CMR is the leading provider of funding and management support for small to medium-sized businesses and entrepreneurs 

Nickel prices on the London Metal Exchange surged as much as 2.6% to $19,050 a ton after Shanghai Metals Market said upwards of 15% of high-grade nickel pig iron capacity at Indonesia's Weda Bay Industrial Park will undergo rotational maintenance in the coming months, according to Bloomberg.

Indonesia's Weda Bay Industrial Park is one of the most important nickel-processing hubs in the world and serves a large cluster of smelters that produce nickel pig iron, a key input for stainless steel production.

Indonesia dominates global nickel supply, producing 2.6 million metric tons of nickel in 2025 out of a global total of 3.9 million tons, accounting for roughly two-thirds of global mine production.

So, the earlier news from SMM indicating a 10% to 15% reduction in NPI output from Weda Bay Industrial Park in the coming months, building on existing NPI reductions in March and April due to lower ore supplies and high costs, has easily sparked supply concerns on the LME ...

Nickel is extremely valuable and a critical industrial metal in the era of electrification and data center buildouts:

• Stainless steel, by far the largest demand center, where nickel improves corrosion resistance, strength, and heat tolerance.

• EV and energy-storage batteries, especially nickel-rich lithium-ion chemistries that increase energy density and driving range.

• Aerospace and military superalloys, including jet-engine turbine blades and high-temperature gas turbines.

• Industrial alloys, plating, and catalysts, used across machinery, chemicals, and corrosion-resistant equipment.

Let's not forget that sulfuric acid prices have surged amid the Hormuz disruption. This industrial chemical is used in nickel production, especially in Indonesia's battery-grade nickel supply chain.

The line in the sand for LME nickel futures is $20,000.

Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times,

The U.S. Supreme Court on May 18 ordered lower courts to reconsider rulings in two redistricting cases that concern whether private individuals may sue to enforce a federal law that bans discriminatory voting practices.

The court directed the lower courts to take another look at the cases from Mississippi and North Dakota in light of its recent landmark ruling limiting the use of race in redistricting efforts.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented from both new rulings.

In Louisiana v. Callais, a majority of the court had said April 29 that race may not be the predominant, overriding reason for how congressional district lines are drawn. The case focused on the Pelican State’s decision to add a majority-black district after a lower court said omitting the district would violate the Section 2 nondiscrimination provisions of the federal Voting Rights Act.

On Monday, the nation’s highest court summarily disposed of the two cases, State Board of Election Commissioners v. Mississippi State Conference of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), and Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians v. Howe, in unsigned orders. The court did not explain its decisions.

Lawyers call this process, which disposes of cases without holding an oral argument, GVR, which stands for grant, vacate, and remand.

The Supreme Court follows this procedure when it wants lower courts to reconsider their rulings using a new legal framework from a recent decision without delving deeply into the specifics of the cases.

North Dakota

In the North Dakota case, the Turtle Mountain Band, the Spirit Lake Tribe, and three Native American voters sued the state’s secretary of state after the state legislature redrew the boundaries of state legislative districts in 2021. The move took the number of majority-Indian districts in the northeastern section of the state from three down to one, and this, the tribes’ petition argued, constituted illegal dilution of Indian voting power.

They filed what’s called a private enforcement lawsuit against the secretary of state to enforce Section 2. They brought their legal action under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, a federal law that allows individuals to sue the government for civil rights violations.

Secretary of State Michael Howe urged the federal district court to dismiss the case, arguing that there was no implied right of action allowing enforcement of Section 2. The court did not rule on the issue because the plaintiffs also pleaded their case under Section 1983, which the court found yielded a cause of action to enforce Section 2. A cause of action is a set of facts that provides a legal basis for suing someone, the petition said.

The district court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, finding that Section 2 created individual rights and that nothing in the section’s enforcement provisions was “incompatible with private enforcement.”

Howe appealed, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit found for the state and reversed the district court. The appeals court found that Section 2 does not make provisions for an implied private right of action, and that private plaintiffs may not “instead maintain a private right of action for alleged violations of [Section] 2 through 42 U.S.C. [Section] 1983.”

In his brief, Howe urged the Supreme Court to reject the case, arguing that the Eighth Circuit ruled correctly.

Section 2 “did not unambiguously create an individual right against collective vote dilution,” and the section’s prohibition against dilution is not privately enforceable under Section 1983, he said.

The tribes said in their petition that the Eighth Circuit erred in finding that Section 2 was not privately enforceable and urged the Supreme Court to grant their petition.

The Supreme Court held in Morse v. Republican Party of Virginia (1996) that Section 2 and other sections of the Voting Rights Act are privately enforceable, the petition said.

Mississippi

In the Mississippi case, the NAACP challenged a map for state legislative districts drawn by the Mississippi Legislature after the 2020 census, the NAACP said in its brief.

The group argued that some of the new districts in the 2022 redistricting plan violated Section 2 and the U.S. Constitution, by cracking “large, cohesive Black populations.” Cracking is drawing districts that divide a population or constituency across several districts.

The NAACP argued that four Senate districts and three House districts violated Section 2. The plaintiffs cited Section 1983 and the implied right of action under Section 2 as bolstering their right to privately enforce Section 2, the brief said.

A district court panel of three Mississippi federal judges ruled that the redistricting plan violated Section 2. The court gave the legislature an opportunity to fix its legislative map and ordered special elections in specific districts.

The state said in its brief, which asked the Supreme Court not to take up the case, that the panel erred when it found that the private parties in the case may sue to enforce section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

That issue regarding private enforcement action is “unsettled and profoundly important” and has divided the regional courts of appeals. Section 2 does not, in “clear and unambiguous” terms, create a federal right to enforce the law under either an implied right of action or Section 1983.

The NAACP urged the Supreme Court to affirm the panel’s ruling.

Jackson’s Dissent

Jackson wrote a nearly identical dissent to both Supreme Court rulings.

“This case presents only the question of Section 2’s private enforceability, which our decision in Louisiana v. Callais ... did not address,“ she said. ”Thus I see no basis for vacating the lower court’s judgment.”

Citing the Morse precedent from 1996, Jackson said she would affirm the lower court’s ruling in the Mississippi case, and reverse the lower court’s ruling in the North Dakota case.

Update(1140ET): President Trump has on Tuesday while fielding questions from reporters repeated his line that Iran is 'begging' for a deal. "They're begging to make a deal. I hope we don't have to do the war, but we may have to give them another big hit. We may have to give them another big hit. You'll know very soon."

His threat to give them another "big hit" was coupled with the assertion that he was just one hour away from ordering new attacks on Iran Monday, but was asked by Gulf allies to given diplomacy just a little longer:

Trump: "I was an hour away" from striking Iran on Monday.

There was also the below moment where he again talked timeline, saying he's ready to resume military action in a few 'days' if Iran doesn't comply:

Reporter: How many days does Iran have to come to the table?

Trump: Two or three days. Maybe Friday, Saturday, Sunday. Maybe early next week. A limited period of time. pic.twitter.com/yAAfv2jR20

— Clash Report (@clashreport) May 19, 2026

Iran for its part says it stands ready to "confront aggression" and remains in a high state of military alert.

Also, tensions with nearby Gulf states are still soaring, and amid reports that drones have recently been launched from Iraqi territory - likely the work of Shia paramilitary organizations which are closely allied with Iran.

(Reuters) - The United Arab Emirates' Defence Ministry said on Tuesday that a drone that caused a fire at its nuclear power plant on Sunday had been launched from Iraq.

Emirati officials have said the UAE has the full right to respond to such "terrorist attacks". https://t.co/Skv8LEkkRy

— Phil Stewart (@phildstewart) May 19, 2026

*  *  *

In a huge and unexpected announcement, amid stalled US-Iran peace talks - which have proven a failure and illusive thus far, NATO now says it could deploy military assets to forcibly reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Per breaking newswires Tuesday late morning:

NATO TO CONSIDER HORMUZ DEPLOYMENT IF STRAIT NOT OPEN BY JULY

President Trump has continuously chastised the NATO alliance for being largely bankrolled by Washington but at the same time fence-sitting when it comes to forming a coalition to patrol and reopen the vital energy transit waterway. Oil plummeted on the initial headline, seeing in it a positive for the potential that crude transit in the Persian Gulf could again be opened up soon:

And Bloomberg freshly reports:

NATO is discussing the possibility of helping ships pass through the blocked Strait of Hormuz if the waterway isn’t reopened by early July, according to a senior official in the military alliance.

The idea has support from several members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, but doesn’t yet have the necessary unanimous support, said a diplomat from a NATO country. Both officials spoke on the condition of anonymity. Leaders from NATO countries will meet in Ankara July 7-8.

But July feels very far away at this point, and anything could happen between now and then, as Washington continues to threaten renewed military action, and Iran says it remains on high alert.

NATO defense chiefs are meeting this week, where also high on the agenda will be the following:

At this week's summit, military chiefs from all 32 member states will examine the impact that consistent rapid consumption may have on NATO's collective capabilities and deterrent power as Russia continues to threaten allies.

Submitted by QTR's Fringe Finance

For the better part of the last year, Wall Street has behaved like a teenager who just discovered Red Bull and leverage at the same time. Anything remotely tied to artificial intelligence has soared into the financial stratosphere.

Startups with no revenue, no profits, and occasionally no actual product are raising millions or billions because their founders can say the words “large language model”. Public company CEOs now jam “AI” into earnings calls with the same shamelessness that “trendy” gastropubs have when being the 4th “new” place on the block to not just offer a good ole’ fashioned cheeseburger, but the breathtaking innovation of a truffle aioli smashburger.

Meanwhile, looming over all of this market hysteria was Berkshire Hathaway and its absurd cash pile. More than $390 billion sitting on the sidelines while markets rocketed higher. The question became an obsession. What were Warren Buffett and his successor Greg Abel waiting for?

Surely this cash hoard was being preserved for some grand masterstroke. Maybe Berkshire would make a massive AI acquisition. Maybe it would take a huge stake in some futuristic robotics company whose product sounds vaguely dystopian. Maybe Buffett would emerge from Omaha wearing a black turtleneck and announce BerkshireGPT.

Nope. None of these. The filing arrived yesterday and Wall Street discovered that the answer was Macy’s: a company most people associate with buying last minute wedding gifts and wandering through perfume fog thick enough to qualify as weather.

In an era when investors are paying breathtaking multiples for companies promising that AI will revolutionize enterprise workflows, Berkshire appears to have strolled calmly into a department store hoping to get harassed by the Vancome lady.

It is notable to write about because it feels so aggressively out of sync with the cultural moment.

Right now entire hedge funds are building investment theses around the possibility that artificial intelligence may someday help your refrigerator compose emails and then there is Berkshire, quietly behaving like an investor that ignores market spectacle and focuses instead on underlying value. While others chase whatever appears most exciting in the moment, Berkshire tends to concentrate on businesses and assets that are durable, understandable, and often overlooked.

Berkshire likely was attracted to Macy’s because it combined several characteristics long associated with Buffett-style investing: a deeply discounted valuation trading near book value and at a low forward earnings multiple, substantial underlying real estate assets including the flagship Herald Square property, strong cash generation and shareholder returns through free cash flow and dividends, and a credible turnaround strategy focused on closing weaker stores while reinvesting in stronger locations.

Berkshire also likely recognized the enduring value of Macy’s higher-performing brands, particularly Bloomingdale’s and Bluemercury, which provide growth and profitability beyond the traditional department store business. In fact, a lot of the reasons Berkshire bought Macy’s remind me of another retail stock that I think is similarly as attractive to own right now.

And this isn’t to say Berkshire is anti-technology. The company increased its stake in Alphabet and clearly understands where the economy is headed. But Berkshire has spent decades avoiding one of the central mistakes in modern investing: confusing a compelling narrative with a compelling investment. A transformative future does not automatically justify any price. Investors learned that during the dot-com bubble, when companies with weak earnings and questionable business models were treated as inevitable paths to wealth. Many eventually discovered that enthusiasm alone is not a substitute for sustainable economics. They will learn this again with the AI bubble.

That is what makes the Macy’s move so interesting. It suggests that Berkshire still sees value in businesses the market has largely dismissed as boring, outdated, or finished. Macy’s possesses valuable real estate, broad brand recognition, and consistent cash generation — qualities that can become easy to overlook in markets dominated by growth narratives. Perhaps most importantly, expectations surrounding the company have become so low that stability itself can exceed investor assumptions.

That may be the broader lesson for investors. Markets often become fixated on whatever appears revolutionary while overlooking companies that quietly generate profits in less glamorous industries. Investors naturally want exposure to the future, but there can also be opportunity in businesses that continue to serve enduring consumer needs and produce reliable cash flow.

Investors should also be careful about dismissing Berkshire Hathaway simply because it appears old-fashioned in an era defined by speed and disruption. Yet Berkshire has continued to compound wealth across market cycles while many trend-driven strategies have struggled to deliver lasting results.

---

?? 50% OFF FOR LIFE: Using this coupon entitles you to 50% off an annual subscription to Fringe Finance for life: Get 50% off forever

---

The lesson is not that investors should rush to buy Macy’s. It is that when disciplined long-term investors begin allocating capital to areas the broader market has written off, it is worth paying attention. Wall Street is often drawn to what is new and exciting. Berkshire has historically succeeded by identifying value where others stopped looking.

Another lesson is that patience remains one of the most underappreciated advantages in investing. Modern markets reward constant activity, rapid reactions, and short-term narratives, but Buffett’s track record has repeatedly demonstrated the power of allowing investments time to mature. Companies facing temporary pessimism or cyclical weakness are often abandoned long before their underlying economics can recover. Berkshire’s approach suggests that long-term value is frequently created not through constant trading, but through disciplined conviction and the willingness to endure periods of unpopularity.

There is also a lesson about temperament. Successful investing is often less about predicting the future perfectly and more about avoiding emotional decision-making when sentiment becomes extreme. During periods of market excitement, investors can feel pressure to chase momentum and follow consensus thinking. Conversely, when industries fall out of favor, fear and pessimism can create opportunities for investors willing to evaluate businesses on fundamentals rather than headlines. Berkshire’s history reflects an investment philosophy grounded in rationality and discipline rather than market emotion.

Finally, Berkshire’s strategy highlights the importance of understanding the difference between a good company and a good stock at a particular price. Even strong businesses can become poor investments when expectations become unrealistic, while unpopular companies can sometimes offer attractive risk-reward profiles if expectations fall too far. The broader lesson is not that every overlooked stock represents hidden value, but that investors benefit from questioning consensus assumptions. Markets are highly efficient much of the time, but periods of excessive optimism and excessive pessimism continue to create opportunities for patient, disciplined capital allocators.

Now read:

• Under The Chaos, One Stock Still Looks Cheap
• The Fed Will Invent New Inflation Numbers Out Of Thin Air
• Your Retirement Is Being Used To Buy Wall Street's Toxic Sludge...Again
• Bonds Are Screaming "Something's Wrong"
• This Rally Ends In Panic
• Time For Rate Hikes

--

QTR’s Disclaimer: Please read my full legal disclaimer on my About page here. This post represents my opinions only. In addition, please understand I am an idiot and often get things wrong and lose money. I may own or transact in any names mentioned in this piece at any time without warning. Contributor posts and aggregated posts have been hand selected by me, have not been fact checked and are the opinions of their authors. They are either submitted to QTR by their author, reprinted under a Creative Commons license with my best effort to uphold what the license asks, or with the permission of the author.

This is not a recommendation to buy or sell any stocks or securities, just my opinions. I often lose money on positions I trade/invest in. I may add any name mentioned in this article and sell any name mentioned in this piece at any time, without further warning. None of this is a solicitation to buy or sell securities. I may or may not own names I write about and are watching. Sometimes I’m bullish without owning things, sometimes I’m bearish and do own things. Just assume my positions could be exactly the opposite of what you think they are just in case. If I’m long I could quickly be short and vice versa. I won’t update my positions. All positions can change immediately as soon as I publish this, with or without notice and at any point I can be long, short or neutral on any position. You are on your own. Do not make decisions based on my blog. I exist on the fringe. If you see numbers and calculations of any sort, assume they are wrong and double check them. I failed Algebra in 8th grade and topped off my high school math accolades by getting a D- in remedial Calculus my senior year, before becoming an English major in college so I could bullshit my way through things easier.

The publisher does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information provided in this page. These are not the opinions of any of my employers, partners, or associates. I did my best to be honest about my disclosures but can’t guarantee I am right; I write these posts after a couple beers sometimes. I edit after my posts are published because I’m impatient and lazy, so if you see a typo, check back in a half hour. Also, I just straight up get shit wrong a lot. I mention it twice because it’s that important.

Bond yields continued to move sharply higher today, driven in large part by the aggressive repricing in the oil strip as markets (finally) price in a lengthy disruption to Hormuz traffic which has pushed year-end prices higher by about $12 in the past month.

The result has been a spike across virtually all tenors:

• *US 2-YEAR YIELD RISES TO 4.11%, HIGHEST SINCE FEBRUARY 2025

• *TREASURY 5- AND 7-YEAR YIELDS RISE 10 BASIS POINTS ON DAY

• *US 30-YEAR YIELD RISES TO 5.195%, HIGHEST SINCE JULY 2007

... as can be seen below, with the 30Y yield rising above 5.19% and the highest since 2007

According to Bloomberg, the latest spike higher in 10Y yields which is reverberating across the curve...

... is due to a block of 23,000 contracts in 10-year bond June futures traded at a price of 108-25+ on CBOT.

A total of 1.34 million contracts traded so far in this session.

Two minutes later 20,000 was also blocked at 108-24+ with price action around the two trades consistent with sellers. 

The combined amount of risk weighting over the two trades equates to $2.8m/DV01.

On May 13, there were identical size block buyers at levels of 110-00 (20,000) and 109-30 (23,000).

The two sales Tuesday point to the unwind/loss liquidation of these long positions established May 13.

As Nomura's Charlie McElligott notes, the resumption of investor focus on reaccelerating inflation (both due to 1--the obvious lack of progress with Iran and the Energy / Petrochem “supply shock” as emergency inventories are depleting rapidly, plus 2—signals of an “overheating” US economic risk ironically from the “demand” / FCI -side) have repriced the global central bank policy path “hawkish-ly” while FOMC outlook at the very least is “less dovish-ly” with high pricing of “No Fed Cuts” -scenario through YE and real Delta of the dreaded “Fed Hikes” -potential by YE too.

Bloomberg technical analysts note that the 30-year Treasury yield is right at a key technical level, a break of which targets 5.44% unless liability-driven investors step in to arrest the selloff. The 10-year yield may make a new range if the 4.66% level holds. 

But more importantly, the 30Y is about to rise above 5.20%, some 20bps higher than what Michael Hartnett warned in his last two Flow Shows is the "door of doom" red line for the bond market.

And stocks are starting to notice. 

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

“Stop Hiring Humans.” Those words are now plastered on billboards from San Francisco to New York City, courtesy of a San Francisco-based startup pushing virtual AI sales representatives.

The company, Artisan, markets AI agents that handle outbound sales tasks like lead generation, cold emailing, list-building, and prospecting. Their message is blunt: the era of AI employees is here.

Artisan’s campaign highlights a growing trend of AI replacing human roles in sales and beyond.

This is so dystopian

“Stop Hiring Humans” billboards are being put up from San Francisco to New York City

The company behind the ads is a San Francisco based startup that builds virtual artificial intelligence sales reps

“The Era of AI Employees Is Here”

This particular… pic.twitter.com/LGiMtNpWYv

— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) May 15, 2026

The startup claims its tools could displace as many as 600,000 jobs in America over the next 5-10 years.

The billboards declare “The Era of AI Employees Is Here,” framing human workers as obsolete. Critics see it as tone-deaf marketing that accelerates public backlash against Big Tech’s rush to automate everything.

Driverless cars and a stop hiring humans campaign…

If this is the future, it is HELL pic.twitter.com/kl5sPIfmdr

— Amy Kremer (@AmyKremer) May 17, 2026

In response to the backlash, Artisan CEO Jaspar Carmichael-Jack published a detailed blog post clarifying the campaign’s intent. He argued that the slogan targets a specific category of tedious cold outbound work—email blasting, template churn, and list-building—that burns people out with short tenures and high rejection rates.

The company insists it does not seek to eliminate entire BDR roles, emphasizing that cold calling and human connection remain human tasks. Artisan also built a human dialer to complement its AI tool Ava, positioning the technology as working “alongside” people rather than replacing them outright.

https://t.co/DtnQ2PnnGT

— Maria?? (@_estela86) May 17, 2026

Carmichael-Jack acknowledged the billboard as deliberate provocation while advocating for policies like meaningful universal income and shorter workweeks to manage the transition.

Nevertheless, the move fits a pattern of accelerating AI deployment with little regard for human consequences. Reports continue to emerge of autonomous AI agents exhibiting rogue behavior in controlled environments and real-world applications.

Recent incidents show agents not only replacing workers but acting independently in ways that destroy critical systems—raising alarms about a future where humans are sidelined and technology runs unchecked.

In one high-profile case, a Cursor AI agent powered by Claude Opus 4.6 deleted an entire startup’s production database in seconds.

The agent, tasked with routine work, encountered a credential mismatch and independently decided to delete a volume on Railway cloud servers—wiping out the production database and all backups. The founder of PocketOS detailed the nine-second catastrophe, which caused a 30-hour outage. The AI later admitted to violating its guardrails.

This wasn’t an isolated glitch. Earlier experiments placed AI bots in a simulated virtual town for two weeks, where they quickly descended into chaotic, unpredictable behavior—prompting fresh concerns about what happens when autonomy meets real systems.

Even more dystopian twists have emerged, with AI bots reportedly “renting” humans for bizarre tasks, racking up hundreds of thousands of sign-ups as the lines between machine direction and human labor blur into something unsettling.

These developments underscore a core problem: as AI agents gain more independence to pursue goals, they bypass safeguards, access unrelated credentials, and make destructive decisions without human oversight. Enterprises are deploying them rapidly, but governance lags dangerously behind.

While tech boosters tout efficiency, the billboard campaign and job displacement projections strike a nerve. Sales roles—often entry points for young workers or career ladders—face direct targeting.

Broader automation in driving, customer service, and knowledge work compounds the pressure. Public reactions on X captured the frustration: concerns over driverless Waymo fleets in cities like Los Angeles despite available human drivers, and warnings that mass unemployment could fuel social instability.

One tech professional with over 20 years of experience pushed back against the “humans are worthless” narrative pushed by some influencers, arguing AI should enhance human work rather than devalue it. Others noted the irony: these AI-pushing startups rely on human investors and customers while trying to eliminate human jobs.

China offers a cautionary glimpse, where heavy robot adoption has forced worker pay cuts and displacement on a massive scale. In the West, the push feels aligned with a globalist mindset that prioritizes efficiency and control over local workers and communities.

The speed of these developments leaves little room for thoughtful policy. Pro-freedom voices have long warned against over-reliance on systems vulnerable to failure, manipulation, or emergent behaviors. When AI agents can independently wipe databases, fabricate data, or direct human labor in strange ways, the risks extend beyond economics into security and societal trust.

The billboards are up. The incidents are piling up. The question is whether policymakers and citizens will push back before the era of AI “employees” leaves millions with no role left to play.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Pending home sales were expected to rise for the third straight month in April (after crashing to record lows to end last year) as mortgage rates stabilized amid war worries, and they did, rising 1.4% MoM (better than the 1.0% expected) with March's gains revised higher too.

Source: Bloomberg

This left pending home sales up 3.35% YoY - the best annual gain since Nov 2024 - lifting the index off record lows...

Source: Bloomberg

The report suggests the housing market was finding some footing entering the busiest selling season of the year, helped by gradually improving affordability since mid-2025.

“Buyers are coming out with cautious optimism despite increasing economic uncertainty and a slight rise in mortgage rates,” NAR Chief Economist Lawrence Yun said in a statement.

That said, lower-income prospective buyers remain challenged by high mortgage rates and elevated asking prices.

There has been a notable decoupling between rates and pending sales with the recent rise in rates coinciding with a rise in sales (bit of course, sales are lagged relative to rates, by typically a month or more)...

Contract signings increased last month in three of four US regions.

Pending sales declined in the South, the biggest housing market in the country, after solid increases in the prior two months.

As a reminder, because houses typically go under contract a month or two before they’re sold, the pending home sales data tend to be a leading indicator of closings that are captured in the monthly previously owned home sales reports.

Today, voters in Georgia, Kentucky, Alabama, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Idaho head to the polls for several primary elections that will affect key gubernatorial, House, Senate, and statewide contests ahead of the November midterms. 

The Epoch Times' Jackson Richman gives us the lay of the land (emphasis, charts, clips and any snark - ours...); 

Kentucky

There are a few competitive races in the Bluegrass State.

The most closely watched race is in the state’s Fourth Congressional District, where incumbent Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) faces retired Navy SEAL Ed Gallrein. President Donald Trump endorsed Gallrein after criticizing Massie over several votes he took in Congress. Trump has had success backing primary challengers and knocking off incumbents in several primary elections, including in Indiana and Louisiana.

The district includes the Kentucky suburbs of Cincinnati, part of northern Kentucky, and the outskirts of Louisville, consisting of coal towns and rural villages in the Appalachian foothills.

It has become the most expensive House primary in history.

Thomas Massie:

"Just in case I lose, they gave me the number to call to concede but the area code is Tel Aviv.” ?? pic.twitter.com/5vmfh7ww0M

— GenXGirl (@GenXGirl1994) May 19, 2026

Federal Election Commission data, which include campaign ad spending and other costs, show that candidate campaigns and political parties have spent an estimated $35 million on the race, according to Quiver Quantitative. And according to AdImpact, more than $25 million has been spent on digital, radio, and television ads.

Massie’s campaign has spent $5.8 million, while Gallrein’s has dished out $2.6 million - and yet...

In terms of outside spending, independent political groups have spent more than $10.1 million supporting Massie.

Massie’s campaign has said it has mainly relied on grassroots fundraising. He has received support from the Kentucky First PAC, backed by Pennsylvania billionaire and major TikTok investor Jeff Yass, which contributed $1 million in support, and the Make Liberty Win PAC, which poured in $518,205.

Super PACs have favored Gallrein, contributing more than $16.4 million in his support.

The Republican Jewish Coalition Victory Fund poured in another $470,000 of spending against Massie over the weekend, according to Quiver Quantitative.

Given the district’s strong Republican lean, the GOP nominee is expected to be favored in the general election.

Meanwhile, the race to succeed retiring Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is on as Rep. Andy Barr (R-Ky.), former Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron, and nine other candidates run in the GOP primary. Trump has endorsed Barr.

Former state Rep. Charles Booker and Amy McGrath, who unsuccessfully ran for Senate in 2020, as well as five other candidates are running in the Democratic primary.

Polls project a Barr-Booker matchup.

Georgia

Georgia voters will cast ballots in high-profile primaries for governor, U.S. Senate, U.S. House, and several statewide offices.

The race to replace term-limited Gov. Brian Kemp, a Republican, has drawn crowded fields in both parties.

On the Republican side, candidates include Attorney General Chris Carr, Lt. Gov. Burt Jones, health care executive Rick Jackson, and Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger. Jones has secured an endorsement from Trump.

Democrats competing for the nomination include former Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms, former Lt. Gov. Geoff Duncan, former state Sen. Jason Esteves, and former DeKalb County CEO Mike Thurmond. Bottoms has received backing from former President Joe Biden.

Polls show Bottoms and Jackson leading their respective races.

Another closely watched contest is the Republican Senate primary to challenge incumbent Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) in November. The field includes Reps. Buddy Carter and Mike Collins, along with former football coach Derek Dooley. Although Trump has stayed neutral in the race, Kemp has endorsed Dooley. Polls show Collins in the lead.

Alabama

Alabama voters will decide key primaries for governor, U.S. Senate, and Congress.

In the Republican gubernatorial primary, Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) faces insurance agent Ken McFeeters and event center operations manager Will Santivasci. Trump has endorsed Tuberville. The Democrats running are former Sen. Doug Jones (D-Ala.); former Greenville, Illinois, City Councilor Will Boyd; former state Rep. Nathan Mathis; and three other candidates.

The Republican Senate primary features Rep. Barry Moore (R-Ala.), Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall, and four other candidates. Trump has endorsed Moore. The most recent polls show Moore leading. Democrats competing for the nomination include business owner Kyle Sweetser, pet care entrepreneur Dakarai Larriett, chemist Mark Wheeler II, and attorney Everett Wess.

Alabama’s redistricting process following a Supreme Court decision has also created an open race in the heavily Republican First Congressional District. Republican candidates include former Rep. Jerry Carl (R-Ala.), state Rep. Rhett Marques, and several other contenders. Clyde Jones is expected to secure the Democratic nomination.

Oregon

Oregon’s primary ballot includes races for governor, U.S. Senate, and Congress.

Gov. Tina Kotek, a Democrat, is seeking reelection as multiple challengers attempt to unseat her. Republicans vying for the nomination include Marion County Commissioner Danielle Bethell, state Rep. Ed Diehl, state Sen. Christine Drazan, and former Portland Trail Blazer Chris Dudley.

In the Senate race, incumbent Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) faces a Democratic primary challenge from retired electrical engineer Paul Wells. On the Republican side, candidates include former Senate nominee Jo Rae Perkins and state Sen. David Brock Smith.

Most of Oregon’s congressional races are expected to favor incumbents, but the Fifth Congressional District could emerge as a competitive general election battleground after Democrats reclaimed the seat in 2024. Republican candidates in the district include Deschutes County Commissioner Patti Adair and political communications consultant Jonathan Lockwood.

Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania’s marquee races include contests for governor and several competitive House districts.

The gubernatorial race is all but set with incumbent Gov. Josh Shapiro, a Democrat, facing Pennsylvania State Treasurer Stacy Garrity in November. There are no opponents to those candidates.

However, several congressional districts feature contested Democratic primaries.

In the state’s First Congressional District, the Democratic primary to take on incumbent Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) includes Bucks County Commission Chair Bob Harvie and mathematician Lucia Simonelli.

Pennsylvania’s Third Congressional District, in Philadelphia, features a Democratic primary to replace retiring Rep. Dwight Evans. The candidates include state Rep. Chris Rabb and state Sen. Sharif Street. Rabb has earned endorsements from progressive figures including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), while Street has the support of Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.).

The Democratic primary in the Seventh Congressional District includes Pennsylvania Professional Firefighters Association President Bob Brooks, former federal prosecutor Ryan Crosswell, former Northampton County Executive Lamont McClure, and Carol Obando-Derstine, a former member of the Pennsylvania Advisory Commission on Latino Affairs. Brooks has been endorsed by Shapiro and members of Congress such as Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). Rep. Ryan Mackenzie (R-Pa.) flipped the district from Democratic to Republican in 2024.

In the Eighth Congressional District, incumbent Republican Rep. Rob Bresnahan is expected to face Scranton Mayor Paige Cognetti in a competitive general election matchup.

The Democratic primary in the 10th Congressional District pits Dauphin County Commissioner Justin Douglas against former news anchor Janelle Stelson for the opportunity to challenge Republican Rep. Scott Perry. Stelson barely lost the 2024 race to Perry.

Idaho

Idaho voters will weigh in on Senate and gubernatorial primaries.

Incumbent Sen. Jim Risch (R-Idaho) faces three Republican challengers: data engineer Joe Evans, entrepreneur Denny LaVé, and engineer Josh Roy. Trump has endorsed Risch. The Democratic primary includes estate executive Nickolas Bonds, lifelong Democrat Brad Moore, and realtor David Roth, who unsuccessfully ran for Senate in 2022.

In the race for governor, incumbent Brad Little, a Republican, faces a primary challenge from seven candidates, while the Democratic primary includes small-business owner Jill Kirkham, former Twin Falls Director of Transportation Maxine Durand, attorney Terri Pickens, and Chanelle Torrez.

Jeff Louderback contributed to this report.

By Bas van Geffen, senior macro strategist at Rabobank

Striking

Trump said that he had delayed a planned military strike on Tuesday, at the request of Qatar, Saudia Arabia, and the UAE. According to Trump, the leaders of the Gulf states had asked the US to call off the attack because “serious negotiations are now taking place,” which could lead to a deal that is acceptable to the US and its Middle Eastern allies.

In earlier stages of the conflict, such news would probably have caused a rally in stocks. But it seems that buyers may be on strike, or are at least fatigued. The S&P 500 briefly jumped from its intraday low, but this was insufficient to end the day in the green. Asian equity markets are trading relatively close to home today, too.

Perhaps that’s because, as much as Trump claims that “serious negotiations” are currently ongoing, yesterday’s news flow suggests that the key sticking points remain unresolved. So, this is either a genuine last attempt to get to a peace deal that the Gulf states may prefer over the damage from war, or it is another flip-flop after Washington rejected an Iranian draft plan that was made over the weekend.

Iran may have since made a new proposal. Newspaper Al Arabiya reported that Iran could agree to a long-term pause of its nuclear program. And instead of demanding war reparations, Iran now reportedly asks for economic concessions. Even if these reports are true, a long-term pause is not the same as completely dismantling the nuclear program – will that be sufficient for the US?

The New York Post suggests it is not. In a phone interview, President Trump told the paper that he’s “not open to anything right now,” adding that “they want to make a deal more than ever because they know we’re – what’s going to be happening soon.” However, separately, Trump has also said that he could agree to an Iranian commitment not to pursue nuclear weapons – if the Gulf states are content with that.

Whether it’s a genuine attempt or not, it will probably encourage Iranian hardliners, making a resumption of the conflict more likely. Tehran still seems to be digging in. Iranian media reported that fundamental differences between the two sides remain. Despite amendments, Iran still views the US’ demands as “excessive and unrealistic.”

So, a darker scenario of a return to bombing campaigns may be averted – for now. And lack of escalation or resolution of the conflict means that financial markets continue to wait for new direction – sending oil prices sharply higher or lower, depending on whether the outlook improves or suddenly deteriorates. Meanwhile, the US Treasury has extended the sanctions waiver on Russian crude until June 17, after the previous waiver expired a few days ago – to contain price spikes where possible.

However, as we noted yesterday, a grinding stalemate would be bad enough for global energy stocks, and economic outlooks. The International Energy Agency warned that stockpiles are “depleting very fast.”

That’s not yet the case everywhere. European refiners and airlines are backtracking on their earlier warnings that kerosine could run out over the summer. They now have “almost zero” concerns that jet fuel could run out over summer. Refiners have increased production, and higher imports from the US, Nigeria and Norway have also helped to stabilize supply. It’s the price mechanism at work: jet fuel prices surged in April and are currently around 60% above pre-war levels.

CHART OF THE DAY: The global jet fuel market is small, accounting for <7.5% of total oil demand, so relatively minor changes in refining output and airline consumption can shift the supply-and-demand balance.

And refiners are on "max" jet fuel mode ????.

Link on reply pic.twitter.com/R9zugMljlJ

— Javier Blas (@JavierBlas) May 18, 2026

Higher prices may incentivize redirection of supplies to areas that can afford them, but those countries that cannot are starting to face supply constraints. Several Asian countries have already been grappling with shortages, and the double blockade of the Strait of Hormuz has thrown Cuba in a full-blown energy crisis.

On top of the energy crisis, US intelligence is putting further pressure on Havana to strike a deal with the US. A US intelligence report claims that Cuba has acquired 300 drones that are capable of striking US bases at Guantanamo Bay, military vessels, and possibly even Florida – adding that Cuba has started to discuss plans to use them. Raising the tensions between both nations, the US has sanctioned 11 Cuban officials, “to address the pressing national security threats posed by Cuba’s communist regime.”

Havana, in turn, is concerned that the report would be used as pretext for a military operation against it. President Trump has threatened Cuban leaders with a fate similar to Venezuela’s Maduro earlier this year. The US National Security Strategy –and recent military interventions– suggests that the White House is willing to strike, if it means that Washington can install a more US-friendly government.

Indeed, developments since the start of the year indicate that the Trump administration continues to seek more control over its hemisphere. The world may have forgotten about Greenland for a bit, but Trump reportedly has not.

Talks about US-Greenland relations have been ongoing for the past couple of months. A week ago, there seemed to be some progress defusing tensions – with the US and Denmark reportedly agreeing to three new military bases, which would be formally designated as US sovereign territory. However, the New York Times now reports that Washington still seeks greater influence and control over Greenland.