Elon Musk has fired back at Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, further inflaming their ongoing feud. This confrontation marks a significant escalation as Musk warned on X, “If it’s war Walz wants, it’s war he will get,” suggesting that Walz risks being remembered as a “secessionist governor.” This quote underscores the tension brewing as the nation faces a fraught political landscape ahead of the mid-2024 elections.
At the core of their dispute is the plummeting stock price of Tesla, which has drawn criticism from Walz. During a town hall meeting in Wisconsin, Walz mocked Tesla’s fall, revealing he added the company’s stock to his tracking app to keep up with its decline. He humorously noted the stock’s dip to $225 per share, down 41.4% for the year. By mocking Tesla, Walz aimed to bolster his political image; yet with public sentiment in flux, such tactics may backfire.
Walz further stirred discontent by jokingly suggesting Tesla owners use “dental floss” to remove the company emblem from their vehicles. This comment earned bipartisan backlash, highlighting the political ramifications of his remarks. Tesla is grappling with not only declining sales but also a spate of violent incidents against its dealerships, including arson and vandalism. Musk’s reaction captures the emotional weight of the situation, calling Walz “a huge jerk” and questioning the logic behind attacking an American company.
The ongoing assaults on Tesla properties have caught the attention of federal authorities, who classify these acts as “domestic terrorism.” Attorney General Pam Bondi confirmed multiple arrests have occurred following violent incidents involving Molotov cocktails and gunfire at various locations. With investigations underway by the FBI and the Justice Department, the ramifications for those involved are severe. Musk linked these violent actions to “left-wing organizations,” framing them as deliberate attacks on American prosperity.
Beyond the incidents targeting Tesla, the discourse embodies deeper political divides. Musk’s connections to the Trump administration, especially his role in advocating for budget cuts to federal agencies, have drawn scrutiny. Musk has labeled Social Security a “Ponzi scheme,” igniting strong reactions from lawmakers and voters, particularly among older citizens. Walz was quick to capitalize on these remarks, accusing Musk of jeopardizing vital American institutions that provide safety for citizens.
This rivalry peaks with Walz alleging Musk is pouring vast sums into political maneuvers to sway elections, while Musk disparages Walz as “a creep” who engages in “petty and self-serving” criticism. The increasing financial pressure on Tesla is evident with the rise of the “Tesla Takedown” protest movement. While symbolic, this movement reflects investor anxiety as the stock continues to falter.
Musk’s political influence extends through a PAC he funds, which aims to sway swing-state voters. Walz criticized this endeavor as an attempt to “buy patriotism” with wealth, signaling deeper tensions between corporate power and governmental accountability. Musk’s supporters, including Senator Ted Cruz, have not held back in condemning Walz’s actions, labeling him “a small, petty, vindictive, evil bastard” and implying he’s rooting for corporate failure in America.
The implications of this feud stretch far beyond personal grievances. The Minnesota pension fund is a significant investor in Tesla, raising questions about Walz’s potential disregard for his constituents’ financial well-being as he attacks a major employer. Musk pointed this out sharply, emphasizing the inconsistency in Walz’s criticism given the state’s investments.
Investor sentiments appear decidedly mixed. Financial expert Kevin O’Leary criticized Walz’s comments, calling them “beyond stupid.” With Tesla’s valuation declining amid global economic uncertainty, the context of Walz’s remarks raises eyebrows about the wisdom of publicly undermining a key American manufacturer.
As November approaches, this feud becomes emblematic of larger struggles within the political landscape, where populist billionaires clash with state-level politicians over power and influence. Musk remains an active player aiming to reshape federal policy while Walz positions himself as a thorn in the side of what he perceives as tech overreach. The stark divide is evident in Musk’s jibe about needing a “boost” by looking at a portrait of a rival senator who defeated Walz.
The commentary surrounding this conflict is charged, hinting that neither side is willing to back down. Musk’s statement serves not only as a threat but as a precursor to a potentially intense political battle. With federal investigations ongoing and Tesla plotting its next moves, this altercation between Musk and Walz is morphing into a broader symbol of America’s cultural and political divides. As economic, social, and political tensions flare, the long-term impacts of this confrontation could shape narratives well past the elections, defining public perceptions on either side of the divide.
"*" indicates required fields
