cycling has never been real. How many of you knew that? How many of you knew the plastic recycling was never real? A lot of you did. How many Democrats do you think know that? Not so many. Not so many.

All right. So what is the answer? You all watch the news. So the most important question I would say, see if you agree with me, the most important question about climate change in terms of what we're going to do about it, because even if you think there's no risk you need more energy, right? So the people who don't believe in climate change as a risk, the ones who do believe it, you all need more energy.

So the biggest question is which one's more economical. So tell me which one's more economical, solar or nuclear. And I'm going to tell you the real answer after you tell me your answers. There's an absolute real answer I can give you. Complete certainty on this question.

A lot of people say nuclear. A lot of people say nuclear. All right. Both. That's an interesting answer. Both make sense from a you need all the energy you can get perspective but one of them is going to be better.

All right. Do you want the absolute guaranteed correct answer? Nobody knows. Are you kidding me? You think somebody knows the answer to this question? No. This is completely unknowable.

Now here we happen to be in my domain of expertise. You know I know it doesn't seem like it but I do have many years of corporate experience trying to analyze what costs more both initially and also in the long run because it's not your initial cost. It's you have to put in decommissioning and everything else there.

So I can guarantee you that the level of complexity involved in nuclear as well as solar guarantees that nobody knows the answer. It's a guarantee.

Here's what else they don't know. What will be the economics if let's say you got a capable president. Let's say you have a Vivek Ramaswamy and he said hey this nuclear stuff would be good if you could make it easier to build and easier to get approved. So at the moment it's nearly impossible to get a nuclear power plant built because of all the environmentalists and blah blah blah.

But could you imagine if there's somebody who is smart and a president could say hey you states don't get a vote because this is too close to homeland security. You can't really have a country. There's a national defense unless you're also a strong economy. So you need your basics, your energy production. That's the most basic thing. You got to get your energy production and then maybe transportation would be next.

But if you don't get your energy production right you might as well disband your army. Your army's useless if you don't have energy and you don't have a good economy to equip them, right?

So somebody like Vivek could make the argument that nuclear energy is not just a choice of which energy to use but it's a requirement for the sustainability of the United States defensively and in every other way that we have a robust efficient nuclear energy game.

Now could the federal government just say hey environmentalists go away and hey Democrats it doesn't matter what you want because it's national security. So I'm going to get rid of all the little state and local ordinances and I'm going to say there's just one set of federal approvals and if you and they won't be that hard you know they'll be optimized so you can get your approval. And I'm just going to say you states you just don't get a vote in this because you're driving the country into ruin and that's a defense problem.

So could that happen? I don't know but you don't either. That's my point. My point is if you don't know could Vivek do that or could Trump do that. He didn't do it the first time so I suspect he can't. But I think Vivek could do it because do you know what it would take to remove all of those regulations? The minimum it would take for a president to do that they would have to understand the topic.

How many people have ever run for that off