I think they were trying to say that it's surprising the Lightning sold so poorly considering the popularity of the ICE version.
I do think F-150 buyers tend to be more conservative than average car buyers and more receptive to anti-EV FUD for both political and cultural reasons.
The US has been doing air strikes in the Middle East on a regular basis since ~1990, and they extensively support the military adventures of allies like Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Absolutely not. It will takes months to years to rebuild onshore infrastructure, and shipping companies will be very reluctant to send tankers into the Gulf. Negotiations may collapse and hostilities resume at any moment, especially since Israel does not know the meaning of the word ceasefire.
I assume you are aware that "they" are the Republicans? The Harris campaign avoided talking about it whenever possible, while Republican groups spent $200 million on anti-trans ads.
Military ships don't run their radio beacons in combat zones. (There was an incident last year where the USS Theodore Roosevelt collided with a civilian cargo ship at night at least partially because it tried to approach the Suez canal with it's beacon off.)
The premise here is that you lose access to a European bank's mobile app because the US government compels Apple or Google to disable your app store accounts. Not that your relationship with the bank is frozen.
The curtailed windfarms are in the north of Scotland. There is currently not enough transmission capacity to export electricity from there to the south of England where the demand is highest. New transmission lines are under construction, but they wont be ready until 2029.
That's production, not consumption. The US exports huge amounts of oil and gas now. The EU/Russia sanctions and the Red Sea blockade are a huge gravy train for American oil and gas companies.
No it doesn't make sense. Every photon that hits the Earth is eventually either absorbed as heat, reflected back into space or both (eg. partially absorbed and partially re-emitted as lower energy photons.) There is no net global increase in heat from a wind turbine or solar panel. (There might be slight local shifts.)
The only way this could change net heat if it significantly altered the reflectivity of the surface, and in practice the affected area is too small to matter. As an exaggerated example, I found an article [1] that calculated the area that would need to be covered by solar panels to generate power equal the total global electricity consumption to be 115,625 square miles, approximately equal to the state of New Mexico.