That's fair.  I also hate this 

This is exclusively for China and excludes the US and Europe.    Something about a massive war on the continent, driving energy prices, and cost of living through the roof has something to do about it.      These Electric costs increases are driven by the war in Ukraine and commiserate increases in Natural Gas costs.  According to the majority of reviews the cost of EV ownership are much lower than ICE vehicles, Espcially if you charge at home or work.  https://www.motorfinity.uk/blog/cost-of-running-electric-car/     I think the biggest differentiator is Urbanization, GDP per Capita, Education, and Political Leanings. After all, California is a large state.  In Ohio, we have a number of anti-EV state policies and little commitment from the State to deploy chargers.    Ford Allowed their ICE lineup to Languish before they declared their move toward EVs; in the Case of their ICE cars in the EU, sales were collapsing due to market conditions and underinvestment in their mainstream vehicles (Fiesta, Focus, and Kuga). the move to BEVs gave them a reason to kill them off.    I find EVs to be more convenient to live with than ICE cars, charging at home is more convenient than a gas station, no oil changes, Transmission Flushes, Etc.  There is an inverse relationship between gas prices and electricity costs when it comes to  EV penetration.  BEVs will be cheaper to build than ICE vehicles; the more EVs, the higher the cost of Electricity and the lower the cost of gas.  For the EU with High Gas prices and Rising Electrical costs, the introduction of cheap Chinese EVs can reverse the decline in EV sales. While in the US the absence of significant Taxes on fuel, increasing EV penetration will make ICE cars Cheaper to run, while electrical prices will increase. In the US, the absence of substantial taxes on fuel and increasing EV penetration will make ICE cars cheaper.  Overall, Cheaper EVs, and better infrastructure will speed EV market penetration. 

Agree 2.3L EB has plenty of power for a Ranger, but wonder if those who dis the engine do so mostly because it lacks power, or because it’s a 4-cylinder, or maybe because they don’t want a turbo engine for a variety of reasons?  The tough part is that buyers don’t have to be right, or have a valid reason.  I’m not sure Ford understands the difference.   For what it’s worth, I recently noticed on a Ford web page that they were highlighting naturally aspirated ICE powertrain for some applications where not long ago a similar page advertised they were all in on newest technologies like EcoBoost, Hybrids, and Battery Electric.  It’s a subtle change but I think it was intentional.  A very different tone suggesting more traditional engine choices are still available and may offer some advantages.

Yea, in 2022 one of the big shots at Ford said the following:   At Ford, combatting climate change is a strategic priority, and we’re proud of our partnership with California for stronger vehicle emissions standards, forged during a time when climate action was under attack. We’re committed to building a zero-emissions transportation future that includes everyone, backed by our own investments of more than $50 billion by 2026 in EVs and batteries. The CARB Advanced Clean Cars II rule is a landmark standard that will define clean transportation and set an example for the United States."  Bob Holycross, Chief Sustainability Officer at Ford

The promise of BEVs being lower-cost to help offset their inherent inconvenience associated with charging and limited range has not materialized yet, and IMO consumers are an impatient group.  Mostly though, hybrids have improved to the point of offering greater value, so why buy a more expensive BEV at all?   As an example, if we compare a Tesla Model 3 to either Accord or Camry hybrid, the HEVs are definitely less expensive.  Energy cost is where BEVs are strongest, and even there a Model 3 at present gas prices for my location cost as much or more.  I just filled up at $2.399 per gallon, and at over 45 MPG (actual MotorWeek test data for Accord over 7,000 miles of driving), gas cost is between 5 and 6 cents per mile.  That’s as good as charging a Model 3 at home at my electricity rate, and much lower if charging away from home.   Model 3 BEV also cost more to buy, more to insure, and depreciates faster.  Accord range is over 500 miles and can be filled in 5 minutes.  As much as I want to be able to justify a new BEV, I can’t.  Eventually I believe BEVs can be cost-competitive, but we are not close yet.

Trump has said in his book "The Art of the Deal" that his first position is always a non-starter and he knows it...he's staking a position to begin the negotiations from.  He said that negotiations take place and he makes the deal when it gets to what he wanted all along.  Too many don't get that about him...it's all in plain sight.  They want to beat him over the head with it for political reasons when it's completely unnecessary.  

Isn't what is going on with uncertainty on tariffs and other issues one reason Ford signed off on the Calif. CARB regs?  They saw it as a a constant -good or bad- that they could make long range plans on🤔

Lower prices at the pump I would think are the one "promise" he WILL deliver on.

Well, it looks terrible, IMO.

Other manufacturers are keeping their ICE/hybrid models longer than originally planned as a response to the slow-down of BEV sales. Ford just got too excited to go all in on EVs that it started killing its popular ICE models prematurely.