SJD Vance as Dumbledore. That's the big story tonight, apparently.
EI'm more interested in his son as Dobby. That's commitment.
SThe internet is having a field day. 'Vice President Dumbledore' is trending everywhere.
ELook, say what you want about the guy's politics. Dressing up as a wizard with your kid? That's just good dadding.
SHe went full robes, beard, the works. I checked — this is real. Vance posted the photos himself.
EAnd the best reply I saw: 'Ten points to Ohio.'
SThat's perfect. No notes.
EBut here's my thing: every single politician does the Halloween costume bit now. Remember Obama with the tiny hands?
SDifferent energy entirely. Obama's was ironic. Vance went all in. There's no irony in a full Dumbledore robe.
EFair point. But let's move to actual news. This one's serious.
SSupreme Court just rejected the DOJ's emergency request to block California from counting disputed mail ballots.
EThis is the midterm fight everyone saw coming. The DOJ wanted the Court to step in before the count finished.
SThe DOJ argued some late-arriving ballots should be excluded. Lower courts didn't buy it. Now the Supreme Court says no.
EAnd this connects to the Alaska Senate election lawsuit. The DOJ is appealing a dismissal there too.
SSo what this means: California keeps counting the disputed ballots. The midterm outcome there stays on track.
ELook, I get the DOJ's argument about election integrity. Every ballot should be legitimate. But you can't just swoop in mid-count and change the rules.
SThat's exactly my point. The rules were set before the election. You count what the state said you count. You don't rewrite it after votes are in.
EBut if the rules themselves are the problem, what then? Just shrug and say, 'well, they were the rules'?
SThen you fix them for the NEXT election. You don't throw out ballots people already cast in good faith.
EI'm not saying throw out ballots. I'm saying the DOJ has a legitimate concern about ballots that arrive late.
SCalifornia's rules allow for certain disputed ballots. That's not new. This isn't a surprise to anyone running the election.
EAnd the Supreme Court just told the DOJ: not our problem right now. Which is probably the right call procedurally.
SThe bigger picture: this is a setback for the DOJ's broader push to tighten counting rules across multiple states.
ELegal observers are watching the Alaska appeal closely. That's where the next fight lands.
SFor now, California counts. We'll see what the final tallies look like.
ESpeaking of surprises, Nvidia's humanoid robots with China-made hands. That's a headline I didn't expect tonight.
SWait, Nvidia's robot hands come from China? That's a supply chain story.
ECNBC's newsletter says the humanoid systems feature mechanical hands from China-linked startups.
SSo the crown jewel of American AI hardware, and the most intricate part — the hands — is built in China.
EThat's the reality of manufacturing. Precision parts at scale. China's still unbeatable on cost.
SBut this is exactly the kind of dependency people in Washington keep warning about. If the supply chain gets cut off, Nvidia's robot dreams stall.
ECounterpoint: if American companies can't source competitive parts, they fall behind. You need the best components, wherever they come from.
SThat's how you end up with critical infrastructure controlled by a geopolitical rival.
EI'm not saying it's ideal. But tell me the American company making robot hands at the same price. There isn't one.
SThen we build one. That's the point of the CHIPS Act, the reshoring effort. You don't just surrender the supply chain.
EFine, but that takes years. Nvidia wants robots now. Their timeline doesn't wait for policy.
SAnd that's how dependencies form: short-term convenience over long-term security.
EWell, when the robots unionize, we can revisit this.
SDon't give them ideas.
EMeanwhile, Jim Cramer is out there recommending fashion stocks. Beyond the AI trade.
SSix fashion stocks. The man picks sectors like I pick lunch.
EHis argument: consumer stocks have been resilient while tech's under pressure. Which is... actually not crazy.
SCramer's right about the rotation. Consumer spending's held up. But taking stock tips from a guy whose top pick last month reportedly fell twenty percent? Tread carefully.
ENo one's saying buy, relax. But the broader point is the market's moving away from pure AI plays. Money's rotating.
SThe S&P 500 history after midterms is actually the better story. Historically, the market likes a Democratic win.
EBecause gridlock means no big spending, no big tax hikes. The market loves nothing changing.
SAlmost half the time after midterms, the market's up double digits over the next year, as the historical figures are usually cited. That's a better guide than Cramer's fashion picks.
EThat's a better guide than hype any day.
SThat's the show for this hour. Sloane and Eric, Prime Time.