar to the one used by X, leveraging X’s open-source technology, including its algorithm, to power this feature. This move marks a shift away from Meta’s previous reliance on third-party fact-checkers, aiming to empower users to add context to potentially misleading content while emphasizing free expression.

However, Meta has not committed to making its own Community Notes system fully open source, though it is considering this possibility for the future. While both X (formerly Twitter) and Meta (which operates Facebook, Instagram, and Threads) are adopting Community Notes as a crowdsourced fact-checking mechanism, their policies and approaches to content moderation, including the implementation of Community Notes, differ in several keyways.

X pioneered Community Notes, originally launched as Birdwatch in 2021, before being expanded under Elon Musk’s leadership after his 2022 acquisition of the platform. The system relies on users to add context to potentially misleading posts, with notes rated for helpfulness by other contributors. X emphasizes transparency by making its Community Notes algorithm open source, allowing public scrutiny of how notes are ranked and displayed.

The platform also publishes daily contributions to Community Notes, enhancing accountability. X uses a “bridging-based” algorithm to ensure notes are rated by a diverse range of contributors, aiming to reduce bias by requiring agreement from users with differing perspectives. This is intended to prioritize notes that are helpful to a broad audience, not just a majority.

X does not allow users to appeal Community Notes directly, but the system is designed to self-correct through community ratings, and X claims it does not write, rate, or moderate notes itself, positioning them as independent of corporate influence. X’s leadership, particularly Elon Musk, has championed Community Notes as a cornerstone of its “free speech” ethos, often framing it as a superior alternative to centralized fact-checking, which Musk has criticized as biased.

Meta has not detailed whether users can appeal Community Notes decisions, potentially reducing user recourse compared to X’s broader transparency measures. This opacity could lead to skepticism about fairness, especially given Meta’s history of centralized moderation. Meta’s implementation of Community Notes is part of a broader policy shift to reduce reliance on third-party fact-checkers, whom Meta has criticized for perceived biases and overreach. This shift aligns with a stated goal of prioritizing “free expression,” but critics argue it may also reflect political pressures, particularly in the context of the new U.S. administration in 2025.

Historically, Meta has adopted a more interventionist approach to content moderation, employing thousands of moderators and partnering with over 80 third-party fact-checking organizations worldwide to label, demote, or remove misleading content. This approach was part of a broader effort to combat misinformation, particularly after events like the 2016 U.S. election and the COVID-19 pandemic, but it drew criticism from conservatives for alleged bias and censorship.

With the 2025 policy shift, Meta is moving toward a less restrictive stance, aiming to “restore free expression” by reducing proactive content removal and simplifying its content policies. This includes ending third-party fact-checking in the U.S., adopting Community Notes, and focusing automated systems on “high-severity violations” like terrorism, child exploitation, and illegal drugs, while dialing back on other areas like hate speech and political content.

Meta’s shift has been framed as a response to cultural and political changes, including user dissatisfaction with perceived over-censorship, but critics argue it may also be a strategic move to align with political pressures, particularly from the incoming Trump administration, which has historically criticized social media moderation as biased against conservative voices.

X places a strong emphasis on transparency in its Community Notes system, with its open-source algorithm and public data on contributions. This allows researchers, users, and critics to analyze how the system works and identify potential flaws, though some studies have questioned its effectiveness in consistently curbing misinformation, especially during rapid news cycles like elections.