00:29:26 · Jordan Nanos, Maya Barkin, Wayne Ma
[00:29:26] S1: Yeah. So clearly, this is the race you're watching most closely today, Maya, or are you watching others as well? [00:29:34] S2: Exactly. I mean, we're watching it closely, but the polls all show that Abbott is projected to win. [00:29:43] S1: Makes sense. Yeah. And I guess there's always a difference between what they're saying during the campaign versus what plays out in practice over the next number of months or years. I mean [00:29:55] S2: Exactly. [00:29:56] S1: The chart [00:29:57] S2: here I think it's [00:30:00] S1: Yeah. Go. [00:30:01] S2: No. I I want to say I think it's important to flag that we also take all of the propositions from these candidates at face value in this article. Even though some of them might... It it it might be smarter to take them with a grain of salt. Right? [00:30:22] S1: Yeah. Yeah. Makes sense. [00:30:24] S3: I was gonna say that Georgia seems to be a huge toss-up. Right? Like, the post, you know, both candidates are neck and neck. And the, you know, Keisha Lance Bottoms, you know, she wants a temporary pause. Andrew Jackson is is more for conditions.
00:30:24 · Wayne Ma, Jordan Nanos
[00:30:24] S3: I was gonna say that Georgia seems to be a huge toss-up. Right? Like, the post, you know, both candidates are neck and neck. And the, you know, Keisha Lance Bottoms, you know, she wants a temporary pause. Andrew Jackson is is more for conditions. [00:30:38] S1: Yeah. But it's it's interesting just looking at this table that you guys made because so many of these positions are not stated. So, not only is it a toss-up election where the candidates don't differ that much issue by issue, but neither of them have a stated position on ending tax incentives, for example. That's a huge thing for a given project, for, you know, a given company. Let's assume there's some conditions and one of those conditions is ending the tax incentive. That's probably like one of the biggest impacts to a data center project right there. And you can just go through issue by issue, race by race, and I think get really wrapped up in exactly what this means going forward.
00:31:25 · Jeremie Eliahou Ontiveros
[00:31:25] S0: Then there's always a question of like, you know, what is the most efficient way to deal with this? Do you want to have a state that like imposes everything or do you want to delegate more towards sort of local authorities? And like that more decentralized model can sometimes be faster. Like, for example, if we talk about power, like bring your own power. Let's just imagine, like if we just imagine and make it simple, imagine there's a law that says you must bring your own power. It's kind of a weird thing to say because it's really like power can be very local. And now even within a state, you can have like different grids. For example, in India, you have PJM, you have MISO, right, which all function in different ways. And so those have different rules. And so it wouldn't really make sense for a state like that to say, hey, you must bring your own power. Like, if there's a power available in this area, then maybe you can take it. If you wanna go off grid, then obviously you're gonna bring your own power because the way you do it. So anyways, all of those to say like decentralization also makes sense. Sometimes it's better to not control everything at the state level. And also, some of these rules must consider actual sort of local conditions.
00:32:32 · Jordan Nanos, Maya Barkin
[00:32:32] S1: How about federal stuff? There's two more years of a Trump administration coming after this, and the states obviously have their way of controlling things, but look, this is Bipartisan all the way up to the top, where Trump has made pretty clear that he doesn't want repairs, you know, price on the grid to increase. That's that's one position. So, what else are you guys watching at the federal level after this happens? Like, let's say, Democrats sweep and they take control of the House and the Senate. What that mean? [00:33:05] S2: Yeah. So if Democrats take the House and the Senate, we don't believe that very much would change. First of all, Trump holds the veto until the end of his term. And a narrow Senate, which is what I believe is projected to happen, a narrow Democratic Senate. It still needs Republican votes to move stricter legislation forward. But it's true that the thing that both parties agree on is making large electricity users pay for their own grid costs. And Trump supports that as well. So what is most likely to happen is that the developers may have to pay upfront or post more collateral, and that can delay some projects, but it doesn't prohibit development. And so, the permitting reforms could actually speed up the infrastructure that the new demand needs.
00:33:05 · Maya Barkin, Jordan Nanos
[00:33:05] S2: Yeah. So if Democrats take the House and the Senate, we don't believe that very much would change. First of all, Trump holds the veto until the end of his term. And a narrow Senate, which is what I believe is projected to happen, a narrow Democratic Senate. It still needs Republican votes to move stricter legislation forward. But it's true that the thing that both parties agree on is making large electricity users pay for their own grid costs. And Trump supports that as well. So what is most likely to happen is that the developers may have to pay upfront or post more collateral, and that can delay some projects, but it doesn't prohibit development. And so, the permitting reforms could actually speed up the infrastructure that the new demand needs. [00:34:21] S1: Makes sense. Yeah, one thing that I'm struck by listening to all of this is that at every level, like federal, state, local, it does seem like there's lots of politicians being pragmatic and thinking these issues through on their merit, rather than having this party line they have to stick to, even if it doesn't make sense in their specific scenario for their constituents. Which is encouraging. Like, this is an important topic, and I think it's actually quite nice to see that not everybody has, you know, one line they need to stick to, and they're gonna actually think these things through. I don't know what you guys... Do you guys agree on that?
00:34:21 · Jordan Nanos, Maya Barkin, Wayne Ma
[00:34:21] S1: Makes sense. Yeah, one thing that I'm struck by listening to all of this is that at every level, like federal, state, local, it does seem like there's lots of politicians being pragmatic and thinking these issues through on their merit, rather than having this party line they have to stick to, even if it doesn't make sense in their specific scenario for their constituents. Which is encouraging. Like, this is an important topic, and I think it's actually quite nice to see that not everybody has, you know, one line they need to stick to, and they're gonna actually think these things through. I don't know what you guys... Do you guys agree on that? [00:34:59] S2: Yeah. I think politicians are listening to their constituents. We're also doing some work. It's still ongoing on better understanding this anti data center backlash that is really a 2026 phenomenon. So stay tuned for that. [00:35:21] S1: Yeah. On the last part, [00:35:22] S3: I'm using this topic [00:35:24] S1: up every time. Like, people have a more favorable rating, like a significantly more favorable rating for AI than they do data centers. And they really like to log onto social media and post online to all their friends to see on the Internet about how much they don't like data center. [00:35:40] S2: Yeah. There's definitely a lot of fear mongering online and some, yeah, some social media posts that have gone viral that are like clickbait and that have been widely reshared. So I think data centers are slowly realizing that they really need to have a better PR strategy.