Electric cars’ winter weakness, Dems’ ‘identity’ disaster and other commentary

From the right: Electric Cars’ Winter Weakness

“The Biden administration is throwing billions of dollars at consumers trying to get them to buy a product that only works nine months out of the year,” as a huge “problem with all electric cars . . . is that cold weather inhibits the chemical reactions necessary for the battery to generate power,” warns the Washington Examiner’s editorial board. “The battery is responsible for producing all the power the car needs” and “also responsible for heating the car itself.” So: “Not only do electric vehicle batteries have lower range in the cold, but they also take longer to charge,” leading to “long lines and freezing drivers at charging stations.” “If drivers want to buy electric cars, they should be allowed to do so. But forcing everyone to adopt an unreliable technology with insufficient infrastructure is self-defeating and cruel.”

Liberal: Dems’ ‘Identity’ Disaster

Democrats “made a terrible mistake emphasizing identity over community fifty years ago,” and that’s led to “disaster,” as “the identity groups have become more complicated” with very different goals, laments Joe Klein at Sanity Clause. Dems’ “grievance agenda” and DEI programs are “indicative of past-thinking,” and “Biden has nothing to say about the future.” “At this point, the Dems need to offer an anti-identity agenda, an American unity agenda.” They need “someone who can offer a thrilling, inclusive defense of democracy based on common goals, not a riot of identities.”

Conservative: ‘Peace Process’ Piffle

Western diplomats insist “that the end of the Gaza war should be part of a wider negotiated settlement between Israel and the Palestinians, capped by the normalizing of ties between Israel and Saudi Arabia,” yet “how the war in Gaza ends will determine what’s possible thereafter,” argues Commentary’s Seth Mandel. “Hamas opposes the two-state solution, so removing it is a prerequisite for any statehood deal.” More important, polling “has long found far more support among the Palestinians for a vague two-state solution than for one in which the Palestinian state would be demilitarized.” The real “point of this exercise” is “to make Israel look like the intransigent party,” when the actual “reason a deal like this is such a longshot is because it would require the Palestinians to give up their armed struggle once and for all.”

Mideast desk: Iran Doesn’t Want a Wider War

Yes, “Iran is clearly asserting its military strength,” note Reuel Marc Gerecht & Ray Takeyh at The New York Times. But “that doesn’t mean its leaders want to be drawn into a wider war.” Why? Consider the domestic issues “preoccupying the regime.” Like “its most serious uprising since the revolution,” protests over the death of Mahsa Amini. And an “economic crisis because of corruption, chronic fiscal mismanagement and sanctions.” That’s as Ayatollah Ali Khamenei seeks “to install a like-minded successor.” Note, though, that while “Khamenei appears to be content” to let “Arab militias across the Middle East do what Tehran has been paying and training them to do,” “the more conflict Iran engages in” also “increases the chance” to “send the violence spinning out of control.”

Justice watch: Stealth Race Preferences

Ever since the Supreme Court rejected racial preferences in college admissions, schools have sought “a way around the decision,” such as by using “proxies for race,” fumes The Wall Street Journal’s William McGurn. So it was “disappointing to see the justices punt Monday” on a case about proxies involving a Virginia magnet high school. To boost minority enrollment, the magnet made moves to accept 1.5% of eighth-graders from every school in the district, meaning “qualified Asian-Americans” would “lose seats to less-qualified students from less-competitive schools.” The appeals court found this policy “race-neutral,” but as a lawyer for the plaintiffs notes, “using proxies for race” doesn’t make any policy “race neutral.” “It’s astounding,” marvels McGurn, “how many who pride themselves on their progressivism are comfortable with discriminating against Asian-Americans.”

— Compiled by The Post Editorial Board