WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:03.180 OK, let's let's try and make sense of this. It 00:00:03.180 --> 00:00:06.059 really feels like we're looking at an economic 00:00:06.059 --> 00:00:08.119 jigsaw puzzle right now, doesn't it? It really 00:00:08.119 --> 00:00:10.259 does. You've got pieces that just don't seem 00:00:10.259 --> 00:00:12.960 to fit together easily. Exactly. Like consumer 00:00:12.960 --> 00:00:15.480 confidence is down quite a bit, actually. But 00:00:15.480 --> 00:00:17.480 then, boom, the jobs report comes in better than 00:00:17.480 --> 00:00:20.280 anyone thought. Right. And then GDP, the big 00:00:20.280 --> 00:00:23.280 one, it actually shrank negative territory. But 00:00:23.280 --> 00:00:25.460 wait, there's like a Another way to slice it 00:00:25.460 --> 00:00:27.519 that shows things are actually pretty solid the 00:00:27.519 --> 00:00:30.019 core GDP figure Yeah, it paints a very different 00:00:30.019 --> 00:00:32.380 picture and then you throw in the political stuff 00:00:32.380 --> 00:00:36.719 elections heating up some Let's say unique policy 00:00:36.719 --> 00:00:39.560 ideas floating around definitely unique. So the 00:00:39.560 --> 00:00:41.740 real question for you know for you listening 00:00:41.740 --> 00:00:44.929 is What on earth does all this mean for your 00:00:44.929 --> 00:00:47.590 finances, for your planning? That's a goal today, 00:00:47.750 --> 00:00:50.289 right? To unpack this. Exactly. We've got a couple 00:00:50.289 --> 00:00:52.590 of key sources to help us. First, there's the 00:00:52.590 --> 00:00:54.649 Leidenberg Market View Weekly from early May 00:00:54.649 --> 00:00:57.270 that gives us the economic rundown, the market 00:00:57.270 --> 00:01:00.369 reaction. And second, we're looking at the electoral 00:01:00.369 --> 00:01:03.350 vote news from about the same time. That's going 00:01:03.350 --> 00:01:07.150 to dive into the politics, key races, legal stuff. 00:01:07.450 --> 00:01:09.969 Got it. So we're connecting the dots between 00:01:09.969 --> 00:01:12.390 the economy and the political scene. That's the 00:01:12.390 --> 00:01:14.709 plan. Trying to pull out what really matters 00:01:14.709 --> 00:01:16.750 for you from all this noise. All right, let's 00:01:16.750 --> 00:01:19.930 dive into the economy first. That consumer confidence 00:01:19.930 --> 00:01:23.250 dropped down to 86 .0 in April. That was, well, 00:01:23.489 --> 00:01:25.530 lower than expected, right? And a big fall from 00:01:25.530 --> 00:01:28.810 March. A significant drop, yeah. And what's interesting 00:01:28.810 --> 00:01:31.650 is the report... directly links it, or at least 00:01:31.650 --> 00:01:34.670 suggests a strong link, to all the talk about 00:01:34.670 --> 00:01:37.170 tariffs. Ah, so people are actually hearing this 00:01:37.170 --> 00:01:39.909 tariff talk and thinking, uh -oh. It seems like 00:01:39.909 --> 00:01:41.890 it. You know, worries about prices going up for 00:01:41.890 --> 00:01:44.569 everyday stuff, maybe uncertainty about jobs, 00:01:44.730 --> 00:01:47.629 if tariffs hit certain industries. It feels like 00:01:47.629 --> 00:01:49.829 that policy debate is really starting to filter 00:01:49.829 --> 00:01:52.269 down. OK, so that potential future pain is making 00:01:52.269 --> 00:01:54.849 people nervous now. But then, that April jobs 00:01:54.849 --> 00:01:59.010 report... 177 ,000 new jobs. That sounds pretty 00:01:59.010 --> 00:02:01.090 good. It does on the surface. Certainly better 00:02:01.090 --> 00:02:03.030 than the projections. Shows there's still hiring 00:02:03.030 --> 00:02:04.590 happening, especially in the private sector. 00:02:04.829 --> 00:02:07.189 But there's a but, isn't there? There is. You 00:02:07.189 --> 00:02:08.930 have to remember those revisions for February 00:02:08.930 --> 00:02:11.409 and March. They were revised down, quite a bit 00:02:11.409 --> 00:02:15.289 actually, by about 58 ,000 jobs total. Ah, OK, 00:02:15.310 --> 00:02:17.389 so maybe the trend isn't quite as strong as that 00:02:17.389 --> 00:02:20.530 one April number suggests. Exactly. Still positive, 00:02:20.710 --> 00:02:23.430 but maybe cooling off slightly. Unemployment 00:02:23.430 --> 00:02:26.490 held steady at 4 .2%. Job openings fell a bit. 00:02:26.889 --> 00:02:29.449 But quits actually increased, which can sometimes 00:02:29.449 --> 00:02:32.370 signal worker confidence. It's mixed. Mixed signals 00:02:32.370 --> 00:02:35.610 again. OK, and that brings us to GDP. First quarter, 00:02:36.389 --> 00:02:40.349 a negative read, minus 0 .3%. That sounds like 00:02:40.349 --> 00:02:42.409 contraction. It does, and if you just saw that 00:02:42.409 --> 00:02:44.849 headline, you'd definitely pause. But remember 00:02:44.849 --> 00:02:47.530 the tariffs. Right, the connection again. The 00:02:47.530 --> 00:02:51.110 report highlights this massive, like, 41 % surge 00:02:51.110 --> 00:02:53.430 in imports just before the end of the quarter. 00:02:53.590 --> 00:02:55.710 Because businesses were rushing to get stuff 00:02:55.710 --> 00:02:57.969 in before potential tariffs hit. That's the most 00:02:57.969 --> 00:03:00.330 likely explanation, yeah. Stockpiling. And because 00:03:00.330 --> 00:03:03.009 imports are subtracted when calculated GDP. That 00:03:03.009 --> 00:03:05.889 huge jump dragged the whole number down, even 00:03:05.889 --> 00:03:08.710 if other parts of the economy were okay. Precisely. 00:03:08.800 --> 00:03:11.699 It creates a kind of distortion, which is why 00:03:11.699 --> 00:03:14.400 looking at core GDP is really helpful here. Explain 00:03:14.400 --> 00:03:17.500 that one again. Sure. Core GDP basically takes 00:03:17.500 --> 00:03:21.560 out the volatile stuff, net exports, so those 00:03:21.560 --> 00:03:24.000 imports we just talked about, government spending, 00:03:25.000 --> 00:03:27.580 and changes in business inventories. It focuses 00:03:27.580 --> 00:03:30.080 more on underlying private demand. And what did 00:03:30.080 --> 00:03:32.639 that show? It showed growth of 3 % in the first 00:03:32.639 --> 00:03:35.069 quarter. Pretty solid, actually, and consistent 00:03:35.069 --> 00:03:36.949 with what we've seen in previous years. OK, so 00:03:36.949 --> 00:03:40.009 that's crucial. The headline number looks bad, 00:03:40.150 --> 00:03:42.870 maybe tariff -related bad, but the underlying 00:03:42.870 --> 00:03:45.889 domestic economy, the core, still seems to be 00:03:45.889 --> 00:03:47.389 expanding reasonably well. That's the takeaway 00:03:47.389 --> 00:03:49.849 from the report, yes. The negative headline doesn't 00:03:49.849 --> 00:03:52.150 necessarily signal fundamental weakness. Got 00:03:52.150 --> 00:03:54.509 it. OK, what about inflation? Always a big concern. 00:03:54.889 --> 00:03:57.389 The PCE index. Right, the Personal Consumption 00:03:57.389 --> 00:04:00.330 Expenditures Price Index. Month over month. Both 00:04:00.330 --> 00:04:02.490 the main number and the core number, which strips 00:04:02.490 --> 00:04:05.250 out food and energy, were flat. So no big jump 00:04:05.250 --> 00:04:07.729 in April itself. OK, flat is good, right? Or 00:04:07.729 --> 00:04:10.889 not bad? Well, yes and no. The year -over -year 00:04:10.889 --> 00:04:14.009 numbers are still up. Headline PCE is up 2 .3 00:04:14.009 --> 00:04:16.850 % compared to last year. And core PCE is up 2 00:04:16.850 --> 00:04:20.009 .6%. Still above the Fed's target, then. What's 00:04:20.009 --> 00:04:22.649 driving that? It's mainly services. The report 00:04:22.649 --> 00:04:25.209 points specifically to inflation in the services 00:04:25.209 --> 00:04:28.829 sector. Think health care, insurance. transport 00:04:28.829 --> 00:04:32.170 that's keeping the overall number elevated. Falling 00:04:32.170 --> 00:04:34.050 energy prices have actually helped keep it from 00:04:34.050 --> 00:04:37.029 being even higher. So goods prices might be moderating, 00:04:37.129 --> 00:04:39.610 but the cost of services is still pushing inflation 00:04:39.610 --> 00:04:42.930 along. All right. So what does all this mean 00:04:42.930 --> 00:04:44.790 for the Federal Reserve? They've got an interest 00:04:44.790 --> 00:04:47.970 rate decision coming up. Cut rates. Hold steady. 00:04:48.250 --> 00:04:51.449 Given that strong -ish jobs report, even with 00:04:51.449 --> 00:04:53.509 the revisions and core inflation still running 00:04:53.509 --> 00:04:56.209 above their 2 % target, plus all this uncertainty 00:04:56.209 --> 00:04:58.660 around tariffs. The general thinking is they're 00:04:58.660 --> 00:05:00.339 unlikely to cut rates in the next meeting. Makes 00:05:00.339 --> 00:05:02.639 sense. Play it safe for now. Probably. Yeah. 00:05:02.980 --> 00:05:05.240 But interestingly, the markets, they're still 00:05:05.240 --> 00:05:07.439 betting on rate cuts later this year. Maybe three 00:05:07.439 --> 00:05:09.699 or four. Why the disconnect? If the Fed's hesitant. 00:05:10.000 --> 00:05:12.660 I think it comes down to rising worries about 00:05:12.660 --> 00:05:15.300 a potential recession down the road. Markets 00:05:15.300 --> 00:05:17.420 might be looking past the immediate data and 00:05:17.420 --> 00:05:19.360 thinking the Fed will have to cut eventually 00:05:19.360 --> 00:05:23.259 if things slow down more significantly. OK. So 00:05:23.259 --> 00:05:27.040 watch the Fed. but also watch the market's expectations. 00:05:27.639 --> 00:05:30.980 What other indicators are key right now? Definitely 00:05:30.980 --> 00:05:33.829 keep an eye on the ISM services PMI. That gives 00:05:33.829 --> 00:05:35.709 us a read on the health of the services sector. 00:05:35.910 --> 00:05:38.329 Which is huge, right? Like 80 % of the economy. 00:05:38.589 --> 00:05:40.870 Exactly. That index has been trending down a 00:05:40.870 --> 00:05:43.370 bit lately, but it's still above 50. And 50 is 00:05:43.370 --> 00:05:46.110 the line between expansion and contraction. Correct. 00:05:46.230 --> 00:05:48.110 So the services sector is still growing, just 00:05:48.110 --> 00:05:50.149 maybe not as fast as it was. It's another one 00:05:50.149 --> 00:05:53.230 to watch closely. OK. And just quickly on the 00:05:53.230 --> 00:05:55.509 markets themselves, stocks seem to have a good 00:05:55.509 --> 00:05:57.970 week recently, despite all this confusing data. 00:05:58.029 --> 00:06:01.709 They did, yeah. The big US index is NASDAQ, Dow, 00:06:01.930 --> 00:06:05.889 S &P 500. all posted pretty solid gains. Small 00:06:05.889 --> 00:06:08.290 and mid -cap stocks did well, too, even international 00:06:08.290 --> 00:06:11.029 markets. Huh, so investors were looking past 00:06:11.029 --> 00:06:13.730 the negative GDP, maybe? Possibly focusing on 00:06:13.730 --> 00:06:16.949 the core GDP, or maybe the hope of eventual rate 00:06:16.949 --> 00:06:21.350 cuts. Fixed income, bonds, were more mixed, likely 00:06:21.350 --> 00:06:23.069 because of that interest rate uncertainty we 00:06:23.069 --> 00:06:25.250 talked about. So amidst all this volatility, 00:06:25.550 --> 00:06:27.610 especially with the tariff stuff, what's the 00:06:27.610 --> 00:06:30.470 message for someone trying to manage their investments? 00:06:30.870 --> 00:06:33.269 The report really stresses the difficulty, maybe 00:06:33.269 --> 00:06:36.089 the futility, of trying to time the market perfectly, 00:06:36.649 --> 00:06:38.930 especially now. Jumping in and out based on headlines. 00:06:39.129 --> 00:06:41.290 Yeah, it's historically very hard to get right. 00:06:41.589 --> 00:06:43.970 The emphasis is on staying invested, assuming 00:06:43.970 --> 00:06:46.269 you have a long term plan, and focusing on those 00:06:46.269 --> 00:06:48.920 long term goals. They even note the S &P 500 00:06:48.920 --> 00:06:51.199 actually recovered pretty quickly from the dip 00:06:51.199 --> 00:06:53.500 after those initial tariff announcements back 00:06:53.500 --> 00:06:56.339 in April. So discipline and perspective are key. 00:06:56.980 --> 00:06:59.360 OK, quite a picture on the economy. Let's shift 00:06:59.360 --> 00:07:01.899 gears to the political side. The electoral vote 00:07:01.899 --> 00:07:03.879 news source gives us a lot to chew on there, 00:07:04.199 --> 00:07:06.379 starting in Georgia, the Senate race, Governor 00:07:06.379 --> 00:07:08.500 Kemp deciding not to run against Senator Ossoff. 00:07:08.759 --> 00:07:11.199 That's big. It's definitely significant. And 00:07:11.199 --> 00:07:14.319 the speculation, as the report points out, is 00:07:14.319 --> 00:07:17.360 pretty strong that he's keeping his powder dry 00:07:17.360 --> 00:07:20.319 for a potential White House run in 2028. Right. 00:07:20.600 --> 00:07:23.560 But for 2026, this helps Ossoff considerably. 00:07:23.660 --> 00:07:26.339 Oh, absolutely. The polling included in the report 00:07:26.339 --> 00:07:28.459 showed Kemp was really the only Republican who 00:07:28.459 --> 00:07:31.120 ran close to Ossoff, hypothetically speaking. 00:07:31.360 --> 00:07:33.839 Like within the margin of error close? Yeah. 00:07:33.899 --> 00:07:38.360 One poll had it Kemp 49%, Ossoff 46%, with a 00:07:38.360 --> 00:07:42.110 3 .1 % margin of error. So very tight. Against 00:07:42.110 --> 00:07:44.810 other potential GOP candidates, Ossoff had leads 00:07:44.810 --> 00:07:47.750 of like six to ten points. And the report specifically 00:07:47.750 --> 00:07:50.250 mentions Marjorie Taylor Greene. It does. It 00:07:50.250 --> 00:07:52.350 notes that Ossoff actually polled best against 00:07:52.350 --> 00:07:54.850 her, leading by double digits in multiple polls. 00:07:54.949 --> 00:07:56.790 And there's that Georgia law issue, too, right? 00:07:56.870 --> 00:07:58.810 Exactly. You can't run for two offices at once. 00:07:58.850 --> 00:08:00.290 So if she were to run for Senate, she'd have 00:08:00.290 --> 00:08:02.550 to give up her House seat. That's a big gamble. 00:08:02.850 --> 00:08:05.750 OK, moving north to Maine. Senator Susan Collins 00:08:05.750 --> 00:08:07.930 has a Democratic challenger now for the primary. 00:08:08.389 --> 00:08:11.959 Yes, Jordan Wood. His background is interesting, 00:08:12.100 --> 00:08:15.160 son of clergy, activist against Citizens United, 00:08:15.660 --> 00:08:18.160 worked for Katie Porter. So he comes with a certain 00:08:18.160 --> 00:08:20.680 progressive profile. But the big question mark 00:08:20.680 --> 00:08:23.319 is Governor Mills. That's the wild card. Yeah. 00:08:23.540 --> 00:08:26.139 If Governor Janet Mills decides to jump in, that 00:08:26.139 --> 00:08:28.420 changes the whole race instantly. She's very 00:08:28.420 --> 00:08:31.199 popular there. Right. And New Hampshire, another 00:08:31.199 --> 00:08:33.899 Senate race, an open seat. Seems like the Democratic 00:08:33.899 --> 00:08:36.879 side is clearing out. It looks that way. Representative 00:08:36.879 --> 00:08:39.820 Maggie Goodlander decided not to run. which likely 00:08:39.820 --> 00:08:42.299 leaves Representative Chris Pappas as the front 00:08:42.299 --> 00:08:45.019 runner for the Democratic nomination. And Republican 00:08:45.019 --> 00:08:47.120 side. The report suggests there isn't really 00:08:47.120 --> 00:08:49.360 a heavyweight Republican candidate emerging yet, 00:08:49.799 --> 00:08:51.620 which, you know, could make it an easier hold 00:08:51.620 --> 00:08:54.320 for the Democrats. OK, similar stories, it seems, 00:08:54.460 --> 00:08:57.620 in Michigan and Minnesota. Open seats, contested 00:08:57.620 --> 00:08:59.980 Democratic primaries, but maybe not the strongest 00:08:59.980 --> 00:09:04.159 GOP fields yet. That's the assessment, yes. In 00:09:04.159 --> 00:09:06.519 Michigan, you've got Representative Haley Stevens 00:09:06.519 --> 00:09:09.559 joining State Senator Mallory McMorrow. and Abdul 00:09:09.559 --> 00:09:12.820 El -Sayed on the Democratic side. Strong contenders. 00:09:13.179 --> 00:09:15.519 On the Republican side, former Rep Mike Rogers 00:09:15.519 --> 00:09:17.840 is maybe the biggest name, but the overall field 00:09:17.840 --> 00:09:20.440 is described as, well, not particularly strong. 00:09:20.879 --> 00:09:23.500 And Minnesota. Senator Tina Smith retiring. Right. 00:09:23.840 --> 00:09:25.700 Representative Angie Craig is running, aiming 00:09:25.700 --> 00:09:28.799 to be the first LGBTQ senator from Minnesota. 00:09:29.720 --> 00:09:32.289 Again, the report characterizes the potential 00:09:32.289 --> 00:09:35.629 Republican opponents as underwhelming. Even in 00:09:35.629 --> 00:09:38.230 Kentucky, Senator McConnell's seat, it's expected 00:09:38.230 --> 00:09:40.389 to stay Republican, right? Even with a primary 00:09:40.389 --> 00:09:42.570 challenge now. Yeah, Representative Andy Barr 00:09:42.570 --> 00:09:44.649 is challenging the former AG Daniel Cameron in 00:09:44.649 --> 00:09:47.330 the primary. But given Kentucky's leanings, the 00:09:47.330 --> 00:09:49.730 odds heavily favor the GOP holding that seat, 00:09:50.190 --> 00:09:52.289 regardless of who wins the primary. OK, let's 00:09:52.289 --> 00:09:54.470 look at a couple of house races mentioned. Maine's 00:09:54.470 --> 00:09:56.289 second district, Jared Golden, facing former 00:09:56.289 --> 00:09:58.389 governor Paula Page. That sounds contentious. 00:09:58.639 --> 00:10:01.820 Oh, definitely. But Page has a very distinct, 00:10:02.240 --> 00:10:04.620 controversial style, and he's trying for a comeback 00:10:04.620 --> 00:10:06.940 after moving to Florida for a bit. It'll be a 00:10:06.940 --> 00:10:09.440 closely watched race, testing how much his Trump 00:10:09.440 --> 00:10:12.379 -aligned approach resonates now. And then in 00:10:12.379 --> 00:10:16.480 Arizona, AZ -05, an open seat, a former NFL kicker 00:10:16.480 --> 00:10:19.299 is running Jay Feely. Yep, Jay Feely running 00:10:19.299 --> 00:10:22.200 as a Republican, very pro -tariff, tough on the 00:10:22.200 --> 00:10:24.279 border platform. The report kind of questions 00:10:24.279 --> 00:10:27.340 this trend of athletes in politics. It does. 00:10:27.379 --> 00:10:29.460 It mentions Tuberville's success, but also others 00:10:29.460 --> 00:10:31.679 who haven't made the leap successfully. It's 00:10:31.679 --> 00:10:34.220 an interesting phenomena. And Feely's tariff 00:10:34.220 --> 00:10:36.659 stance connects right back to our economic discussion. 00:10:36.940 --> 00:10:39.840 True. And one more House note, AOC deciding not 00:10:39.840 --> 00:10:42.100 to run for oversight chair. Yeah, Representative 00:10:42.100 --> 00:10:44.899 Alexandria Ocasio -Cortez. The speculation is 00:10:44.899 --> 00:10:47.240 this might free her up or signal she's maybe 00:10:47.240 --> 00:10:49.399 thinking about higher office down the line, like 00:10:49.399 --> 00:10:52.950 Senate. Interesting. Okay, now for some of those 00:10:52.950 --> 00:10:55.570 unconventional policy ideas attributed to former 00:10:55.570 --> 00:10:58.909 President Trump, the 100 % tariff on foreign 00:10:58.909 --> 00:11:01.429 films. Yeah, that one's quite something. The 00:11:01.429 --> 00:11:03.470 report does a good job breaking down why it's 00:11:03.470 --> 00:11:06.169 probably completely impractical. Well, think 00:11:06.169 --> 00:11:09.269 about modern movie making. It's global funding, 00:11:09.649 --> 00:11:12.409 actors, crew, shooting locations. They use Titanic 00:11:12.409 --> 00:11:14.669 as an example. How do you even decide if a film 00:11:14.669 --> 00:11:18.899 is foreign enough for 100 % tariff? It's a logistical 00:11:18.899 --> 00:11:21.200 nightmare. And the justification was national 00:11:21.200 --> 00:11:24.139 security for movies. That's what was reported. 00:11:24.399 --> 00:11:27.299 Yes, which seems tenuous at best. It's hard to 00:11:27.299 --> 00:11:29.659 see the connection. Right. And then reopening 00:11:29.659 --> 00:11:32.539 Alcatraz. Another head scratcher. As the report 00:11:32.539 --> 00:11:35.279 points out, Alcatraz was shut down decades ago 00:11:35.279 --> 00:11:37.679 precisely because it was falling apart and cost 00:11:37.679 --> 00:11:40.340 too much to maintain. So reopening it would be 00:11:40.340 --> 00:11:42.480 astronomically expensive, presumably. You'd think 00:11:42.480 --> 00:11:44.820 so. The report kind of wryly speculates maybe 00:11:44.820 --> 00:11:47.059 the idea came from watching escape from Alcatraz. 00:11:47.220 --> 00:11:50.779 Wow. OK. And, oh, the Star Wars day post detail. 00:11:51.100 --> 00:11:52.700 Ah, yes, the red lights they were in the Instagram 00:11:52.700 --> 00:11:55.080 post. Yeah. For Star Wars fans, that's the color 00:11:55.080 --> 00:11:57.539 associated with the Sith, the villains. So it 00:11:57.539 --> 00:11:59.440 definitely got people talking about the symbolism, 00:11:59.779 --> 00:12:02.340 intended or otherwise. Oh, always layers of meaning 00:12:02.340 --> 00:12:04.259 there. OK, finally, let's touch on the legal 00:12:04.259 --> 00:12:07.139 news cover. A big ruling against a Trump administration 00:12:07.139 --> 00:12:10.279 executive order. A very significant one, yes. 00:12:11.159 --> 00:12:14.679 Judge Barrel Howell struck down an EO that seemed 00:12:14.679 --> 00:12:17.950 targeted at the law firm Perkins Coy. Why target 00:12:17.950 --> 00:12:21.389 it? The judge's ruling was pretty scathing. She 00:12:21.389 --> 00:12:23.769 basically said the order looked like retaliation 00:12:23.769 --> 00:12:26.090 because the firm represented opponents like Hillary 00:12:26.090 --> 00:12:29.250 Clinton, filed lawsuits challenging the administration 00:12:29.250 --> 00:12:32.289 and supported things like DEI initiatives. And 00:12:32.289 --> 00:12:35.220 she called it unconstitutional. Yes. violating 00:12:35.220 --> 00:12:37.100 the first, fifth, and sixth amendments. Yeah. 00:12:37.340 --> 00:12:40.179 She really emphasized how vital independent lawyers 00:12:40.179 --> 00:12:42.320 are. Lawyers willing to challenge the government 00:12:42.320 --> 00:12:44.360 without fear of punishment. A strong defense 00:12:44.360 --> 00:12:46.440 of that legal principle. Absolutely. She drew 00:12:46.440 --> 00:12:49.200 a contrast between Perkins Coy and other firms 00:12:49.200 --> 00:12:51.740 she suggested had maybe bowed to pressure. And 00:12:51.740 --> 00:12:53.899 there was also a final resolution in a North 00:12:53.899 --> 00:12:56.440 Carolina Supreme Court election challenge. That's 00:12:56.440 --> 00:12:58.679 right. A judge ruled against Jefferson Griffin's 00:12:58.679 --> 00:13:00.460 challenge, confirming Allison Riggs's victory. 00:13:00.620 --> 00:13:03.399 The key point there was upholding voters' rights, 00:13:03.899 --> 00:13:06.399 rejecting the idea that minor administrative 00:13:06.399 --> 00:13:09.399 errors should disqualify otherwise valid votes. 00:13:10.139 --> 00:13:12.899 It affirmed due process for voters. Okay, so 00:13:12.899 --> 00:13:15.940 wrapping this all up. It's clear we're in a period 00:13:15.940 --> 00:13:18.559 with a lot of tension, a lot of conflicting signals. 00:13:19.039 --> 00:13:20.820 Definitely. You've got this weird disconnect 00:13:20.820 --> 00:13:24.000 in the economy. Nervous consumers, but okay, 00:13:24.139 --> 00:13:27.960 job growth, headline GDP down, but core GDP up, 00:13:28.460 --> 00:13:31.139 tariff uncertainty looming over everything. And 00:13:31.139 --> 00:13:34.100 politically, it's just as dynamic. Key elections 00:13:34.100 --> 00:13:37.720 taking shape, unusual policy debates, and these 00:13:37.720 --> 00:13:40.759 really fundamental legal challenges about democratic 00:13:40.759 --> 00:13:42.740 processes. It really makes you wonder, doesn't 00:13:42.740 --> 00:13:45.279 it? How do all these threads, the economy, the 00:13:45.279 --> 00:13:47.980 tariffs, the politics, the legal battles, how 00:13:47.980 --> 00:13:50.399 are they all going to weave together? Yeah, what's 00:13:50.399 --> 00:13:52.940 the ultimate impact going to be? For you listening, 00:13:53.379 --> 00:13:56.539 how might this mix of cautious consumers, active 00:13:56.539 --> 00:13:59.179 job markets, potential trade wars, and fights 00:13:59.179 --> 00:14:01.789 over the rules of the game? How does that shape 00:14:01.789 --> 00:14:03.909 your future, your opportunities, the challenges 00:14:03.909 --> 00:14:06.250 you might face? It's a complex picture, no doubt. 00:14:06.289 --> 00:14:08.710 There's no single easy answer. It really forces 00:14:08.710 --> 00:14:10.649 you to think about which of these developments 00:14:10.649 --> 00:14:12.590 deserves more of your attention, right? Where 00:14:12.590 --> 00:14:14.610 should you focus your energy to stay informed? 00:14:14.929 --> 00:14:16.889 Absolutely. Is it the week -to -week economic 00:14:16.889 --> 00:14:19.210 numbers, the long game of these Senate races, 00:14:19.889 --> 00:14:22.470 the precedent set by these court rulings? Lots 00:14:22.470 --> 00:14:25.490 to consider as we navigate, well, these very 00:14:25.490 --> 00:14:26.190 interesting times.