Who’s Still Sending Virtue Signals?
Kamala Harris and the evolution of San Francisco progressives.
2 min
It seems that just about all San Francisco political leaders have lately acknowledged the need to rein in progressive policies—except perhaps the one running for President of the United States.
Compared to past elections, the mayor’s race in San Francisco this year has been striking for its focus on the need for law and order. Even many leftist politicos are sounding more moderate these days and offering fewer progressive virtue signals—perhaps because such signals don’t yield progress and lack virtue.
The San Francisco Standard’s David Sjostedt reports on the incumbent running for re-election:
How very Texan of Ms. Breed. Earlier this year she led a successful referendum campaign to cut off cash assistance to drug addicts who refuse to enter treatment programs. While she’s at it, perhaps she’ll consider turning off the subsidy spigot entirely for able-bodied adults.
Meanwhile across the Bay, there is a similar political hunger for a new approach to social problems. Rigel Robinson, a former member of the Berkeley City Council, opines in the Standard:
Back in San Francisco, another Breed departure from the kooky dogma of the extreme left is suddenly relevant to our national political discourse. Last December this column noted a Jose Martinez report for CBS News in San Francisco:
The office would have been a precursor to attempting to redistribute money from people who never owned slaves to people who were never enslaved. It isn’t just the principle of reparations plans that’s offensive , or the difficulty and destructiveness of government officials trying to precisely define the level of ancestral guilt or victimhood within the great American melting pot. It’s also the money.
In early 2023, after studying the work of San Francisco’s reparations committee, Lee Ohanian at Stanford’s Hoover Institution provided a ballpark estimate:
Pretty much everyone in San Francisco, even those who favor expansive social spending, recognized that this leap into the depths of progressive insanity wasn’t going to happen.
In February of this year, Aldo Toledo reported in the San Francisco Chronicle:
Opposing reparations plans—un-American efforts to punish or reward people based on their ancestry—is now a perfectly safe space for politicians on the left to show how reasonable they have become. If a massive reparations plan failed in San Francisco for goodness sake, politicians campaigning nationwide can be comfortable rejecting it, too.
But the Democratic presidential candidate from San Francisco still won’t do it. Curtis Bunn reports for NBC News:
Any gathering of journalists is likely to be deflated when a candidate refuses to stake out the leftwardmost position on an issue of public policy. But for the rest of America, it’s bound to be disturbing that Ms. Harris won’t repudiate an extreme position she held as a presidential candidate in the last election.
The logical conclusion is that she’s still just as radical as her record.
From making unpopular decisions to learning when to listen, leaders from five businesses reveal what nobody prepared them for — and how running a company has challenged their expectations.
Technology and semiconductor shares fell sharply as investors questioned the debt financing the AI infrastructure boom and confronted higher rates and Chinese competition.
Elon Musk is exploring a potential merger between Tesla and SpaceX, a deal that could reshape the future of AI, robotics, autonomous vehicles and space technology. With a combined valuation potentially reaching $3.5 trillion, the move could bring Musk’s vision of an interconnected technology ecosystem closer to reality, although a deal remains uncertain.
5 min
Elon Musk has engineered ties between Tesla TSLA 3.41%increase; up pointing triangle and SpaceX SPCX 7.79%increase; up pointing triangle that are hard to break, and now he wants to fuse them together permanently.
Musk has run both Tesla and SpaceX concurrently over the past two decades, using a schedule that dictated which days he spent focused on each business.
The companies have often shared resources and personnel, signaling their close ties. Last year, SpaceX looked into creating a spacesuit for Tesla’s humanoid robot Optimus, a person familiar with the matter said. Tesla last week showed off its new Roadster, a vehicle featuring SpaceX rocket thrusters that it hopes to soon bring to market.
And in recent months, Musk has repositioned both companies by expanding beyond their core operations toward a shared mission centered on artificial intelligence.
The world’s richest man on Tuesday signaled his interest in tying up SpaceX and Tesla, marking what would be the biggest corporate merger of all time. Because he serves as chief executive of SpaceX and Tesla, Musk said committees of independent directors at both companies are evaluating a possible deal, adding that a transaction might not come to fruition.
The committees will likely evaluate, with lawyers and bankers, how each company would fare in a potential deal and how a deal might best be structured. They then present their conclusions to their respective boards, who typically vote on whether to proceed.
“It’s an odd Kabuki dance where two groups of people are talking and I can’t be in the conversation,” Musk told SpaceX investors on Tuesday in response to an analyst’s question about a potential deal.
For Musk, the merger supports his vision of a world full of autonomous cars, humanoid robots and weekly rocket launches, as well as the data centers and satellites required to keep the whole thing running.
Some investors and analysts said they expect a transaction would be structured as an all-stock deal, with SpaceX potentially paying a modest premium for Tesla shares.
SpaceX, which has a market value of about $2 trillion, said it is seeing sharp growth in revenue across its businesses, which include operating data centers, launching rockets and operating satellite networks such as the internet service Starlink. Tesla is valued at about $1.5 trillion and is expanding its operations beyond its automotive and energy business. Shares in both companies traded higher following the news Tuesday.
Musk’s substantial ownership stakes in both companies, along with voting control at SpaceX, has enabled him to set the deal in motion. Analysts and investors said the deal will probably face regulatory scrutiny internationally, though some see Musk’s close relationship with the Trump administration as an asset to getting approval.
Blurred lines
The companies haven’t said which directors are on the special committees evaluating a potential deal. Several SpaceX and Tesla board members have either personal or business ties to Musk. And like Musk, venture capitalist Ira Ehrenpreis sits on both boards.
In a filing this week, Tesla outlined millions of dollars in business agreements with SpaceX and its subsidiaries last year, including $143 million in car sales to SpaceX, $3.3 million in advertising that it bought on the social-media platform X and $430 million in revenue from the sale of Megapack batteries for SpaceX’s data centers.
The companies also split the cost of resources including the use of Musk’s SpaceX jet and the bill for his personal security, which he runs through a private company.
Employees at both companies routinely move between companies to work on special projects, and some executives have dual roles, including Charles Kuehmann, vice president of materials engineering at both SpaceX and Tesla, and Ashok Elluswamy, the vice president of AI software at Tesla who runs a joint venture with SpaceX called Digital Optimus.
Over the years, Musk has launched new startups within his empire, including brain-implant company Neuralink, underground-tunnel developer the Boring Company and xAI, the AI startup that merged with SpaceX in February.
It is that AI business that Musk thinks can serve a market worth tens of trillions of dollars, justifying the need for a merger.
The business case goes like this: Tesla is developing robotaxis and robots, which it calls “physical AI.” SpaceX is working on the back end of physical AI: the data-center capacity and internet connection required for those robotaxis and robots to operate continuously.
“I don’t see what the value of Tesla is if it’s not merged with SpaceX,” said investment adviser Ross Gerber, a former Tesla bull turned critic invested in both companies. “If they don’t merge, the brains of everything that runs Tesla is owned by another company.”
On top of it all, both companies face constraints on the supply chains they need to make this world a reality, particularly when it comes to chips. To address this, Musk earlier this year announced a joint venture between Tesla, SpaceX and Intel to design and manufacture chips in Texas. “The most epic chip-building exercise by far,” he has said.
Musk at the wheel
For Musk, a merger would also solve two problems: demands on his attention and his lack of control at Tesla.
Tesla for years was Musk’s only public company, a status that came with greater scrutiny. There, Musk reports to a public board, as well as individual investors who make up around 30% of Tesla’s voting power, according to FactSet.
The question of Musk’s attention became a particular focus for investors and the board in recent years after he acquired Twitter in 2022 and launched xAI in 2023, and again in 2025 as he spent time in Washington, D.C., running the Department of Government Efficiency in the early months of President Trump’s second term.
As Tesla’s car business suffered in 2025, Musk threatened to take his AI ambitions outside the company if he wasn’t granted 25% voting control. Last November, Tesla shareholders approved a new pay package for Musk, which created a path for him to vastly expand his stake.
As of Sept. 30, Musk owned a roughly 20% stake in Tesla, according to the company’s proxy filing.
The SpaceX IPO gave Musk a different path. When SpaceX went public in June, the deal’s structure enabled him to have more than 80% voting power at the company—so much that he can’t be fired and decisions can’t be made without his support.
If SpaceX acquires Tesla, he will likely stay in control.
A survey of people with at least $1 million in investable assets found women in their 30s and 40s look nothing like older generations in terms of assets and priorities
Powerhouse real estate couple Avi Khan and Kaylea Sayer welcome their daughter while balancing record-breaking careers, proving success and family can grow side by side.
