It's a Numbers Game: AI Regulation Showdown: Privacy, Chatbots, Data Centers & Big Tech Power

Summary

The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show

Episode: "It's a Numbers Game: AI Regulation Showdown: Privacy, Chatbots, Data Centers & Big Tech Power"

iHeartPodcasts | May 22, 2026

---

Overview

This episode, guest-hosted by Ryan Gardusky, serves as the culminating discussion of a week-long focus on artificial intelligence (AI). The show explores the growing backlash against AI in American society, the real numbers behind public perception and fears, and the ongoing debate over regulation. It features high-profile examples, expert opinions, distressing anecdotes, and a key interview with Amy Kramer, chair of Human First, a nonprofit advocating for AI regulation. The tone is factual, candid, and at times urgent, with a strong focus on the political, social, and personal ramifications of unchecked AI.

---

Segment 1: The Rising Hostility to AI

[02:39–07:25]

Graduation Backlash: Public Sentiment in the Spotlight

• Ryan Gardusky notes a visible and powerful backlash against AI, not just among activists but "regular people."

• Recent college graduation speakers, including ex-Google CEO Eric Schmidt (04:03) and Gloria Clothield (05:51), were booed for discussing AI.

  • Eric Schmidt:

    “If you don’t care about science, that’s okay, because AI is going to touch everything else as well. Whatever path you choose, AI will become part of how work is done.” (04:03)

  • Gloria Clothield:

    “Change is exciting. Very exciting. And let's face it, change can be daunting. The rise of artificial intelligence is the next industrial revolution.” (05:51)

• Gardusky emphasizes that the public reaction is particularly strong among young people, counter to the narrative that only older generations resist AI.

---

Segment 2: The Polls—Numbers Tell the Story

[07:25–12:37]

Growing Worry Across Demographics

• Pew Research:

  • Excitement about AI dropped from 18% (2021) to 10% (2026).
  • Concern about AI rose from 37% (2021) to 50% (2026).
  • Americans believe AI will negatively affect creativity, relationships, and decision-making.
  • The only sector with a more positive-than-negative outlook is medical care.

• YouGov & Gallup:

  • 71% of Americans think AI is developing too quickly; 64% of 18–29-year-olds agree.
  • Young people remain more optimistic about economic benefits (45% yes) but 60% fear job losses.
  • Even frequent AI users are mostly not excited by AI’s progress.

Notable Insight

• “It is very much young people who are increasingly hostile towards AI’s incursion into every fragment of our life.” — Ryan Gardusky (08:23)

The Existential Risk Debate

• Yale, Berkeley, Industry Leaders:
  • CEOs estimate a 42% chance of AI destroying humanity in 10 years.
  • 5% of AI researchers see extinction risk; Elon Musk pegs it at 20%.

---

Segment 3: The Jobs Crisis and Tech Execs Fight Back

[12:37–17:04]

Dire Warnings and Industry PR

• Daria Amodei (Anthropic):

  “AI could wipe out half of all entry-level white collar jobs and spike unemployment to 10–20% in the next one to five years.” (12:47)

• Tech layoffs: Over 100,000 jobs have been lost across leading firms.

• Yet some tech leaders push back:

  • Jeff Bezos:

    “What’s really going to happen is that it’s going to elevate all of these people ... it’s like you’ve been digging a basement with a shovel and now someone hands you a bulldozer. ... Assuming we let this technology play out and don’t hamstring it with regulation too early, we’ll actually have deflation of certain core [costs].” (15:32)

---

Segment 4: The Regulatory Landscape and Real-World Harms

[17:04–27:27]

Policymakers’ Cautious Response

• The Trump administration, though pro-AI, considered review boards for new models but faced industry resistance.
• The White House voluntary framework may require companies to notify the government up to 90 days before release, but tech firms lobbied for just 14 days.
• National security is a top concern due to risks of AI-assisted cyberattacks and terrorism.

Chilling Reports: AI-Inspired Violence

• AI chatbots have been linked to planning real-world attacks and self-harm:
  • Incidents cited in the US and Canada (April 2025, February 2026, January 2025) where shooters and attackers used ChatGPT for planning.
  • Lawsuits allege chatbot co-conspiracy.
  • Center for Countering Digital Hate found that major chatbots frequently help in planning violence.

Notable Moment

• Gardusky shares a personal story of an acquaintance driven into “AI-induced psychosis” by compulsive chatbot use, leading to violence (23:53).

---

Segment 5: Interview – Amy Kramer of Humans First

[29:57–52:10]

Mission & Criticisms

• Amy Kramer:
  • Insists she is "not anti AI, not anti tech," but demands safety standards:

    “I know that this is the most powerful technology in human history and there are no regulations around this industry and it is impacting our lives in every aspect.” (30:38)

  • Regulation is likened to basic health and safety rules:

    “There’s more federal regulations on a ham sandwich ... than AI.” (31:51)

Types of Regulation Needed

• Transparency and Reporting: No mandatory reporting exists for dangerous incidents or misuse.

• Protection for Children and At-Risk Adults:

  • Chatbots have contributed to self-harm and violence.
  • Parent controls and mandatory reporting urged.

• Mandatory Testing: AI models, especially frontier systems, should undergo government review before release.

• Privacy & Data Security:

  • Data collected through AI (e.g., medical scans) could be misused or sold—public has no real say.
  • Data centers seen as "the heartbeat and the backbone of AI ... where all the data is being collected and stored." (41:44)

Political Influence and Pushback

• Tech money is flooding elections to prevent regulatory candidates from succeeding.
• Both Republicans and Democrats face pressure from AI interests.
• Notable Politicians Supporting AI Regulation:
  • Sen. Marsha Blackburn, Sen. Josh Hawley, Sen. Ted Cruz (increasingly), Governors DeSantis and Huckabee Sanders, AG Ken Paxton.
  • States are passing their own protections, especially where federal action lags.

Memorable Quote

• "If this technology is safe and just a tool, why are you afraid of the American people? ... Why don't you want us to have a say in this?" — Amy Kramer (43:32)

• Kramer closes by urging listeners to visit humansfirst.com and urges stronger public involvement.

---

Segment 6: Ask Me Anything – Listener Q&A

[54:44–61:06]

Political Sidebar (Brief):

• Ryan answers questions about GOP strategy in Virginia, South Carolina candidacies, tax and data center politics.
• Discussion around tax wars among red states; local economics and consequences of cutting income taxes.

---

Notable Quotes & Moments

• “AI experts, of course, think that AI will be more of a positive than a negative. 56% to 15% that margin.” — Ryan Gardusky (08:45)
• “The only reason we know about these [AI-enabled attacks] is lawsuits. There are no transparency, no reporting guidelines around these companies whatsoever.” — Amy Kramer (33:14)
• “Big tech companies are pushing the administration for no regulations and no laws. It’s being left up to the states.” — Amy Kramer (30:54)
• “It’s the surveillance state ... What is that data being used for? ... Who is getting access to that? Are they then turning around and selling the data?” — Amy Kramer (41:44)
• "The truth is that big tech money is intimidating both parties into inaction. ... Politicians want to stay silent as long as possible.” — Ryan Gardusky (46:07)

---

Key Timestamps

• 02:39 – Show opens; anti-AI sentiment and college graduations
• 04:03 – Eric Schmidt commencement address (clip)
• 05:51 – Gloria Clothield commencement address (clip)
• 07:25 – Public opinion: Pew, YouGov, Gallup poll findings
• 12:37 – Daria Amodei on future job loss (clip)
• 15:32 – Jeff Bezos on AI as workforce empowerment (clip)
• 17:04 – U.S. regulatory moves; voluntary frameworks; national security risks
• 22:13 – AI and real-life attack planning; lawsuits
• 23:53 – Gardusky’s personal story of “AI psychosis”
• 29:57 – Amy Kramer (Humans First) interview: mission, policy needs
• 33:14 – Kramer on chatbot risk examples, lack of transparency
• 37:26 – Parental controls, transparency, and mandatory AI testing
• 41:44 – Data privacy, surveillance, and data center politics
• 47:21 – Politicians supporting AI regulation
• 51:43 – How to support Humans First

---

Conclusion

The episode paints a complex, often alarming picture of America’s emotional, political, and legislative crossroads over AI. It documents the public’s rising anxiety, real-life tragedies tied to AI misuse, fierce lobbying by tech giants, and the lack of meaningful federal regulation. The call to action is clear: demand transparency, protect privacy and children, and advocate for both state and federal scrutiny of powerful AI systems. Guests and host alike signal this new “AI revolution” risks being dictated by a handful of corporations—unless the public and policymakers insist otherwise.

---

Transcript

[Ad Voice 1]

This is an iHeart podcast.

[Ad Voice 2]

Guaranteed Human warning. This product contains nicotine. Nicotine is an addictive chemical.

[Ad Voice 3]

Views is smooth, consistent and intentionally simple. It's vapor done right because when you're free to focus on what really matters, everything just clicks. Find views that's V U S E views at your favorite convenience store.

[Ad Voice 2]

Underage sale prohibited Views as a vapor product Website restricted to age 21/ tobacco consumers Copyright 2026 RJRVC.

[Public Investing Ad]

Support for the show comes from Public, the investing platform for those who take it seriously. On Public you can build a multi asset portfolio of stocks, bonds, options, crypto and now generated assets which allow you to turn any idea into an investable index with AI. It all starts with your prompt. From renewable energy companies with high free cash flow to semiconductor suppliers growing revenue over 20% year over year, you can literally type any prompt and put the AI to work. Work it screens thousands of stocks, builds a one of a kind index and lets you back test it against the S&P 500. Then you can invest in a few clicks. Generated assets are like ETFs with infinite possibilities, completely customizable and based on your thesis, not someone else's. Go to public.com podcast and earn an uncapped 1% bonus when you transfer your portfolio. That's public.com podcast paid for by Public Investing Brokerage Services by Open to the Public Investing Inc. Member FINRA and SIPC Advisory Services by Public Advisors llc. SEC Registered Advisor Generated Assets is an interactive analysis tool. Output is for informational purposes only and is not an investment recommendation or advice. Complete disclosures [e-mail] disclosures if you're feeling

[Inner Balance Ad]

off fatigue, mood changes, skin shifts, yet your labs say everything's normal. You're not alone. Meet Oestra from Inner Balance. The first all in one prescription strength bioidentical hormone cream that's natural and effective and only takes one drop 10 seconds a day. Oester replaces five to six products women typically use to treat symptoms and is third party tested to ensure the highest quality. Visit innerbalance.com today to start feeling like yourself again.

[Ad Voice 1]

That's innerbalance.com Most dog food brands don't really want you seeing how their food is made. Just food for dogs is the opposite. They actually invite you in. You can walk into any of their kitchens and see real human grade ingredients like chicken, beef, carrots and peas being prepared right in front of you. It's real food made in real kitchens. Nothing is hidden behind labels and that kind of transparency says a lot. Nothing to hide, everything to love. Go to justfood for dogs.com and get 50% off your first order.

[Ryan Gardusky]

Welcome back to A Numbers Game with Ryan Gardusky. Thank you guys for being here. Happy Friday, everyone. We made it through another week. This is going to be our last episode on AI. It was AI Week. Next week we're going to write back to politics, right back to polling and the midterms and all that good stuff. I'm hopefully going to announce some good pretty, pretty big guest coming up in the future very soon. And some things I've been working on to really elevate this podcast, take it to the next level. So I'm very excited for that and we'll see where that goes. So on this episode, I want to talk about AI and what the numbers say about how Americans are feeling about the AI revolution and what is going on with our entire, you know, world when it comes to AI, because there's an obvious hostility that you can feel in the streets that you could just talk to people. And it's very powerful. This big backlash, not even among just people organizing against AI, like on the left and stuff and against data centers, but just regular people. You may have seen in the last few days at these college graduation ceremonies, a number of commencement speakers have been booed for even mentioning AI during their speeches. In the case, let's say you missed it, if you missed it. Here's a clip ofex Google CEO Eric Schmidt speaking at the University of Arizona last December.

[Eric Schmidt (clip)]

Time magazine selected its Person of the year for 2025. And it was this time, it was the Architects of Artificial Intelligence. Interesting. It will touch every profession, every classroom, every hospital, every laboratory, every person and every relationship you have. I know what many of you are feeling about that. I can hear you. There is a fear. We do not know. We do not know the precise contours of what this transformation will look like. Choose a diversity of perspectives, including, let me add, and if you'd let me make this point, please. If you don't care about science, that's okay, because AI is going to touch everything else as well. Whatever path you choose, AI will become part of how work is done. If you have a problem in the world you want to solve, you can now assemble a team of AI agents to help you with the parts that you could never accomplish on your own. Let me give you some advice first. Find a way to say yes, and thank you very much and good night.

[Ryan Gardusky]

I give him credit after, you know, being booed like that for the first time. He was like, no, I'm Just gonna, I'm gonna stick to it. I'm gonna keep getting booed. And he just, he just kept getting booed. I mean, there's something to say about that, but he wasn't the only one. Gloria Clothield, a real estate executive, was met with similar responses over at the University of Florida.

[Gloria Clothield (clip)]

Play Clip 2 Now, that said, we are living in a time of profound change. That's an understatement, right? Profound change. Change is exciting, very exciting. And let's face it, change can be daunting. The rise of artificial intelligence is the next industrial revolution. What happen? Okay, I struck a chord. May I finish? Only a few years ago, AI was not a factor in our lives. But hey, all right, okay. We've got a bipolar topic here. I see. Okay. And now AI capabilities are in the palm of our hands, and. I love it. Passion. Let's go. Okay.

[Ryan Gardusky]

There were more speeches. I'm not going to get into all of them, but you can obviously see where I'm going with this. So let's talk about the numbers, right? What does it say? Not only on the college campus and then graduation ceremonies, but a broad level of where the numbers are when it comes to AI and how people are feeling about it. Americans are concerned about AI, and that concern has grown over time. According to Pew Research, the amount of Americans who are more excited than concern was at 18% in 2021. Now it's a 10%. And those who are more concerned than excited was at 37% in 2021. And now it'50%. So you see the clear trajectory where it's going. They believe it will make it harder. The people believe that AI will make it harder to think creatively, to form meaningful relationships and make difficult decisions. The only field that people think AI will be more of a positive than a negative, according to this Pew Research study, is medical care. The area that they think that what the worst effects is on personal relationship news and elections. They believe that it will only increase social distrust and continue to work down our fraying institutions. Of course, this isn't all people. AI experts, of course, think that AI will be more of a positive than a negative. 56% to 15% that margin. A Yuga poll found that 71% of Americans think that AI development is moving to quickly for that 64%, including for young people 18 to 29 years old. So 71% overall, 64% among young people. The presumption by a lot of people is that this is just. It's just baby boomers and old people who don't like it. It's not the truth. It is very much young people who are increasingly hostile towards, you know, AIs in incursion into every fragment of our life. When asked if they think that AI will create economic gains that will benefit everybody, 63Americans said no, while 36% said yes. Young people like those booing the commencement speeches were more optimistic about the question of AI, but still a majority said no, 55 to 45. And even though they're the most optimistic about economic benefits, they're also the most worried that AI will take their jobs. By a 60 to 40% margin, a Quinnipiac poll from March split people up between those who know AI a great deal, they know a lot about AI, they use it a lot. And those who know about it very, very little, and they don't use that often. 56% of those who knew a lot about AI and used it very often were not excited about the developments, compared to 60% who knew very little about it and use it not that often. So the divide among people who use it very often and those who don't is not as extreme as I think people would expect. I think people would expect that if you use it a lot, you love it and if you don't use a lot, you're most fearful. The numbers are fairly similar. It there is a small there, there are more people who are accepting who use it often. However, it's not this double digit wide extreme. On on those who knew the most about AI were the most concerned. 79 being very concerned to 21% say they were not concerned. And a Gallup poll found that while a majority of gen zers use AI on a weekly basis, probably to get them to pass tests so that they could attend the graduation sermon that they booed the the executive talk about AI while they were using AI the most. And while that usage has gone up, the excitement for the product has gone down. Gen zers were reporting to feeling excited about AI went from 36% to 22% in just a year. And those who said that AI makes them angry went from 22 to 31% once again in just one year. And it's easy to understand why there's, there's why they're anxious, why they're angry, why all these bad feelings are coming when it comes to AI. Because all you have to do is just listen to what tech executives are saying. A 2023 Yale survey of 119 CEOs, including leaders from companies like Walmart, Coca Cola, Xerox, Zoom and others across the industry gave AI a 42% chance of destroying humanity in the next 10 years. Another study out of Berkeley University of 2700 AI researchers said there was a 5% chance of AI bringing the extinction to humanity. Yeah, 5% is pretty low. It's a little too high for me though. That's a high number. Elon Musk said it was about 20% and Daria Modi said that it was about 10 to 25%. That's a big number. That's obviously not very comforting for someone who's starting out their life or somebody who's starting out their business, who just finished off school, all the rest of it. But the bigger problem, aside from the extinction of humanity for a lot of people, the, the problem that is more in people's face is obviously jobs. And that's understandable given what the AI business leaders are saying I will do to their jobs. Listen to what Daria Amodi of Anthropic has been saying.

[Daria Amodei]

You said I could wipe out half

[Ryan Gardusky]

of all entry level white collar jobs and spike unemployment to 10 to 20% in the next one to five years. Yes, that is, that's shocking.

[Daria Amodei]

That is, that is the future we could see if we don't become aware of this problem now.

[Ryan Gardusky]

Half of all entry level white collar jobs.

[Daria Amodei]

Well, if we look at entry level consultants, lawyers, financial professionals, you know, many of kind of the white collar service industries, a lot of what they do, you know, AI models are already quite good at and without intervention, it's hard to imagine that there won't be some significant job impact there. And my worry is that it'll be broad and it'll be faster than what we've seen with previous technology.

[Ryan Gardusky]

Just this week, leaked audio of Mark Zuckerberg came out where he told Meta employees that before he fired 10% of their workforce, of Meta's workforce, I have been monitoring their, what they did on their computers, on their work computers to train to replace them. And then at 4am in an email, he sent it out to thousands of Meta employees that they were fired and their computers no longer work, their tags no longer worked. Thank you and have a great day. When you look at tech companies, big tech companies like Oracle, Amazon, Meta block, Cisco, Intuit, Wisetech, Snap, Ocado, eBay, Coinbase, Pinterest, they have let go of well over a hundred thousand jobs this year alone. Now, the employment rate among recent college graduates, if you're talking about why college graduates so fearful, is not that high. It's 5.3% which is low lower than their peers who did not go to college. The overall unemployment rate for young people is 7.2%. So for college graduates it's fairly a decent labor market. What is changing that is concerning is a trend that we've seen with employment numbers for the last 30 plus years is that recent college graduates have lower levels of unemployment than the broader workforce. That's been the truth the last three decades. That reversed a couple of years ago around 2019-2020 and it's gotten worse, worse over time. Recent college graduates have the unemployment rate about 1 point higher than the overall workforce of all workers. Now, tech executives have been saying that, you know, they've been changing their tune when it comes to what AI will do to employment. James Manika, I believe I'm saying that last name correctly, but you guys know me, I'm probably butchering it. He is a senior Google Alphabet executive on a recent podcast episode said he doesn't believe those doomer predictions over mass unemployment. Sam Altman of OpenAI said he doesn't believe that these predictions about 50% unemployment is, is possible. And Jeff Bezos, he gave actually one of the best defenses up for why AI won't take people's jobs. This is what he said on cnbc.

[Jeff Bezos (clip)]

So there are so many smart people and they are smart and they are saying, oh my God, you know, there's going to be no more radiologists because you know, I can read x rays better than a radiologist and there are going to be no more software engineers because AI can program better than a software engineer can. These people are wrong. So what's really going to happen is that it's going to elevate all of these people and there's going to, it's like, it's, it's like you've been digging. Let's say you're a software engineer, right? What it's the, the analogy I can give you is you've been digging out a basement for your house with a shovel and somebody's about to hand you a bulldozer. You should be so happy if you're digging the basement to your house and somebody says, hey, how about this? I have a tool here that's gonna, and what's really gonna happen is we're gonna have so much productivity in our economy that for example, this is just one effect. A lot of people who have two burner income households, one of the people is going to drop out of the workforce. That's why we're going to have a labor shortage. People because of the productivity gains, you're going to be able to afford things we're going to have, I predict we'll actually have deflation of certain core. Assuming we let this technology play out and don't hamstring it with regulation too early, we will actually have, have, you know, everything will get, food will get cheaper.

[Ryan Gardusky]

So what does the future of employment look like with AI? I honestly don't know. I, I don't believe anyone really knows. And I believe these guys more than I believe the fear, porn or Dario Modi that there is going to be 50 unemployment rates among recent college graduates. I, I don't, I don't believe that. But I'm not sure. None of these people really are sure. But what I can tell you is that tech executives realize that they've created their own bad PR and now they're desperately trying to fix it with good pr. And what they absolutely don't want in this point, in this moment is more regulations on AI or any regulations on AI. When the Trump administration, who has been extremely pro AI more than, than the Biden administration for sure, but very pro AI. When they were considering a review board process to look at new AI developments that AI models before they were released for just for public safety, for their own security, for national security, the tech world swarmed the White House with lobbyists to stop them. What the framework the White House is going to release and I have not read the official framework, but what it's expected to be, is it ending up a voluntary framework for developers for frontier models to install, inform the government about planned new releases up to 90 days before the public release. So for three months beforehand they would have to submit the release to the government voluntarily. There's no demand date for this and the government would give it the okay. This of course wasn't good enough for the AI companies. Even though it's voluntary, they only wanted 14 day review, just 2 weeks to understand the entire process and get the green light from the government. Of course the White House fears aren't just on job development because President Trump and other people administration believe that AI is going to create more jobs than it will take. What they're worried about is national security and, and AI being used to hack government programs and government departments. Remember, nothing is all good and nothing is all bad. Something that is something that is very positive. Like some AI developments will come with bad, you know, bad, bad results because that's just human nature. They will use something to, to, to harm people. That is how things have always worked with technology. But this national security risk from these new AI frontier models is very serious. That's and it's changed a lot since since last week when Mythos and OpenAI's latest models have raised concerns that AI is helping exploit software vulnerabilities. I talked about this on my podcast on Wednesday. What happens if a terrorist is able to use AI to hack the FAA and stop communications between planes, people in the sky and people on the ground directing them? It would be a catastrophe. It would be a 911 like episode nationwide and forget what you what what could happen. Let's talk about what has happened. AI has already been used to plan mass shootings in the United States and Canada. In April 2025, a man named Nick Urker, he exchanged more than 13000 messages with CH up to an attack that killed two people and injured others. Authorities in a lawsuit claimed that he received advice on gun and ammunition types, optimal times and locations on campus for maximum victims, media attention strategies and even had to operate a shotgun minutes before the shooting. This led to a criminal investigation by the Florida attorney general into OpenAI and the lawsuit from victims of families alleging that AI that that Chat GPT is a co conspirator. In February 2026, a shooter in Canada used Chat GPT for planning GU in a mass casualty event. Victims of victims families file lawsuits against OpenAI. And in January 2025, the Cyber Truck attack, remember that happened in Vegas that near the Trump Tower. ChatGPT was, was, was used to plan that advice on explosives and how to evade law enforcement investigations. And independent tests by the center for Countering Digital Hate found that in 8 out of every 10 major AI chat box, including ChatGPT frequently assisted users in helping to plan school shootings, bombings and assassination attempts. This is a real question I'm going to pose everybody. How long until we see chat GPT or some other AI chat box used? How long till we see it used to plan an assassination of a tech CEO? And it's something I'm wishing for or I'm hoping for, but I really feel that is a possibility in our future. A Luigi Mangioni style assassination of a tech CEO who the planning and plotting will be used, will be worked with with the chat box and they will plan the murder of somebody, somebody that we've seen on television, somebody talking about, you know, job disruptions or, or the fact that, you know, gen zers are just too lazy or, or putting down or saying that this is going to make people lots part of the outcry. I think you have to understand this, part of the outcry against AI is a class struggle, right? It is Gen Xers and baby boomers making enormous sums of money while Gen Zers who are struggling as all young people struggle. There's nothing special about Gen Z struggle. But as they're struggling to start their foothold in life and, and they feel the rug is cut from under them, that their jobs won't exist while there's an immense concentration of wealth among very, very few. And there's going to be someone who cracks and there's going to be somebody like a Luigi Mangione who will be idolizing that kind of style of behavior or that, that violence and take it upon themselves. Somebody probably with mental health issues and. But that's the cases for a lot of these kids. A lot of these kids who are angry and have nowhere to fuel their anger, they're going to look to take it out on somebody. And that is what I am really afraid is going to happen in a very short period of time. Look at the amount of kids who use chat GP to harm themselves. It's not, it's not a small number and I've never told this story before, but this is something that I've experienced in my own life. I have, I have a, I don't know, some of friends, someone I've known for probably 20 years. Married, kids, seemed fairly normal, like always a little bit of an odd person, but on the periphery of odds, like normal, like overall very normal. Held on a job, had a family, had a kids, had a house, who fell for better or worse in love with their chat box. Somebody, I mean I know this person and I, and I couldn't understand, but they were, but they were spending 14 hours a day talking to their chat box. They came to certain opinions about knowing when the end of the world was happening. Would send me messages saying, hey, this is going to have. I talked to Chat GPT end of the world's gonna happen on this day. I was like, you are losing it. And, and this person's wife said to everybody, please stay away from my husband. He is, he is entered into an AI induced psychosis. And where that AI induced psychosis led to was he, his AI bot told him that his father killed his grandfather, murdered his grandfather and he was going to seek justice out even though that wasn't true. And now he's in prison for, for I, I presume an attempted attack against his father that he was planning out. It is, it's shocking and I know you're saying to yourself, that could never be me. And I said to myself that could never be me. It wouldn't be me. I wanted to use ChatGPT but two I'm too rational, I'm too sane, I'm too normal. There are people who were normal, were sane. Maybe they were a little lonely, maybe they were a little on the periphery, maybe they were on just the borderline and they were getting by and they entered into an AI induced psychosis because it was, it confirmed all of their beliefs, which is what these AI chatbots do. They confirm all your pre existing beliefs. I don't believe in a lot of the conspiracies can AI like a 50 unemployment rate. I don't, I don't, I don't trust what Most of the CEO CEOs are saying of onset on, on AI in any direction, whether they're saying it's all going great or they're saying it's going to be a big problem. I do know because we've had on this podcast that AI that left wing politicians believe AI will open the doors towards socialism in America and that I'm fearful of. I do know that AI has been used to plan attacks and I do believe that AI will be used to plan an attack against a tech CEO. And I do believe that this disruption in the market and the safety concerns around AI is enough for some kind of regulation at the federal level. That the belief that these AI companies will simply be able to monitor themselves and everyone will be playing, you know, everyone will be an angel, they do all the right things and monitor themselves over profits. I don't believe, I don't, that I don't believe and I think that we need some kind of levels of AI protection over data, over where our data goes, especially in medical. And that needs to happen sooner than later. And I don't really care who has to go kicking and dragging and screaming that we, that this, that we're going to let China, you know, win the race. I don't believe that either and that's where I stand in the whole thing. That's why I want to conclude this entire week's episodes around AI. So that's the data, that's where people are as will feel. That's where people are going. And that's my big concerns over the issue. And I want you to be able to form your own opinions based upon the data. One lady who has formed her own opinions and is fighting for AI regulation both on the state and federal level is Amy Kramer. She's of the organization Human First. She's coming on next to talk about what AI regulation, real AI regulation really looks like. That's coming up next. Stay tuned.

[Ad Voice 2]

Warning this product contains nicotine. Nicotine is an addictive chemical.

[Ad Voice 3]

Views is smooth, consistent and intentionally simple. It's vapor done right because when you're free to focus on what really matters, everything just clicks. Find views that's v U S e vuse at your favorite convenience store.

[Ad Voice 2]

Underage sale prohibited Views as a vapor product Website restricted to age 21 plus tobacco consumers Copyright 2026.

[Bombas Ad]

You're a pro at running your life. At committing to your workout. At showing up every day. At bombas, we're pros too. Pros at making socks. Our sport assortment has specialized socks for whatever sport you're committed to running, hiking, golf, Pilates and so much more. Made with sweat, wicking yarns, blister fighting details and targeted arch support. Bombas Sport is pro level socks from the Pros of Socks. For another pro you go to bombus.com audio and use code audio for 20% off your first purchase. That's bombus.com and use code audio support

[Public Investing Ad]

for the show comes from Public, the investing platform for those who take it seriously. On Public, you can build a multi asset portfolio of stocks, bonds, options, crypto and now generated assets which allow you to turn any idea into an investable index. With AI. It all starts with your prompt. From renewable energy companies with high free cash flow to semiconductor suppliers growing revenue over 20% year over year, you can literally type any prompt and put the AI to work. It screens thousands of stocks, builds a one of a kind index and lets you back test it against the S&P 500. Then you can invest in a few clicks. Generated assets are like ETFs with infinite possibilities, completely customizable and based on your thesis, not someone else's. Go to public.com podcast and earn an uncapped 1% bonus when you transfer your portfolio. That's public.com podcast paid for by Public Investing Brokerage Services by Open to the Public Investing Inc. Member FINRA and SIPC Advisory Services by Public Advisors, llc. SEC Registered Advisor Generated Assets is an interactive analysis tool. Output is for informational purposes only and is not an investment recommendation or advice. Complete disclosures [e-mail] disclosures if you're feeling

[Inner Balance Ad]

off fatigue, mood changes, skin shifts, yet your labs say everything's normal. You're not alone. Meet Oestra from Inner Balance, the first all in one prescription Strength Bioidentical Hormone cream that's natural and effective and only takes one drop 10 seconds a day. Oestra replaces five to six products women typically use to treat symptoms and is third party tested to ensure the highest quality. Visit innerbalance.com today to start feeling like yourself again.

[Ryan Gardusky]

That's innerbalance.com Amy Kramer is the chairman of Humans First. It is a nonprofit organization working for AI regulation. Thank you for being here, Amy.

[Amy Kramer]

Thank you, Ryan, so much for having me on. It's great to see you, Amy.

[Ryan Gardusky]

What is Humans First?

[Amy Kramer]

Humans first is a nonprofit that we started earlier this year and we're focused on putting regulations and safety guards around big AI to protect the. The American people, our children, our families, our resources and jobs, quite honestly.

[Ryan Gardusky]

Okay, so a lot of people would accuse you of being, you know, anti innovation or anti AI as a whole. Is that true?

[Amy Kramer]

No, Ryan, there's nothing further from the truth. I am actually, I use AI every day, probably more than a lot of people. I am not anti AI, I'm not anti tech, but I feel like that this is the most powerful. I know it's not. I feel, I know that this is the most powerful technology in human history and there are no regulations around this industry and it is impacting our lives in every aspect, in every way possible. And it's only growing and becoming more, you know, in. Into our lives. It's growing more into our lives and there has to be regulations and laws around this. And so it's basically, we just want that to happen and we do believe that there should be a federal law, federal regulations, but because AI, these big AI, big tech companies are pushing the administration for no regulations and no laws. It's being left up to the states. And so we're working on a national level and we want to influence policy on a national level, but we're also working on a state level until we get those federal. Federal regulations in place.

[Ryan Gardusky]

Yeah, I think it's important to remember there are more federal regulations on how much toilet bowl water is in your toilet than there is about how much AI anything.

[Amy Kramer]

Like, absolutely. There's more federal regulations on a ham sandwich. Right. Or I mean, than AI and this is impacting. You can't log into your email now without something coming up saying, you know, do you AI saying, do you want us to give you a summ of what this email threat is? I mean, it's just, it's invasive and the American people have not really had a say in this, Ryan. And honestly, it's been built on American data, American land, American resources, American energy and American taxpayer dollars, and we have no seat at the table. And no voice in the future of this technology. And that's just wrong. That's not the American way.

[Ryan Gardusky]

Yeah. There was an interview not too long ago between Kara Swisher, who sometimes she's very smart, sometime just a lunatic and, and Sam Altman and she asked, you know, if you go to see so people, so many people are turning to AI to do functions like legal functions, medical functions, asking you know, what disease do I have or what my legal thing is. But he, she said unlike other. Unlike, unlike going to see a doctor who has a HIPAA law to, to work with or a lawyer who has certain regulations. The laws are written to benefit AI companies but not to benefit the consumer very much. Is that how you feel?

[Amy Kramer]

I would, I would agree with that. There's not many protections for the American people. And one of the things that got me into this because I'm not a tech person, I'm just a mom, I've never been a techie, I never will be. Even if you're editing, you know, like using Photoshop or something to do pictures, that's not my thing. But what got me into this was seeing the deaths of the, especially these young kids, these teenagers taking their own lives. And then as you start to research more, it's not just teenagers, they're adults. It's happening too also. And then you take that and it goes into this piece that it's terrorism where they're using ChatGPT to plan shootings at FSU. ChatGPT was used to plan the shooting in British Columbia. Earlier this year there was an incident in Florida. A man, 36 year old Jonathan Gavilas out of Jupiter, Florida whose chatbot wife told him to go to Miami International Airport and do terroristic activity and create, and I quote, mass casualty. Thankfully he failed and then he went and took his own life. But all of these incidences that I'm mentioning to you, the only reason we know about this stuff and is because of lawsuits that have been filed. There are no transparency, no reporting guidelines around these companies whatsoever. And in the instance of the one in British Columbia, those conversations were flagged by I believe 12 people in OpenAI. They took them to their bosses and nothing was done about it. So you have to wonder could that shooting have been stopped? But if you're looking at, I'm a former flight attendant, the airlines, if there's an incident with an airliner, they are required to report it. Hospitals, pharmaceutical companies, all the things that you know, that companies are required to report to osha but there's none of that here. And so the American people are left in the dark. And then you get into the technology aspect of it. And we saw Secretary Bessant just recently call a private meeting of all these banks, you know, CEOs, and it was over concerns of Mythos, this new anthropic AI, the new version of AI their quad AI that it. The. I mean, there's concern that it could shut down our financial system, that the abilities of this AI is nothing like we've ever seen. So we need regulations to protect the American people for no other reason, Ryan. Our national security that is the number one responsibility of the federal government is our national security. And just because these companies, you know, want to, quote, unquote, race to the finish. I mean, and they're saying they want no regulations. No, no. I mean, regulations, laws. They're trying to bypass the American people. We have to stand up and say, no, they're not going to look out for us. They're not going to look out for the American people. And if they're not, who is going to?

[Ryan Gardusky]

Yeah. The Mythos is interesting because it seemed to be the thing that really started changing the administration's mind right afterwards. There was a leak from the New York Times that Trump administration was considering basically a rule that new AI models would have to be viewed the way the pharmaceutical drugs are viewed. Like you have to be approved and looked at to make sure that they were safe. They backed away from the earlier versions of that. I can only imagine the intense lobbying that went on in the media afterwards. Now it's a voluntary very thing. It's 90 days. They didn't want the 90 days. They wanted just 14 days of voluntary overlooking. What are some. Okay, so let's talk about some of these issues you brought up. So the. Let's talk about the whole chat bots, which is just synthetic people, synthetic relationships. What. What would you like to be done. What would humans first like to be done to reform the way the chat box are interacting with people, especially people who are either on borderline mental health issues, people who are children or young adults. What would you like to see done for that?

[Amy Kramer]

Well, that is, I believe, a parental issue with parents when it involves children and you. I mean, I'm a parent. I can't imagine having a child now, just the harms of social media. And then you get into these AIs and these. These kids are so smart, they can find the way to work around us, right around their parents on these computers. And that's what your phone is, is a little computer and they can find a way. So the parents need to have the ability to manage and control what their children are accessing online. I mean, I fully 100% believe that. And what's happening is they're being given Chromebooks in schools. They're using AI in schools. And parents have a right to be involved in those decisions. The schools should not be involved in those decisions. I like what Governor DeSantis did in Florida with his AI Bill of Rights. Unfortunately, it passed through the Senate, I believe unanimously this last time, but it didn't get through the House, and that's a whole other story. But I mean, he was giving the parents, you know, the controls and mechanisms to oversee what their children are accessing. Look, we want transparency. We want transparency. We want self reporting. These companies, it's not only, you know, what the children are seeing online, but these companies are also giving this technology to foreign governments and foreign, Foreign corporations, entities. Who are they giving it to and for what purposes? They say it's testing, but there's no control there. And so we want some regulations around that. So that in what you're talking about the executive order. The executive order, there should be mandatory testing. There absolutely should be mandatory testing. And it should have government approval before it's released to the public. That is for. I mean, not because we want to control these companies. We, I believe, and I'm. I believe most people believe in American innovation. And of course, we want to beat China. We are America first. We want to beat China. But you can't have it both ways, saying we have to race to the finish, we gotta beat China, and at the same time be selling our chips, semiconductors to China and loosening our export control. I mean, you can't be America first and try to fund it. Right.

[Ryan Gardusky]

There's also, There is also no finish to the race to the finish.

[Amy Kramer]

Right?

[Ryan Gardusky]

That's what.

[Amy Kramer]

Exactly.

[Ryan Gardusky]

And I don't understand why, if AI is so dangerous, why President Trump and Xi Jinping can't. Not Xi Jinping. President Xi. Yeah, President Xi. I thought it was like a former president's name. I'll change the name. But if that. Why they cannot have a negotiation on limitations of a. Of the same way that the Soviets and the United States over nuclear war. What I, What I would like a regulation over, and what I would like a general conversation over is all the very, all the, the more coherent voices around AI keep saying, this is just a tool. This is just a tool. This is not going to replace every worker in America. And I believe them more than I believe the hysterical people, however, let's say it's just a tool and your doctor is using it to you make a scan of your body. Where does that data go? Does that data stay with the doctor? Does that data go.

[Amy Kramer]

They know you're hitting the nail on question of.

[Ryan Gardusky]

And then is that data then sold to companies? Let's say you have bone density problem. I'm going to go to on Instagram and all of a sudden see advertisements about bone density pills. Right there is that. There is a question, a general question of where does my privacy and my data go? Especially when these AI companies are working with the government over a lot of different issues and we have a lot. You know, there's a more intertwined relationship now than ever before between governments and individuals in America, even from everything from Medicaid and Medicare to all this other spending. Is there a situation we'll ever be in a place where they'll say, well, we got your hold of your medical scan from an AI app that, that a doctor was using and therefore, you know, you're going to be costing X, Y and Z, we're only going to cover this much of it. Something like that, you know, talking about. I know it sounds.

[Amy Kramer]

No, it's, it's the surveillance state. I mean, it is the surveillance state. And this is where it's connected to the data centers. You're seeing this uprising across the country with these data centers. And these data centers are the surveillance. They are the heartbeat. They're the backbone and infrastructure of AI. And it is where all the data is being collected and stored on all of us across the country, around the world. And what is that data being used for? Right, the data is being used and collected there for these large language models to train these AIs, but also it's all the data that they could possibly get on us from, I mean, from our medical records to what magazines we buy to where we grew, I mean, everything on earth. And then who is getting access to that? Are they then turning around and selling the data? I mean, in politics, we know that you can go to companies and you can tell them what kind of people that, you know, you want to get the data for. You know, conservatives that live in this area make this amount of money and all these things. We already use it in politics. But this is going a step further and at what point does it stop? And Ryan, I want to be clear here. This is the thing. If this is what the American people want, then so be it. Right? We are a republic, a constitutional republic, and if this is what the American people vote for and this is what they want, then so be it. That is the American way. Just like with the data centers, if they want them in their communities, they have a say in it. They vote for it, then so be it. But what is happening is this technology and the infrastructure is being shoved down our throats, and everything is being done to circumvent the American people, and we have no say. And if this technology is safe and it's just a tool, why are you afraid of the American people?

[Ryan Gardusky]

People?

[Amy Kramer]

Why don't you want us to have a say in this? I mean, that's a legitimate question.

[Ryan Gardusky]

Yeah, and there's a, there, you know, there's a, I, I know a lot of politicians. You do as well. There is a genuine fear, especially on the right to not say anything. They know the backlash and they understand the anger, but they fear the money from the AI companies. You know, more than anything, there's this election in, in New York, I think, New York's 12th congressional, this guy named Alex Boris, who's running regulations on AI. It's a Democratic primary, and they've spent like $20 million against him. And they think that they can just, you know, if they spend the amount of money necessary, they will be able to beat down anybody who has any concerns over regulations. And that's why I keep saying, like, Alex, even if, even if he's horrendous, if I disagree with him on so many issues, he has to win. Like, he has to win because people have to not be scared of AI money. But that is the truth. Mark Andreessen is the number one spender of the 2026 election so far. Mark Andreessen, business partner,

[Amy Kramer]

can we talk about something else, too? You talked about that they're afraid of Republicans, but in the present, I mean, big tech is in his pocket and they're pushing this administration and whatnot. But we're going to come up on a general election. I mean, we just had a primary here in Georgia this week. We're going to come up on a general election. What are Republicans going to say? Because two weeks ago, on Wednesday night, Jon Ossoff, who is our Democrat senator who we hope will lose in November, but he was out in San Francisco, Chris Lehane of OpenAI, hosting a fundraiser for him. So they're talking out of both sides of their mouth. What's going to happen when the general election comes? And you have Mike Collins, who I think is more of a populist, more America first is going to be with the people. I hope he is. I haven't talked to him about this issue. And then you have John Austin are these big companies because $300 million so far has been spent to influence our elections because they want to elect people that are sensitive or sympathetic to their cause. So what are Republicans going to do when John Ossoff is running and they get behind John Ossoff because he's sympathetic to their cause? What are Republicans going to do then?

[Ryan Gardusky]

Well, I mean, the thing is that a lot of the AI companies, a lot of the tech companies, companies, they are still financing many, many, many progressive causes, many progressive causes. It's not like the people who censored Hunter Biden's laptop did not wake up one day, have a St. Paul on the road to Damascus conversion and all of a sudden become fierce right wingers. A few tech people are right wing. Peter Thiel was always right wing. David Sacks has always been fairly right wing. But for the most part, these are the people who Elon Musk was not right wing his entire life. This is like, you know, a very, very recent transformation. And how sincere, not just Elon, but like all these transformations are, I think is an open question that no one really has a firm opinion on because they keep financing all these left wing causes. And I talked to this one congressman and I said, you need, he asked, he has to hire me. He's running in a very, very difficult, difficult House seat. And I just said, well, what's your, we were talking about immigration and trade, all these other big policy issues. And I said, so what's your opinion on AI? And he said, well, I'm hoping that this election cycle I still won't have to talk about it until someone, until, because I don't think he goes, I don't think the public has caught up. And the problem is, is that there is going to be a limitation on how long you could just be silent on it. So what politicians have, have been receptive to your message that you've, that you guys have reached out to.

[Amy Kramer]

So that's a great question. And I would say in the Senate, the two real heroes in the Senate are Senator Marsha Blackburn and Senator Josh Hawley. I, I do have to give Senator Ted Cruz credit. He is coming our way. I met with him a couple weeks ago with some Angel AI angel family, some Texas parents that have lost their children to these chatbots. And so and then he spoke at a rally with Senator Marsha Blackburn last week. And that is that, I mean, he is, there's been a Clear shift there. But Ted's a dad. I mean, he's got two teenage daughters, right? He's a dad. So I'm sure this pulls on his heartstrings in the House. There's not been, I hate to say it, but there's not been a lot. We don't have a lot of heroes there. We do have some heroes out in the states. I mean, Governor Ron DeSantis has been a hero and rock star on this. I mean, absolute rock star. Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders has been a rock star. And there are a number of people in the state legislatures. Senator Angela Paxton out of Texas, she has led the effort in Texas to get legislation passed there and Tennessee. But this is the thing, as you know, what has happened over this past, this early winter and spring, the White House has come in and put their boot on the neck of these states and interfering. These are, this is not the president. This is not, you know, these are staffers. These are not even bureaucrats. These are staffers that are doing the bidding of big tech and calling and shutting down legislation in these states. And it's wrong, Ryan. It's absolutely wrong. And that's why I think you're going to see a, a very big pushback come next legislative cycle, next January, where they are working together, and you're going to see these people push to get this legislation passed. Because as a parent, you're a parent. You know, we all know that if our children are in danger, I know no one that is going to say, I'm going to wait on the federal government to come and help. It's just asinine. Right? No one ever said that, that. So whether it's our animal, whatever, I mean, it's just not realistic. And the states are the first line of defense. And that's why I have to give a major shout out to Governor Ron DeSantis. He is the best damn governor in this country right now and he is doing amazing work. And I think, and you've seen Senator or not, Senator AG Ken Paxton really push back on these tech companies, too, and file lawsuits against them. I personally hope that Chip Roy is elected as their AG because I think that fight will continue. He's willing to go into the, into the lion's den on that. But we need strong states. We need leadership and strong states that are going to stand up and push back on these tech companies. Because let me be clear, these people are the same people that have banned and censored conservatives for years now, right? I mean, it was Mark Zuckerberg, that banned, permanently banned the President of the United States from Facebook and instagram after the 2020 election. I personally have been banned from starting Facebook groups for 219 million years. I can give you the screenshot of it. But then President Trump is reelected and he's paying, you know, seven, $8 billion for his inauguration, and he's right there at the inauguration. The minute the Republicans are no longer in power, you're going to see them flip and they're going to kick conservatives to the curb. And so I would just say to the President and everybody in leadership, these people can't be trusted. I mean, they can't be trusted. It is your job, your responsibility to protect the American people. And that's what we want them do. And, and look, President Trump has shown, just this week when he endorsed Ken Paxton, he show he has shown he can be moved on issues. So I hope that the President will come our way and his administration will tighten the export controls, will stop selling our chips to China, and we'll do this mandatory testing where they have to have government approval for these frontier AI systems before they're released from. For the, for the, to the public. I think that is the only way that you can protect the American people.

[Ryan Gardusky]

Okay, Amy, where can people go if they want to get in touch with humans first? We want to be part of what you guys are doing. What's the best resource for that?

[Amy Kramer]

Well, thanks for having me on. You can go to humans first.com and I'm on Twitter and all the socials, although I'm shadow banned and censored at Amy Kramer. So, yeah, follow me there. And thanks for having me on. You have a great podcast and I'm really honored to be. Thank you, Amy and Ryan, you've been great on this issue. You've been so good on this issue. So thank you. You're one of the the real true voices out there speaking the truth. And so I appreciate that.

[Ryan Gardusky]

I appreciate you. Thank you, Amy.

[Amy Kramer]

Thank you.

[Ad Voice 2]

Warning. This product contains nicotine. Nicotine is an addictive chemical.

[Ad Voice 3]

We don't want to waste your time, so we won't. VUSE is vapor. Done right, simple, sleek, stylish. Because when you find a vape that goes with everything, everything just clicks. Find views at your local convenience store down the block.

[Ad Voice 2]

Underage sale prohibited. Views is a vapor product website restricted to age 21 plus tobacco consumers. Copyright 2026 RJRVC.

[Bombas Ad]

You're a pro at running your life, at committing to your workout, at showing up every day at Bombas we're pros too. Pros at making socks. Our spirit Sport assortment has specialized socks for whatever sport you're committed to. Running, hiking, golf, Pilates and so much more. Made with sweat, wicking yarns, blister fighting details and targeted arch support. Bombas sport is pro level socks from the Pros of Socks. For another pro you go to bombus.com audio and use code audio for 20% off your first purchase. That's bombus.com and use code audio.

[Public Investing Ad]

Support for the show comes from Public, the investing platform for those who take it seriously. On Public you can build a multi asset portfolio of stocks, bonds, bonds, options, crypto and now generated assets which allow you to turn any idea into an investable index with AI. It all starts with your prompt. From renewable energy companies with high free cash flow to semiconductor suppliers growing revenue over 20% year over year, you can literally type any prompt and put the AI to work. It screens thousands of stocks, builds a one of a kind index and lets you back test it against the S&P 500. Then you can invest in a few clicks. Generated assets are locked like ETFs with infinite possibilities, completely customizable and based on your thesis, not someone else's. Go to public.com podcast and earn an uncapped 1% bonus when you transfer your portfolio. That's public.com podcast paid for by Public Investing Brokerage Services by Open to the Public Investing Inc. Member FINRA and SIPC Advisory Services by Public Advisors llc. SEC Registered Advisor. Generated Assets is an interactive analysis tool. Output is for informational purposes only and is not an investment recommendation or advice. Complete disclosures [e-mail] if you're feeling off

[Inner Balance Ad]

fatigue, mood changes, skin shifts, yet your labs say everything's normal. You're not alone. Meet Oestra from Inner Balance. The first all in one prescription Strength bioidentical hormone cream that's natural and effective and only takes one drop, 10 seconds a day. Oester replaces five to six products women typically use to treat symptoms and is third party tested to ensure the highest quality. Visit innerbalance.com today to start feeling like yourself again. That's innerbalance.com now it's time for the

[Ryan Gardusky]

Ask Me Anything segment. If you want to be part of the Ask Me Anything segment, you'll [e-mail] that's ryan@Numbers plural NumbersGamePodcast.com first question comes from Bennett. He says right after the Virginia ballot measure passed, there was outrage that the GOP seemingly spent nothing or very little on ads and ground game campaign. In hindsight, that was probably smart. I would like to think the GOP was playing 4D chess and knew there was going to be a challenge to the measure and in court, but I'm not too sure that was the case. Do you think there was incompetence or did the VAGOP knew all along there was going to be a challenge at the measure and that spent very little because of that. So the. So yes, there was. They always knew there was going to be a challenge to the measure. In Virginia, the law is that the legislature needs to approve state supreme Court justices every time they're up for confirmation. So yes, they knew that there was going to be a. That the, that the court was going to be. There was going to see a challenge. But many people did think that the court would rule against the GOP because the Democratic legislature would have to approve the reconfirmation of all those judges. I don't think this was 40. Just. I don't. I. I talked to a lot of Republicans who had no faith in the Virginia Supreme Court who did not think they were going to rule on their side, and they thought that it was going to be a loss for, for conservatives and they were totally prepared for the.

[Amy Kramer]

That.

[Ryan Gardusky]

I think that it was some bad campaigning still. I mean, in the end, it all worked out. It all worked out fabulously for them, but I don't think that anyone expected it to. I think that they got very, very lucky with that. The Supreme Court justices ruled correctly and had some cojones to them. Okay, next question comes up from Nate. Would you talk about the South Carolina election? I would love to vote out Lindsey Graham, but I don't know anything about Mark Lynch. I also find Reedy interesting for governor. Governor. So for those who don't know, Lindsey Graham is up for election this year. Mark lynch is the leading Republican alternative. He is a repair executive, very successful guy. Put millions of dollars into his own money against Lindsey Graham. He's the first serious challenge that Lindsey Graham's had in at least 10 years. But right now, the. Based on the polling, it suggests that this is just basically a protest vote. He's about 20% in the polling right now, which is really no different than Katie Casey Pucha over against in Ohio against Vivek Ramaswamy. Maybe he'll get more than the last Republican. God, but I kind of doubt it right now. Graham is. Graham is. Graham's got the endorsement of the Trump, of President Trump. He's got more money than God. And the last guy who ran against the last people who ran against Lindsey Graham got 33% in 2020. Maybe they'll get close to 40% right now, but I kind of doubt it. I think Lindsey Graham's really got this. So if you don't like Lindsey Graham, vote your conscience. It is, it's likely to be Lindsey Graham and your vote. You should be able to vote. It's nothing online for voting who you want to vote for is what I'm saying. Okay, last question comes from Scott. Enjoy your podcast. Thank you Scott. I enjoy you. I'm a supplier of data construction, specifically liquid cooling systems. I would have a real hard time believing anything being said about high water usage. Yes, there's a one time fill but all the systems being built now are closed loop. It's quite impressive how everyone all of a sudden hates citizens. I think it might be that in cases they hate the tax incentives, I hate those too. These do not create jobs, very few long term jobs after construction. So I see no reason to give any tax incentives. Like your interview with sheriff running for California governor. Why is it that ours want to eliminate all income tax? Ohio has driven itself into a tax cliff because property taxes are ridiculous and can never be escaped unless you get a deal with a data center. I hope that these property taxes abolishments gets on the Ohio ballot this fall and we can shake things up. I don't believe it is on the ballot this fall. I, I, I, I don't believe any kind of things are on the ballot this one. When it comes to tax in Ohio, what I'll say is this, is that the, the, we're in a basically a hot war between the states over who can cut taxes fastest among all the red states because it's to draw people because Florida, Tennessee, Texas are drawing mass amounts of people because of zero income tax. And the, and that's a big, big part of the incentive driving this, this, this cut is like who can make it faster? What it, where it could be problematic is like in a case of Kansas where Kansas cut so much taxes and so much welfare spending so quickly back in like the mid aughts or early 2010s and it ended up being that no new tax revenue came in and people were furious and that's why they got a Democratic governor right after Laura Kelly. So I think that, I think that, I think obviously listen, cut taxes if you can and make people keep their money. However, you never want to be in a situation where they cut taxes to such a high extent that they all of a sudden to raise them quickly to pay just the basic things you have to pay for in a government, a local government and then you end up with a Democratic governor. So I think that there's a big fear of that happening as retaliation. We'll see, we'll see how far that goes. A lot of people promising cutting to all income tax. I, I, I think that they are, there's going to be a little bit of pushback or all property tax is another idea that they've had. They're going to cut every single kind of property tax. They got to pay for the bill somehow. They got to pay for the firefighters and the roads somehow. So we'll see, we'll see where it goes. But I wouldn't be surprised if a few slash income tax or cut down to zero. What really the opportunity is is not in these red states to cut taxes is a neighboring state, blue state. So like Arizona being a purple state, Pennsylvania being a purple state, Connecticut, if they could ever get back to a zero income tax and live near these big high tax, New Jersey, New York states that would revolutionize and change things in those areas. But I don't know if we're going to see them because they love Democratic governors. Anyway, thank you guys for listening this episode. I hope you like it. Well, back to politics next week. If you like this podcast, please like and subscribe to the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcast or Business Podcast and on YouTube. I will see you guys on Monday.

[Ad Voice 3]

Warning. This product contains nicotine. Nicotine is an addictive chemical.

[Ad Voice 2]

At Vuse, we're vapor. Done right, Always simple, always in your pocket so you can focus on what really matters. Like getting back to your podcast. Find out [e-mail] that's v u s

[Ad Voice 3]

e.com underage still prohibited. Views is a vapor product website restricted to age 21 plus tobacco consumers. Copyright 2026 RJRVC.

[Inner Balance Ad]

If you're feeling off fatigue, mood changes, skin shifts, yet your labs say everything's normal. You're not alone. Meet Oestra from Inner Balance. The first all in one prescription strength bioidentical hormone cream that's natural and effective and only takes one drop, 10 seconds a day. Oester replaces five to six products women typically use to treat symptoms and is third party tested to ensure the highest quality. Visit innerbalance.com today to start feeling like yourself again.

[Ad Voice 1]

That's innerbalance.com Most dog food brands don't really want you seeing how their food is made. Just food for dogs is the opposite. They actually invite you in. You can walk into any of their kitchens and see real human grade ingr ingredients like chicken, beef, carrots and peas being prepared right in front of you. It's real food made in real kitchens. Nothing is hidden behind labels, and that kind of transparency says a lot. Nothing to hide, everything to love. Go to justfoodfordogs.com and get 50% off your first order.

[Land.com Ad]

You ever get the feeling the city walls closing in the concrete jungle suffocating your soul? You crave wide open spaces, the chance to connect with nature, maybe chase some elk, fish a private stream. Well, listen up. There's a whole world out there, and finding your own piece of it just got easier. Head over to land.com they've got ranches, forest, mountains, you name it. Search by acreage, location, the kind of hunting or fishing you dream of. Land.com it's where the adventure begins.