I would somewhat limit that saying to individual stocks and companies. Trading the broad market SPX/SPY is much more, slightly, less odd and mysterious and unexpected. Easier to gauge and read and predict and manage and tame.
There are a few exceptions, such as Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, Peter Schiff, Gerald Celente, Jim Rogers ... but the corporate media is giving them hardly any air time, for obvious reasons. I guess Tesla's bond holders and some Wall Street institutions have an inherent interest in keeping the Tesla bubble intact for now.
Musk knows what he's doing, I don't like his approach but I'm still thinking about buying a Tesla purely to use the near zero cost of motoring and annoy the senses out of everyone, hey, I'm all for paying £0.82 to park for 4hrs in W1. Tesla is like Bitcoin, it breaks all the rules, no one has any clue what to do with it, and while it lasts you can use it to your advantage, you know, the one thing no one wants you to have because ultimately it costs them money.
Yeah, the "make America great again" hype... There are a few investors (Elon Musk, FMR LLC a Fidelity company, Baillie Gifford & Co, T. Rowe Price Associates, Vanguard Group) that have a lot (billions) to lose if Tesla would go down. These investors will manipulate all they can till they can recover their money. They have their own plunge prevention team.
I'm all for environmental protection and cutting down on all forms of pollution. I'd separate the 3 major aspects of the Tesla question: (1) the pro-environment aspect, (2) the utility aspect from the average car user's perspective, and (3) the stock trading aspect. For (1), the pros of electric vehicles are widely known, but there are cons: the heavy battery packs consume energy, and they contain toxic substances that will have to be dealt with once their limited life span expires. The electricity for charging EVs has to be generated somehow and somewhere, by nuclear power plants, coal-fired power plants, etc. So pollution from those power plants will increase. For (2), Tesla is raising the range of their EVs simply by packing more batteries in the car, and the heavy weight means accelerated wear on tires and other moving parts. EVs require an extensive network of charging stations for support, which is not going to be available in the short term. For "mass market" Model 3, the single monitor for all controls represents a major single point of failure, i.e., an unproven, highly risky engineering decision. For (3), the price of TSLA shares will ultimately depend on the profitability of the company. Tesla is not profitable and will likely remain so in the foreseeable future. Tesla is a car maker. So it must achieve economy of scale to compete with other car makers. Unfortunately that's not happening, as the latest rounds of news have indicated. Assembly line design and operational flows etc have turned out to be poorly planned. Now other established car makers with proven mass production experience are entering the EV market as well. I'm in favor of competitions, but I'm not optimistic about Tesla's chances in light of Elon Musk's track record.
I agree with absolutely everything you've said, but if I have an opportunity to stick to the governments I will take it, and I have a feeling this is the general concept of all Tesla owners, even if it means a capital loss.