In 2025, we published a bold proposal to use fusion reactors for gold production. And now we’ve done it: Mercury transmuted into stable gold, using fusion neutrons, at 10x the record set by CERN in 2025. We’ve reduced alchemy to a series of difficult but tractable engineering problems.

Ralph Norman: ‘My family is not going to vote for Darline Graham’ thehill.com/homenews/campaig…

Counterpoint: This is race is not going to be particularly close. Here are a bunch of reasons why: 1. Alan Wilson is going to have exceptional coattails. He wins by a minimum 10 points, and I think honestly probably closer to 12, despite the environment. 2. By contrast, there is zero interest and excitement in the Dem ticket. Andrews is a flawed and uninspiring candidate. Johnson - who should have been a pretty good gubernatorial candidate - has run an extremely meh campaign. For either of them to have a shot, they'd both need to be firing on all cylinders. The rest of the ticket is a veritable "Who's that?" of Democratic activists. 3. There is outside money being spent here, but not serious money. It's placation money. It's the political equivalent of buying your kid a pack of Skittles in the checkout line so they'll stop pitching a fit. Smart money doesn't think Andrews has a shot. 4. The SCDP turnout and GOTV operations are absolute ass (pun sort of intended). They are not investing in places where they could actually have an impact, and they're perpetually stuck on Hail Mary plays like Andrews instead of investing locally where small wins could impact the state more broadly. 5. Speaking of ground games....I'm a paid media guy through and through, but the ground game DOES matter in races like this. The SCGOP Victory program being lead by @SteveWMichael and the Team Graham effort being run by @MarkTKnoop are both really, really good and will be worth more than people think on election day. 6. The path to a Dem having a prayer in SC runs through CD1, and no serious person thinks Jenny Costa Honeycutt is going to lose to Nancy Lacore. 7. The write-in / third party effort from erstwhile conservatives is happening in a terminally online echo chamber. They're loud, not numerous. Whatever polling is showing today, it's going to shake out about like this: Graham 53, Andrews 46, 1 percent odds and ends.

This fault line is going to determine American politics for the next 20 years. Why? Boomers vote for young people before those young people existed to cover a $40T deficit for boomers. If you're a boomer, you see that as "I am owed what I was promised". If you're a young person, you see that as "you guys promised yourselves you'd rip me off and I never agreed to this". Mark my words, the parties will be forced to re-align around this question and take sides. Keep your promises vs. no taxation without representation. You're going to have to pick one, as a politician. And it's going to get really ugly.

Ralph Nader, 1997: “When we came out against nuclear power in the early '70s, the government had predicted that there would be 1,000 nuclear plants by the year 2000 in the United States, and there's 109 and shrinking, as more and more get shut down.” pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline…

This survey contacted 6175 people in 2020 and then followed up with the same people in 2022 and 2024. 85% of folks made no change in affiliation. Protestant to Catholic: 14 people. Cath to Prot.: 15 Prot. to None: 125 Cath. to None: 72 None to Christian: 157

Does this mean we need a new unit of measurement — the Zacharia rather than the Scaramucci?