Why Tesla’s latest road test could be BAD NEWS for Washington



For years, Americans have been told self-driving cars are still somewhere off in the future.

An intriguing idea that is simply not fully ready for the real world.

Tesla now has millions of vehicles gathering real-world driving information every day. No competitor comes close to that level of data collection.

But on a recent episode of "The Drive,"my co-host Karl Brauer and I sat down with automotive journalist Roman Mica — and the story he told us had us thinking the future is closer than we realize.

Not everybody is going to be happy about it either.

Hands off

After spending roughly 2,000 miles using Tesla’s latest Full Self-Driving system across highways, city traffic, parking lots, and construction zones, Mica said the technology behaved very differently from earlier versions.

The old “until moment” — where the system suddenly did something unpredictable or dangerous — barely appeared.

This makes one thing undeniable: The gap between the current self-driving capability of this technology and the way the government talks about it is only getting wider.

Washington is still treating self-driving technology as if it's experimental, while the companies building it are already deploying it in the real world.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration continues escalating investigations into Tesla’s Full Self-Driving system, focusing on crashes involving fog, glare, dust, and other low-visibility conditions. Regulators warn drivers not to put too much trust in the technology, constantly reminding consumers that these systems still require active supervision.

At the same time, policymakers continue promoting autonomous vehicles as the future of transportation.

Safer roads. Fewer accidents. Smarter mobility.

Both messages can technically be true. But the gap between them is becoming harder to ignore as the technology improves faster than the public conversation around it.

Racing ahead

Tesla isn’t alone either.

Nissan recently demonstrated autonomous driving technology navigating dense urban traffic in Tokyo. Waymo continues expanding robotaxi operations in multiple U.S. cities. Mercedes-Benz and BMW are investing heavily in increasingly advanced assisted-driving systems.

The race is already underway.

But Tesla remains the company pushing the technology most aggressively into everyday consumer vehicles, and that’s part of what makes regulators uneasy.

Traditional automakers typically introduce new driver-assistance systems cautiously and in tightly controlled stages. Tesla operates more like a software company, constantly refining the system through over-the-air updates while collecting enormous amounts of real-world driving data from millions of vehicles already on the road.

That approach has created a major advantage.

It has also created tension with regulators who are accustomed to slower, more predictable development cycles.

RELATED: Big Brother on the road: Backlash grows against license plate surveillance

SOPA Images/Getty Images

Cause for concern?

To be fair, some concerns are legitimate.

No self-driving system is perfect. Construction zones, poor weather, glare, faded lane markings, road debris, and unpredictable human behavior remain difficult problems for every autonomous platform currently being developed.

Tesla’s system still legally requires a driver ready to intervene at any moment.

But critics often avoid another uncomfortable reality: Human drivers fail constantly too.

People drive distracted. They text. They fall asleep. They panic. They drive impaired. Human error causes the overwhelming majority of crashes on American roads.

Computers don’t get tired or distracted.

That doesn’t automatically make autonomous systems safer in every situation. But it does explain why so many companies — and governments — continue betting heavily on the technology despite the public skepticism.

Head start

The bigger issue is scale.

Tesla now has millions of vehicles gathering real-world driving information every day. No competitor comes close to that level of data collection. Every mile driven feeds additional information back into the system.

That lead may prove difficult to overcome.

And that’s where this stops being just a technology story and starts becoming a political one.

Autonomous driving isn’t simply about convenience. It’s about infrastructure, liability, regulation, data collection, and ultimately control over how transportation functions in the future.

Washington wants the economic and technological advantages that come with leading autonomous vehicle development. But it also wants tight oversight over how that future arrives.

Those goals don’t always align neatly.

What Mica describes in our conversation would have sounded impossible only a few years ago. A vehicle handling thousands of miles across varied driving conditions with minimal intervention once felt like science fiction.

Now it’s happening on public roads.

That doesn’t mean fully autonomous driving has arrived. We are still a long way from removing drivers entirely from the equation in every environment and condition.

But the line between driver assistance and true autonomy is getting thinner much faster than most Americans realize.

And Washington still seems unsure whether it wants to accelerate that future — or slow it down.


Tesla unveils its driverless future — but you're only invited if you comply with these rules



Tesla is banking on travelers wanting to hang out with themselves rather than an Uber driver.

The company announced that its Texas production facility, known as Gigafactory Texas, is ready to start preparing for a world without drivers.

'A personalized driverless experience.'

Elon Musk's company is diving further into the autonomous auto sector by not only ramping up its production of driverless vehicles, but by pairing specific vehicles with its taxi app that will compete with existing services like Waymo and GM's Cruise.

"Purpose-built for autonomy," Tesla wrote on X, promoting its new line called Cybercab. The vehicles are a new production of a battery-electric Tesla with neither steering wheels nor pedals available inside the car.

It was first shown off in 2024 and boasted futuristic wireless charging capabilities, with a rumored target range of 200 miles per charge.

RELATED: 5 cars from the 2026 New York International Auto Show you might actually want to buy

Cybercab will be combined with Tesla's existing Robotaxi app — launched in 2025 — to create "a personalized driverless experience."

Currently, the rides are offered on Tesla Model Y cars, but Tesla expects its new autonomous rides to target customers who grow tired of their human experiences. In this sense, Tesla notes how their rides differ from some of the most annoying parts of riding in someone else's car.

Heating and cooling settings are saved in the passenger's profile in the app, which means vehicles will automatically adjust to their settings across different rides. Other features target the aggravation of having to hear another person's music selection, as the Robotaxi allows riders to stream their own.

There are some limitations though. For example, children under 8 years old, which of course includes infants, are not permitted to ride in the taxis. Guests between 8 and 17 years old are permitted in the cars, but minors cannot ride in the vehicle alone, per Robotaxi Rider Rules.

Riders must also adhere to applicable laws regarding small children, meaning a child safety seat may be required (provided by the customer) to bring them along.

Pets are also not permitted unless they are service animals.

RELATED: Anti-Trump Indian investor wants you to use this hat that reads your thoughts

SUZANNE CORDEIRO/AFP/Getty Images

Only three passengers at a combined weight of 800 pounds may ride in the vehicle at one time, and no one can sit in the front seat, Tesla says.

Smoking, vaping, and alcohol consumption are also not allowed.

The company also lists strict rules about recording or collecting any data from inside the vehicle.

"Instruments or equipment intended to record, measure, reverse engineer, collect information about, or conduct surveillance of any feature, equipment, component, or area of our Robotaxi are strictly prohibited."

The service is currently only available to residents in Austin, Dallas, and Houston, Texas.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Tesla is winning the self-driving race — so why is Washington trying to slow it down?



Washington has a messaging problem on self-driving cars — and it’s becoming harder to ignore.

Regulators and politicians keep telling Americans that autonomous vehicles are the future. Safer roads. Fewer accidents. Smarter mobility. That’s the pitch. But at the same time, they’re turning up the heat on the one company that has already put the technology into millions of vehicles: Tesla.

Tesla has millions of vehicles generating data. Most competitors don’t. That raises a bigger question: control.

If this technology is so important, why does the most widely deployed system keep getting singled out?

Target: Tesla

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has escalated its probe into Tesla’s Full Self-Driving system, taking a closer look at incidents involving the technology. The focus is on low-visibility conditions — fog, glare, dust — where camera-based systems can struggle.

That’s a legitimate concern. But it’s not unique to Tesla. Every system on the road today — whether it’s Super Cruise, BlueCruise, or any lane-centering technology — faces similar limitations.

Yet Tesla remains under the most consistent scrutiny.

That’s where this starts to look less like routine safety oversight and more like selective pressure. Regulators are right about one thing: These systems are not fully autonomous. Drivers still need to stay engaged. That hasn’t changed. So why the escalation now?

Mixed messages

At the same time Washington is warning consumers to stay alert, it’s also pushing policies and funding that accelerate autonomous vehicle deployment. That’s the disconnect. You can’t fast-track a technology and undermine confidence in it at the same time.

And while U.S. regulators focus on Tesla, real-world issues elsewhere are raising broader questions.

In Wuhan, China, more than 100 robotaxis operated by Baidu’s Apollo Go reportedly stalled in traffic following a system-wide glitch, creating disruption across active lanes. No injuries were reported, but the incident highlighted the risks of systems operating without a human fallback.

Waymo problems

We’ve seen similar issues closer to home. In San Francisco, service disruptions — including outages and connectivity problems — have temporarily sidelined Waymo’s robotaxis. In China, Apollo Go vehicles have struggled in complex environments like construction zones — situations that still challenge autonomous systems more than human drivers.

Here’s the part that often gets overlooked: Tesla’s system still requires a human in the loop. Robotaxi services are designed to operate without one.

When a driver-assist system makes a mistake, a person can step in. When a fully autonomous fleet runs into problems, those issues can scale quickly across the system.

That’s not just a technical issue. It’s a scalability risk.

So again — why does Tesla draw so much attention? Because it’s visible. Because it’s ahead in deployment. And because it took a different path.

Setting the pace

Tesla didn’t wait for perfect conditions or full regulatory alignment. It put its system into the real world and improved it through over-the-air updates, collecting large amounts of driving data along the way. That’s a lead competitors are still trying to close.

But that approach doesn’t fit neatly into traditional regulatory models. Regulators are used to slower, more predictable development cycles. Tesla operates more like a software company — iterating continuously and improving through real-world data. That forces regulators to react instead of setting the pace.

According to NHTSA findings, recent updates may not fully resolve visibility-related issues. That matters. It shows the technology is still evolving. But that’s true across the entire industry. Edge cases — weather, lighting, unpredictable road conditions — remain unresolved challenges for every system on the road today.

The difference is scale. Tesla has millions of vehicles generating data. Most competitors don’t. That raises a bigger question: control. Autonomous vehicles aren’t just about convenience. They’re about data, infrastructure, and who ultimately controls mobility.

RELATED: The great Chinese EV hype: What the media isn’t telling you

VCG/Getty Images

Backseat driver

Governments understand that. And they’re not just regulating for safety — they’re shaping the outcome.

That creates friction. Because innovation — especially software-driven innovation — moves faster than regulation ever will.

Tesla is pushing forward in real time. Washington is trying to catch up. And instead of offering clear, consistent rules, it’s sending mixed signals that confuse consumers and distort the market.

Meanwhile, global competition isn’t slowing down. China continues expanding robotaxi programs. U.S. companies like Waymo are scaling more cautiously. Partnerships involving Uber and Lyft are waiting in the wings. The race to define autonomous mobility is already underway — and it’s not just about technology. It’s about leadership.

If regulators are serious about safety, standards need to be applied evenly — not selectively against the most visible player. If autonomy is the future, policy should support innovation, not work against it. Right now, we’re getting mixed signals.

Until Washington decides what it actually wants, the future of self-driving cars won’t be shaped by technology alone — it will be shaped by policy.

The great Chinese EV hype: What the media isn’t telling you



For the past few years, a familiar narrative has taken hold in American automotive media: Chinese electric vehicles are about to reshape the global car market.

Reviewers highlight low prices, sleek interiors, and giant screens. Commentators talk about a coming wave of imports that could challenge American, European, and Japanese automakers. Some even point to BYD surpassing Tesla in global EV sales as proof the shift is already happening.

Some reports suggest a large number of brands could disappear, merge, or restructure in the coming years.

That all sounds compelling — until you ask a simple question: What does this actually mean for a buyer?

Because right now, most of these vehicles aren’t even for sale in the United States.

Tariffs and regulations keep them out. So a lot of this hype is based on overseas test drives and showroom impressions — not real ownership in North America.

And where these vehicles are being used, the story isn’t nearly as clean.

What happens in real-world driving

Cold weather is one of the first reality checks.

Like all EVs, Chinese EVs lose range in low temperatures — sometimes up to 30% to 40% of their range.

That’s not a small difference. That’s the difference between getting home comfortably and watching your battery percentage like a hawk.

Shorter range means more charging. Charging takes longer in the cold. And more energy goes to heating the battery and cabin instead of driving the car.

If you live somewhere with real winters, this isn’t theoretical. It’s your daily routine.

The problem with 'cool' features

A lot of the appeal here is design — flush door handles, fully electronic entry, big minimalist interiors.

It looks great in photos; a different story in real life.

Electronic door handles and latches depend on power and sensors. Lose power after a crash, or deal with freezing conditions, and those systems can fail or become harder to use. There have already been reports of handles sticking or not working properly in cold weather.

That’s the trade-off with adding complexity to basic functions.

And when something breaks, it’s not a simple fix. It’s usually more expensive, more specialized, and more time-consuming.

Here’s the bigger issue

The structure of China’s EV industry may matter more than any individual feature.

Over the past decade, government incentives fueled a wave of EV startups. Dozens of companies jumped in. A lot of them are now competing on price, trying to survive.

And not all of them will.

Analysts at firms like Deutsche Bank and JPMorgan Chase expect consolidation. Some reports suggest a large number of brands could disappear, merge, or restructure in the coming years.

That’s not just industry chatter. That’s a real risk for buyers.

Because if the company behind your car disappears, what happens next?

Who provides software updates? Who supplies parts? Who services the vehicle?

That “great deal” doesn’t look so great if you can’t get support — or if resale value drops because buyers don’t trust the brand will still be around.

We’ve seen this before with failed automakers. The difference now is how dependent vehicles are on software.

RELATED: How government and Big Tech can wreck your new car's resale value

Denver Post/Getty Images

Price isn’t the whole story

There’s no question Chinese automakers have pushed prices down in some markets.

But price is only part of the equation.

Many of these companies are operating on thin margins while spending heavily to stay competitive. That creates pressure — and in some cases, instability.

Some brands will make it. Companies like BYD and Geely have the scale.

Others won’t.

And you don’t get to choose which one you bought after the shakeout happens.

What American buyers actually care about

Even if these vehicles eventually reach the U.S., they’ll be competing on more than price.

American buyers care about reliability, service access, resale value, and long-term support.

That’s not something you figure out in a quick test drive or a YouTube review.

That’s built over time — through dealer networks, parts availability, and how a company stands behind its product.

And that’s where newer players still have something to prove.

Don't buy the hype

Chinese EVs are real. Some are competitive. Some are impressive.

But the idea that they’re about to flood the U.S. market and take over leaves out a lot.

They face trade barriers, infrastructure challenges, and a major shakeout at home.

For buyers, the takeaway is simple: Don’t buy the hype — buy what actually works for your life.

Look at how the vehicle performs in real conditions. Look at who’s going to support it. Look at what it’s likely to be worth in a few years.

Because in the end, the question isn’t how a car looks in a headline, but how it holds up when you’re the one paying for it.

Big Tech’s Plan To Make Work ‘Optional’ Is Evil

While innovations in robotic automation may create new and exciting economic opportunities, a world without work is something none of us should desire.

Unhinged Minnesota DHS employee gets off easy after vandalizing Teslas



Last year, Minnesota state employee Dylan Adams was arrested for vandalizing six Tesla vehicles, reportedly causing $20,000 in damage.

Despite the damage, Adams was punished by the state with only a single-day, unpaid suspension, according to a letter from the state Department of Human Services.

'THAT’S IT. He’s not even being PROSECUTED.'

Dylan, an employee of the Minnesota Department of Human Services, was just one of several people arrested last year in connection with the destruction of Tesla vehicles in Minnesota.

The damage was in protest against Tesla CEO Elon Musk and his then-leadership role at the Department of Government Efficiency.

RELATED: Counter-protester lights explosive amid anti-Mamdani protest, utters 'Allahu Akbar' — but NYC mayor rips 'bigotry and racism

Photo by PATRICK T. FALLON/AFP via Getty Images

According to the investigative report, Adams claimed he was disturbed by Musk's hand gestures to a Trump crowd in 2025, perceiving it as a Nazi salute. He said he vandalized the Teslas "in hopes that the owners of the vehicles would disassociate themselves from Elon Musk and Tesla," the report said.

The suspension letter revealed Adams' official punishment and the details of the damage.

“This letter is to inform you of our intent to suspend you for one (1) working day," the letter read, for "the following facts": “Your behavior of vandalizing ('keying') multiple (six) Tesla vehicles in March of 2025 which made local and national headlines.”

Adams was told that he had the right to appeal the suspension, but it does not appear he has done so.

The letter was signed by Heidi Hamilton, Disability Services director.

Adams has never been charged with a crime in connect with the vandalism.

RELATED: Mamdani walks back popular progressive campaign promise to pedestrians

Photo by Lab Ky Mo/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images

Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty's office announced last year that prosecutors would opt for "diversion" instead, which officials said was typical in similar cases.

Daniel Borgertpoepping, spokesperson for Moriarty's office, said, "We offered diversion, as we often do with property damage cases when the person has no record. Mr. Adams will have to complete the requirements of the program. He will also have to pay every penny in restitution to the victims. If he does not meet those requirements, we will proceed through the criminal legal system process."

Critics noted the minimal consequences Adams is facing for his actions.

Nick Sortor wrote on X, “THAT’S IT. He’s not even being PROSECUTED. Minnesota is a FAILED STATE!”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Affordable cars still exist — but Americans can't buy them



The auto industry is marketed as global — same brands, same badges, same hype. It’s easy to assume we’re all shopping from the same menu.

We’re not.

BYD has now surpassed Tesla in global EV sales — even though BYD sells none of those vehicles in the United States.

On the latest episode of “The Drive,” iSeeCars.com executive analyst and Forbes Autos contributor Karl Brauer and I sit down with automotive creator Al Vazquez, whose Spanish-language platform gives him a vantage point most U.S. journalists don’t have.

He covers cars for the American press like we do — but he’s also regularly flown to Latin America and other markets to drive vehicles, many of them Chinese-branded, that Americans will never see on a dealer lot.

What he’s seeing raises a practical question for buyers here at home: What happens when other markets are flooded with cheaper, rapidly improving vehicles — while American consumers face higher prices and fewer straightforward options?

Bargains head east

Because Al’s channel is in Spanish, his reach extends across Latin America and into Europe. That audience brings invitations: Bolivia, Argentina, Chile, the Dominican Republic, Costa Rica, Spain. And when he lands in those markets, he often finds himself driving cars unfamiliar to U.S. buyers.

A major reason: Chinese brands are no longer fringe players in many regions.

Al is blunt about the shift. Five to 10 years ago, he says, he would have dismissed many of these vehicles. Today he sees better interiors, stronger feature sets, and long warranties backing them up.

But the real story is price.

In several markets, buyers are offered vehicles that undercut U.S. pricing dramatically — sometimes at what he describes as “half the price” of comparable models here. Whether that pricing would survive U.S. regulatory and labor realities is another question. But for consumers abroad, the appeal is obvious: new-car affordability that hasn’t vanished.

That’s something American buyers increasingly struggle to find.

Redirecting competition

In the U.S., tariffs and dealer franchise laws make it difficult for Chinese automakers to sell directly here. But as Karl points out, barriers don’t eliminate competition — they redirect it.

If Chinese brands gain massive volume in Europe, South America, and elsewhere, they gain scale. Scale means supplier leverage, faster iteration, and more resources to improve product.

For American consumers, the implications are concrete:

  • If global competitors grow rapidly elsewhere, they get stronger — even without entering the U.S.
  • If the U.S. market remains more closed and more expensive, buyers here risk paying more while seeing less variety.

“Global competition” may sound abstract. But it shows up as pricing, features, and whether a truly affordable new car is even an option.

RELATED: No new cars under $50K? Thank the government

NurPhoto/Getty Images

Tesla or BVD?

We turn to Tesla, where reports suggest the Model S and Model X may be phased out amid slowing sales.

Al offers an international perspective. In places like Bolivia, he says, Tesla still signals status. Owning one means you’ve arrived. He also claims that Teslas sourced through China appear better assembled than some U.S.-market examples.

Karl widens the lens: BYD has now surpassed Tesla in global EV sales — even though BYD sells none of those vehicles in the United States. Meanwhile U.S. EV growth has cooled compared to earlier momentum.

For buyers, this is a lesson in how automakers respond to pressure. When margins tighten and competition intensifies, companies cut slower-selling models and redirect investment. The future shifts toward autonomy, AI, robotics, and software ecosystems.

Show and sell

Our conversation shifts to auto shows — Detroit, L.A., Chicago, New York — and whether they’re fading into irrelevance.

At their best, auto shows solve a real consumer problem: They let buyers compare multiple brands in one place, sit in vehicles without pressure, and evaluate options without a salesperson hovering nearby.

Al argues it’s a mistake to let that disappear. He points to Detroit’s recent rebound — smaller than its glory days, but active — and contrasts it with international shows that are still thriving. In Qatar, he says, the show was sold out with lines out the door.

Consumers increasingly delay visiting dealerships until they’ve narrowed their choices online. Auto shows provide something dealerships often can’t: a neutral comparison environment.

In an era obsessed with “experiential marketing,” there’s nothing more experiential than physically sitting in a dozen competing vehicles in a single afternoon.

Influencers or experts?

Al describes watching an influencer perform handstands in front of a Mustang — without mentioning the car itself.

It’s easy to roll your eyes, but it also illustrates the reality: Automakers now market vehicles through personality-driven content as much as traditional reporting.

Journalists report on the car. Influencers incorporate the car into their personal brand. Both models coexist.

For consumers, this shift changes the information landscape: more personality and less structured analysis.

This makes discernment more important. Buyers who want real trade-offs, cost analysis, and ownership implications still need to seek out sources focused on the vehicle — not just the vibe.

Fragmented markets

Al’s story is partly about media evolution — how a creator adapts from print to YouTube to TikTok and beyond. But the larger story is about fragmentation.

Some markets are getting cheaper new-car options faster than we are. Some brands are gaining global dominance without ever touching the U.S. Meanwhile American buyers face rising transaction prices, heavier regulation, and fewer places to comparison-shop freely.

The auto industry may be global, but your buying experience is still local — and increasingly shaped by forces that don’t always align with consumer affordability.

Listen to the full episode of “The Drive with Lauren and Karl” (featuring Al Vazquez) below:

EV bubble bursting? Automakers lose billions as tax credits disappear



America’s largest automakers are retreating from their electric vehicle ambitions after taking staggering financial hits — a shift highlighted in a recent Wall Street Journal report revealing more than $50 billion in combined charges.

“Ford announced in December that it expected to take $19.5 billion in charges to retrench amid sinking EV demand. Together, Ford, General Motors and Jeep-maker Stellantis have now announced more than $50 billion in charges as they pull back on their EV ambitions,” the article in the Wall Street Journal reads.

“EV tax credit expiring, which was, of course, part of the Big Beautiful Bill, goes into effect late 2025,” BlazeTV host Stu Burguiere explains while looking at a chart from the Wall Street Journal.

“And you see monthly sales have dropped off by well over 50%, which is remarkable,” Stu says.


“Net profit, you see, everything going fine for these companies — General Motors, Ford, and Stellantis — until this EV credit goes away. Things drop through the floor. Again, when you’re building your business based on some government credit — if the only way it can succeed is if the government is giving you money, then you haven't built a business,” he explains.

“What you’ve built is a rent-seeking operation. What you’ve built is an opportunity to bilk other taxpayers to pay for your crappy business. That’s what we’ve built here with the EV bubble,” he continues.

And while other companies' EV sales are doing better than GM, Ford, and Stellantis, they are still dropping.

“The sales are dropping, and yes, they are dropping by more in the United States,” Stu says.

“Remember, if you have built a company, basically, that is completely dependent on the government giving you free money every time you sell something, you haven’t really built a business at all,” he adds.

Want more from Stu?

To enjoy more of Stu's lethal wit, wisdom, and mockery, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Waymo Renames Its New Driverless Cars To Scrub References to CCP-Linked Chinese Company That Makes Them

Waymo, the buzzy driverless car startup, recently rebranded its newest robotaxi model, choosing the name of a small California town to create a sense of "familiarity" for customers. The company that actually makes the vehicles, Zeekr, is based in China—and it has extensive ties to the Chinese Communist Party, a Washington Free Beacon review found.

The post Waymo Renames Its New Driverless Cars To Scrub References to CCP-Linked Chinese Company That Makes Them appeared first on .

Top 5 funniest Trump moments of 2025



President Donald Trump has secured a spot as one of the most iconic figures in American history. While many of his significant political actions are certain to be remembered, so will the countless clips and memes throughout his time in office.

Here are the five funniest Trump moments of his second presidency so far.

5. Making plastic straws great again

In the early weeks of his second term, Trump signed the "number one trending" executive order ending the "forced use" of paper straws across the country.

During the signing, Trump quipped about the ineffectiveness of paper straws, noting they "explode" in drinks, rendering them useless and often frustrating to drink from.

"We're going back to plastic straws," Trump said. "These things don't work. ... On occasion they break, they explode. If something's hot, they don't last very long. Like, a matter of minutes, sometimes a matter of seconds. It's a ridiculous situation. So, we're going back to plastic straws. I think it's OK."

"I don't think that plastic is going to affect a shark very much as they're munching their way through the ocean," Trump added.

4. "Everything's computer!"

Trump shared a unique friendship with serial entrepreneur Elon Musk, whose many business ventures include Tesla. These electric cars that were once one of the most iconic and prevalent vehicles in Silicon Valley quickly became associated with Musk and Trump's political alliance.

In support of Musk, Trump had several Tesla models shown at the White House, where he candidly reviewed a Tesla vehicle himself.

"Oh wow, it's beautiful!" Trump said as he stepped into the Tesla. "Wow. That's beautiful. This is a different panel than I've — everything's computer!"

3. Trick-or-treat

Trump recreated one of his most iconic moments during Halloween, when the White House hosts an annual trick-or-treat on the South Lawn, where the president and the first lady hand out candy to children.

In 2019, one of Trump's funniest unscripted moments was when a child in an inflatable Minion costume came to the White House for candy. Trump, unsure of where to hand off the candy bar, made the executive decision to place it on the Minion's head, producing one of the most meme-able moments of his first term.

Trump re-created this interaction in 2025 when a child dressed as Marshmello, a DJ who wears a marshmallow-shaped mask, came through the line. Just as he did in 2019, Trump opted to set the candy bar on the flat top of the marshmallow, sending the trick-or-treater on his way.

2. Autopen presidency

As Trump works to solidify his legacy after his second term, he has taken it upon himself to spruce up the White House grounds with a new ballroom, a paved patio in the Rose Garden, and touches of gold pretty much every place he can.

He has also made sure to commemorate those presidents who came before him.

One new feature at the White House is Trump's hall of presidents, featuring an array of gold-framed presidential portraits alongside a walkway overlooking the Rose Garden. Trump cleverly added his own flair to the commemorative walkway, featuring a framed photo of the autopen between his 45th and 47th presidential portrait, memorializing former President Joe Biden's autopen scandal.

1. The N-word

Trump has always had a flair for the dramatic, often echoing the showmanship of his reality TV days. Love him or hate him, he knows how to capture a crowd's attention.

In one of his funniest and most underrated political speeches of 2025, Trump delivered an edgy punchline in an address to military brass in Quantico.

"It was really a stupid person that ... mentioned the word 'nuclear,'" Trump said during the address.

"I moved a submarine or two ... over to the coast of Russia, just to be careful, because we can't let people throw around that word," he continued.

"I call it the N-word," Trump added. "There are two N-words, and you can't use either of them."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!