Electric Vehicle Vandalism: It's Not Just a Democrat Thing – A Non-Partisan Push for Common Sense

Electric Vehicles Vandalism: It's Not Just a Democrat Thing – A Non-Partisan Push for Common Sense

Hey folks, it's Honest Mike here, coming at you from a non-partisan corner. I've been an activist my whole life—fighting for clean air, clean water, and fair choices without ever once vandalizing anyone's property. I don't condone that stuff one bit, but I get it: when voices feel stripped away, activism takes many forms. If a revered figure says EVs are bad for nature and we need to "drink more oil," some folks fall into a trance—party, country, God in that order. It's like they're hypnotized and can't help themselves. But let's talk EVs without the tribalism. The political piece? It's not just Democrats. Both sides should rally around tech that's cheaper, safer, more convenient, and job-creating. We're not begging for subsidies—just don't stack the deck with regulations that make owning an EV a hassle, or billions in oil subsidies that artificially keep gas prices low. And please, don't ridicule those prioritizing the environment. As Republicans often say, common sense ain't so common anymore. Let's break it down with facts.

#### The Partisan Myth: Data Shows a Broader Divide

First off, the idea that EV "hate" is a Democrat thing? Flip that script. Polls and ownership data paint a different picture. Democrats and leaners are generally more pro-EV, with about 64% favoring a phase-out of gas cars by 2035, seeing them as a climate win. Republicans? More skeptical—71% say they wouldn't consider an EV, often citing high costs, infrastructure gaps, and mandates as government overreach. But it's not zero among conservatives; in 24 states, more Republicans, independents, and third-party folks own EVs than Democrats in some spots. Adoption is highest in blue-leaning counties (half of U.S. EVs in the top 10% most Democratic areas), yet the gap is shrinking—Republican resistance dropped 20 points recently.

This isn't blind hate; it's about trade-offs. Conservatives emphasize personal choice and energy independence via domestic oil, while liberals focus on emissions cuts. Energy independence? EVs shine here: They slash oil imports (U.S. spends billions yearly), shifting to domestic electricity (60% from non-oil sources like nat gas and renewables). EVs use 3-4 times less energy per mile than gas cars. Logically, if EVs prove better overall—creating thousands of jobs in manufacturing, mining, and infrastructure—both sides should back them. We're talking 200,000+ U.S. jobs already from EV growth, with more in wireless tech ahead.

#### Regulations, Subsidies, and Fair Play: Don't Stack the Deck

We're not asking for EV handouts, but level the playing field. Oil gets $20-50 billion in annual U.S. subsidies (tax breaks, drilling incentives), keeping gas cheap artificially. Meanwhile, regulations like paused charging infrastructure funding make EVs tougher to own—long waits at stations, range anxiety in rural spots like Mimaropa here in the Philippines. Don't control our choices; let the market decide. If wireless charging corridors become the norm, bottlenecks vanish—no more cable fights/vandalism or impatience excuses. Speaking of which, impatience isn't worthy when alternatives like gas pumps have lines too.

I saw a viral auto article asking, "What would you do if someone cut your EV cable?" It highlighted the drug addicts pulling cables and stripping them for their copper. Also mentioned were the angry people just going around pulling plugs whenever they had an opportunity. Thieves use hacksaws, even on live wires—dangerous and disruptive. What to do? Some say “call a cornoer”, some say “live and learn”. You can report to police but chances are there are many States that would just let it happen without punishment. You can use your cameras/alarms, or go wireless to ditch cables altogether. Go wireless and its game over, a win-win for everyone but the pill.

#### Wireless Charging: Low Hurdles, Big Wins

Upfront costs for "Super Volt" wireless charging corridors (high-power inductive systems) seem daunting but are minimal compared to alternatives. Estimates peg electronics at PHP 16-19M million $350,000 for (2 sets of 8km) wireless charging corridors, with other companies the construction adds more even tearing up the roads. Purdue's U.S. highway test bed or Sweden's pilots) focuses on high-traffic spots. Their systems currently cost $2-3M per mile. Even that's peanuts next to oil subsidies or full grid overhauls. Hurdles? Really? Once this gets in front of a sensible environmentally conscious billionaire, it will be a piece of cake. There are others such as regulatory metering and vehicle upgrades. But for fleets, it means smaller batteries, more cargo, lower costs. UCLA's $20M grant for wireless shuttles shows it's doable. If Trump knew the benefits—American innovation beating China—he might soften.

Setup	Length	Estimated Cost (₱)	Per km (₱)	Notes / Comparison
One 8km set	8 km	₱8M–9.6M	₱1M–1.2M	Scaled from 16km total
2 sets (total)	16 km	₱16M–19M (up to ₱19.2M)	₱1M–1.2M	Bidirectional pilot example (Pasig/intercity)
Global competitors (adjusted)	Per km	₱56M–175M+	Much higher	US/EU/Sweden pilots

#### Cultural and Environmental Angles: History and Facts Over Doubts

Culturally, ICE (internal combustion engines) has dominated for ages, but EVs were first—zapped by JP Morgan and oil tycoons fearing competition. Without that, we'd be in a Jetsons world: flying cars, clean skies. Today, a strong minority loves EVs' torque and silence, but doubters miss the roar. Environmental doubts? Unfounded.

A recent post on Ireland/Europe results nailed it: EVs cut lifecycle GHGs 73% vs. gas cars, even with production factored. In Ireland, 40% renewable grid means zero tailpipe emissions, slashing local pollutants. Europe's EEA says 17-30% lower now, up to 73% by 2050 as grids green up. Ireland's transport emissions dropped with EV uptake, proving real-world wins.

Age old argument that CO2 is needed by plants to survive is correct but misleading. The globe emits way more CO2 and heavy metals than plants can absorb. It’s the reason it's getting trapped in the atmosphere and causes severe weather patterns around the world. I sometimes watch the news/weather and most times I don’t have to see it on tv I can see the changes right here in the rain forest. But the fires blazing in every administration always saying it’s the other sides, fault. The tornadoes ripping through homes and destroying life and love. Never agreeing as it gets more severe and causes more lives. I’m 58 and very well-travelled I see and am experienced. Weather should be a non-partisan issue too.

Bottom line: EVs aren't partisan. They're common sense for jobs, oil independence, and a healthier planet. Let's ditch the trance, hear all voices, and build that better way—without vandalism or ridicule. What do you think? Drop your takes below. Stay honest, folks. 🚗⚡