Electric vehicle maker Rivian missed Wall Street’s expectations for revenue on Thursday, with sales coming in lower than anticipated in the third quarter.

The Irvine-based company reported revenue of $874 million in the three months ending Sept. 30., which fell short of the $992 million projected by analysts, according to FactSet. The company recorded revenue of $1.3 billion during the same period a year ago.

In a shareholder letter, Rivian attributed the revenue drop to a production disruption and “a more challenging consumer environment.”

Rivian faces several hurdles, including supply chain problems, safety issues and a slowing demand for electric vehicles from consumers worried about cost and convenient charging options.

RJ Scaringe, the company’s founder and chief executive, said in a call with analysts that it’s been a “tough quarter” for Rivian because of the supply chain hiccups and fixing that has been at the top of the company’s priorities.

“We’re working very, very hard to address that,” said Scaringe, adding that the company sees the challenge as a “short-term issue.”

Automakers are also bracing for more uncertainty after Republican Donald Trump won the 2024 presidential election this week, securing his return to the White House. Trump, while he has softened his criticism of electric vehicles after Tesla Chief Executive Elon Musk backed him, has considered ending a $7,500 federal tax credit for new electric vehicle purchases.

Consumers who lease Rivian vehicles are able to take advantage of that tax credit, but there are also income requirements, so most of their customers don’t qualify. With Trump potentially placing more tariffs on imported goods, the company has focused on sourcing suppliers that aren’t going to be subject to large tariffs, Scaringe said.

“There’s a lot of policy elements here that are in play and we’re watching it very closely,” he said on the call. Manufacturers are keeping an eye on how tariffs could affect the price of raw materials.

The company reported a net loss of $1.1 billion, or $1.08 per share, in the third quarter, compared with a loss of $1.4 billion during the same period last year.

Rivian made its public debut in 2021 and has seen its share price drop 42% in the last year. Rivian shares closed at $10.04, up 3.35 %, on Thursday.

The company’s share price took a hit last month when the startup missed delivery expectations for the third quarter and lowered its production forecast, reportedly because of miscommunication with its supplier of copper windings. Rivian produced 13,157 vehicles at its manufacturing facility in Normal, Ill., and delivered 10,018 vehicles in the third quarter.

As the company has tried to find a path to profitability, it has inked high-profile deals with partners including Amazon and German automaker Volkswagen Group, which said this year it would invest $5 billion in Rivian.

Known for its sleek electric adventure vehicles, Rivian’s pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles stand out on the road. For some consumers, though, the prices of the vehicles are too high. The company’s R1S SUV starts at $75,900 and the R1T pickup truck starts at $69,900. Rivian is planning to release a cheaper and more compact electric SUV, known as the R2, in 2026.

Rivian said Thursday it signed an agreement with LG Energy Solution to provide cylindrical battery cells for the R2.

The company is planning to close its joint venture with Volkswagen in the fourth quarter.

It was perhaps natural that campaign coverage of the presidential candidates’ healthcare policies began and ended with abortion rights; since June 2022, when the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, 20 states have banned abortions or enacted draconian restrictions on the procedure.

That landscape could turn even more dire with the reelection of Donald Trump. But many other healthcare issues were implicitly on the ballot Tuesday. Republicans may well feel empowered to continue their long campaign against the nation’s public health infrastructure, to step up their attacks on science, and to spread the anti-vaccine mantra of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has worked his way into Trump’s inner circle.

The Biden administration’s progress in making healthcare more accessible and affordable for all Americans, especially seniors on Medicare, is almost certain to be rolled back. RFK Jr. and other healthcare quacks, such as Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo, may move into national policy-making. Religion-based policies may move to the fore, shouldering science-based policies aside. The plundering of healthcare institutions by private equity investors could pick up steam.

If any of these eventualities come to pass, America’s health profile will be in danger of declining, and sharply. The main victims would be women, seniors and low-income households.

Let’s examine the particulars. Some of these derive from the Heritage Foundation’s notorious Project 2025, a road map to a reactionary future that is sure to animate many Trump administration policies. But others reflect policy efforts already tried in red states or promoted during Trump’s first term.

ABORTION: Protections for abortion rights were on the ballot in 10 states, and passed in seven — not including Florida, where a measure rolling back the state’s draconian abortion ban garnered 57% of the vote but fell short of the 60% required to pass. (That threshold was enacted in 2006 after it was placed on the ballot by a Republican-controlled legislature; as it happens, the 60% rule passed even though it did not itself garner 60% of the vote.)

In only two other states is a supermajority required to pass a ballot measure: Colorado (55% required) and New Hampshire (two-thirds, or 66.7%).

The seven states in which voters protected abortion rights by enshrining them in the state constitution were Arizona, Colorado, Maryland, Missouri, Montana, New York and Nevada. Measures failed in South Dakota and Nebraska.

Republican and conservative hostility to abortion rights has persisted despite the ghastly deaths of pregnant women because doctors were unwilling to terminate their pregnancies because the treatment would break the law in their states, even in an emergency, and expose the doctors to consequences including criminal prosecution.

Trump has specifically said he would not support a national abortion ban “under any circumstances,” but that leaves open a multitude of ways he could achieve that goal by another name, whether by applying an ancient federal law to constrain the shipment of abortion pills, installing reproductive rights opponents at federal healthcare agencies as he did in his first term, or some other means. Plainly, abortion rights aren’t safe in a Trump presidency.

GENDER: Trump made gender-related medical treatments a target of his campaign, spinning a deranged fantasy about schools subjecting children to gender-changing surgery behind their parents’ backs; Project 2025 disdains what it calls “the new woke gender ideology, which has as a principal tenet ‘gender affirming care’ and ‘sex-change’ surgeries on minors.”

This parallels laws passed in several red states barring any gender-affirming care for minors. In fact, surgery is not part of the standard of care in gender-affirming cases involving children and adolescents. The authors of Project 2025 advocate barring transgender individuals from serving in the military.

AFFORDABLE CARE ACT: The repeal of Obamacare, as it’s familiarly known, has been a prime goal of Republicans since the law’s enactment in 2010. The law was saved from repeal in 2017, during the last Trump administration, by a single “no” vote from the late Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).

It’s still a target. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) vowed last month that there would be “No Obamacare” in another Trump term. The law is popular, however, favored by 62% of Americans according to a KFF opinion poll in May. Trump has repeatedly promised to offer an alternative program, but never has done so.

Project 2025 calls for giving more latitude to bare-bones health plans such as association health plans and short-term health plans. These don’t meet ACA standards because they often exclude essential healthcare services and can mislead consumers into thinking an illness or treatment is covered — learning the truth only when they try to obtain coverage.

The road map also calls for curtailing the ACA’s contraceptive mandate, which it says “has been the source of years of egregious attacks on many Americans’ religious and moral beliefs.” (Of course, the ACA doesn’t require that anyone actually use a contraceptive, only that they be covered without cost-sharing.)

It calls for removing the “morning-after pill” Ella from the contraceptive mandate. It also calls for turning the clock back on the Food and Drug Administration’s safety approval for the abortion pill mifepristone, which is currently the target of a lawsuit file by antiabortion activists.

MEDICAID and MEDICARE: These crucial federal healthcare programs — the first serving low-income Americans and the second serving seniors — are in the GOP’s gunsights. Project 2025 claims that they are “the principal drivers of our $31-trillion national debt. … In essence, our deficit problem is a Medicare and Medicaid problem.”

Never mind that the single biggest driver of federal deficits is the tax cut for corporations and the wealthy signed by Trump in 2017, which could add $5.2 trillion to deficits over the next 10 years.

By Project 2025’s reckoning, Medicare and Medicaid together cost $17.8 trillion from 1967 through 2020, a span of 53 years. This year, the two programs enroll more than 140 million Americans, or more than 41% of the population. (Medicare members also pay premiums for some of its parts.)

Although Trump has vowed not to cut Medicare benefits, conservative antagonism toward Medicaid, the state-federal healthcare program for low-income Americans, has never ebbed. In 2014, under former Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.), House Republicans proposed converting the program from one that covered a percentage of state spending on healthcare to enrollees into a block-grant structure, that lacked the flexibility needed to confront disease outbreaks as they occur. Ryan’s plan would have cut Medicaid funding by 26% over a decade.

It failed, but the idea was taken up by Trump in his first term, though it wasn’t enacted. Expect it to be considered again. Project 2025 advocates adding work requirements to Medicaid, an idea that has proved in the past to achieve nothing in terms of reducing joblessness or improving enrollees’ health, but did end up throwing thousands of people out of the program.

Permission that the last Trump administration granted some states to impose work requirements for Medicaid was overturned by a federal judge in 2019; the Biden White House consigned the idea to the dumpster.

Project 2025 asserts that the ACA “mandates that states must expand their Medicaid eligibility standards” to include everyone at or below 138% of the federal poverty level. This is a lie. Following a Supreme Court ruling, the ACA leaves it to individual states to cover childless low-income individuals; 10 states, all of which are under the control of GOP governors or legislatures, still haven’t done so. The project also calls for eliminating the 90% government match of the cost of that coverage and reducing it to a “fairer and more rational level,” presumably lower.

VACCINES: The rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines, which averted about 1.1 million U.S. deaths and more than 10.3 million hospitalizations within a year of their introduction in December 2020, was one of the few genuine achievements of the first Trump term. So it’s a mystery why he has turned against them, and against vaccines in general.

During his campaign he promised, “I will not give one penny to any school that has a vaccine mandate or a mask mandate.”

It’s possible that this reflects the sway that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has exercised over Trump, who has promised to place RFK Jr. in a policymaking role over healthcare. The prospect should make all Americans queasy, for Kennedy is a one-stop shop for conspiracy theories ranging from anti-vaccine claims to outright antisemitism.

The truth is that vaccines are indisputably a triumph of medical science. They’ve eradicated smallpox from the face of the Earth and reduced diseases such as measles, polio and whooping cough to occasional outbreaks (among the unvaccinated). If Trump and RFK Jr. intend to make the world safe again for these diseases, they should come right out and say so.

To the authors of Project 2025, the COVID vaccines along with other anti-pandemic policies were nothing but infringements on individual rights (don’t think about the children and families whose rights to a healthy life would be jeopardized by the elimination of school vaccine mandates).

The project rails against the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institutes of Health — the country’s premier public health agencies — for “the irrational, destructive, un-American mask and vaccine mandates that were imposed upon an ostensibly free people during the COVID-19 pandemic.” It also claims that “masks provide little to no benefit in preventing the spread of viruses and might even be counterproductive,” a statement that is unadulterated BS.

But that’s just one example of how the right wing, which will now occupy a favored perch in the White House, has elevated an amorphous concept of individual freedom over the undeniably real benefits, to millions of people, of robust pubic health imperatives based on communal responsibility.

How much worse will things have to get before the public wakes up to the consequences? Why in heaven’s name would anyone want to find out?

SAN FRANCISCO —  On election night, as Republican Donald Trump inched closer to reclaiming the U.S. presidency, some tech executives and venture capitalists rejoiced.

“The people of America gave @realDonaldTrump a crystal clear mandate for change tonight,” Elon Musk posted on his social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter.

The eccentric billionaire, who shared a Photoshopped image of himself carrying a sink into the Oval Office, has been a vocal supporter of Trump, who defeated Vice President Kamala Harris to win the White House.

The 2024 U.S. presidential election has been a wild ride, highlighting a divide between venture capitalists and tech executives — some of whom spent millions of dollars backing Trump while others poured money into Harris’ campaign. Both sides argued the candidates they support would benefit the tech industry.

Box Chief Executive Aaron Levie, who backed Harris and made the case the Democrat is pro-business, congratulated Trump on his win late Tuesday night. “What’s great about America is that we’re on a rocket ship right now and can keep accelerating with the right policies and execution,” Levie posted on X.

Musk stands to benefit from a second Trump presidency. He runs companies such as Tesla and SpaceX that hold billions of dollars in government contracts, but has also clashed with regulators. Trump said he would make Musk the head of a new “government efficiency commission,” sparking concerns about potential conflicts of interest. Once critical of policies that benefit electric vehicles, Trump softened his tone after Musk endorsed him.

Trump‘s and Harris’ campaigns didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Here’s how a Trump presidency could reshape the tech industry:

Artificial intelligence

Trump plans to repeal President Biden’s 2023 AI executive order, which aims to ensure businesses develop technology responsibly because he thinks it hinders innovation.

“In its place, Republicans support AI Development rooted in Free Speech and Human Flourishing,” according to a document that outlines policies he supports.

There will probably be some form of AI regulation under Trump, analysts say, but exactly what that will look like is unclear.

“Knowing what you’re going to be dealing with really matters for the business community,” said Todd O’Boyle, senior director of technology policy with the Chamber of Progress, a tech industry advocacy group. “We are entering really uncharted waters.”

Under Trump, there could be “rejuvenated interest” for state AI regulation, he said.

In California, lawmakers proposed a slew of AI-related bills this year and O’Boyle expects that will continue. Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed Senate Bill 1047, a hotly contested bill that aimed to require developers of advanced AI models to adopt safety measures.

Trump could make a big push into AI innovation, analysts say. As the use of AI in the military rises, Trump’s campaign says he would “invest in cutting edge research and advanced technologies” in part to modernize the military, which would benefit tech firms such as Palantir and Anduril Industries.

Palmer Luckey, who founded Anduril Industries and supports Trump, urged his followers on X to “Pokemon Go to the polls.” As Trump moved closer to victory on election night, Luckey posted a photo of Pokémon character Ash Ketchum with a tear (apparently of joy) streaming down his face.

“When it comes to AI, what will rule is, if there’s money to be made, it’ll be supported,” said Olaf Groth, faculty member at UC Berkeley’s Haas School of Business and chief executive of think tank Cambrian Futures.

Trump could also punish companies that cross him.

His campaign has said he would pass a digital bill of rights and legislation to “drastically limit the ability of big social media platforms to restrict free speech.” Trump, who operates his own his own social media platform, Truth Social, has been critical of Facebook’s parent company Meta Platforms and Google, accusing them of censoring his speech, allegations they deny.

Citing competition with China, Trump has proposed imposing tariffs so businesses prioritize American suppliers. In the past, tech titans such as Apple that rely heavily on China to manufacture products such as the iPhone and the Apple Watch have managed to get tariffs waived.

O’Boyle said that the tech industry is “tariffs skeptical.”

“Tariffs are a tax on consumers,” O’Boyle said. “It’s hard to see how tariffs are going to address the economic challenges in the country. Tariffs slow trade. They create friction to trade.”

Cryptocurrency

Some of Trump’s vocal supporters include investors and twins Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, who co-founded cryptocurrency exchange Gemini, and have accused the Biden administration of trying to destroy their industry.

A Trump presidency is a “huge win for crypto,” said Daniel Ives, a managing director at Wedbush Securities.

The Biden administration has proposed tax reporting requirements for cryptocurrency brokers and issued an executive order in 2022 to crack down on cryptocurrency scams, fraud and theft. The executive order also mentions exploring the creation of a digital U.S. dollar.

In his policy document, Trump’s campaign signaled he would be more friendly toward the cryptocurrency industry and roll back the Biden’s administrations actions. Republicans oppose the creation of a digital U.S. dollar.

“To the extent that the Biden administration was skeptical of fintech and crypto, it’s a reasonable bet that the Trump administration will reverse any fintech and crypto skeptical policies that the Biden administration stood up,” O’Boyle said.

Antitrust and TikTok

U.S. regulators have been trying to rein in the power of tech heavyweights such as Meta, Amazon and Google, which the U.S. government is considering breaking up after a federal judge declared that the search giant has an illegal monopoly on search.

For all his concerns about the power of tech companies, Trump signaled he’s wary about breaking up Google. In an October interview moderated by Bloomberg News, Trump said he would “do something” but stopped short of saying he would break up the search giant.

“It’s a very dangerous thing because we want to have great companies,” he said. “We don’t want China to have these companies. Right now, China is afraid of Google.”

Some tech industry observers expect that Trump will name a new Federal Trade Commission chair, pushing Lina Khan out of the role.

The previous Trump administration pushed for Chinese tech company ByteDance to sell TikTok due to the U.S. government’s security concerns with the popular video app’s ties to China. Trump, who has raised free speech concerns about banning TikTok, might be open to allowing the tech platform to stay in the U.S. so it can compete with Google and Meta, analysts say.

“The irony is, even though Trump started the TikTok ban narrative, he’s changed his tune significantly and would actually support TikTok within the U.S. with restrictions, and any talk of a ban would actually dissipate for TikTok,” Ives said.

In a video posted on social media in September, Trump said, “We’re not doing anything with TikTok.”