Trump’s Tariffs on Canada, Mexico Signal Focus on North American Free Trade AgreementIt looks like politics is shaking up the healthcare industry. Several blue-chip healthcare stocks have been on the slide in recent weeks. The cause? It could be the recent nomination of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as the Secretary of Health and Human Services for the incoming Trump administration. Throughout the election cycle, Kennedy has been vocal about his desire to make big changes at several agencies, including the Food & Drug Administration (FDA). This has introduced uncertainty for businesses that work with the agency, especially pharmaceutical companies. While it remains to be seen what will come of all this, the fear has knocked some prominent dividend-paying healthcare companies down to appetizing valuations that long-term investors should consider taking advantage of. Here are three compelling buys to look into today: 1. AbbVie Shares of pharmaceutical giant AbbVie ( ABBV 3.04% ) are currently trading down over 18% from their high. But it's not just political angst dropping the stock; AbbVie paid $8.7 billion to acquire Cerevel last year, seeking the company's pipeline of psychiatric drugs. However, Cerevel's schizophrenia drug emraclidine unexpectedly failed its clinical trials, raising severe doubts that AbbVie will get much return on that nearly $9 billion investment. It's not ideal that such a promising asset has fallen on its face. Still, AbbVie is a well-diversified drug company with plenty of growing products that have helped offset the losses from Humira, a mega-blockbuster product that came off of its patent protection last year. Notably, the stock's fantastic dividend is on solid ground. AbbVie currently yields 3.7%, and its dividend payout ratio is just 56% of its estimated 2024 earnings. So, the failure of emraclidine hurts, but it doesn't make or break AbbVie. The stock now trades at a forward P/E ratio of 15. Meanwhile, analysts estimate AbbVie's earnings will grow by an average of 8% to 9% annually over the long term. This is an opportunity to buy a top-notch dividend stock at a PEG ratio of 1.7, a solid deal for AbbVie's expected growth. Assuming the valuation stays roughly the same, investors could see growth and dividends combine for total returns averaging 11% to 13% annually over time. 2. Pfizer The COVID-19 pandemic created a business boom for Pfizer ( PFE 2.07% ) , but that's dried up, and the combination of declining earnings and sour industry sentiment has punished the stock. Shares now trade at less than 9 times earnings. Such a low valuation would imply that Pfizer, an industry giant, is on the ropes. The stock's 6.7% dividend yield is the highest it's ever been outside of the financial crisis in 2008-2009. A high yield can signal trouble, but Pfizer is doing just fine. The company's dividend payout ratio is only 58% of its 2024 earnings estimates. Plus, Pfizer has pivoted its business to oncology , with a healthy pipeline and analysts calling for 10% to 11% annualized earnings growth over the next three to five years. Investors can buy a well-funded, high-yield dividend stock at a bargain price in Pfizer. Management has committed to supporting and increasing the dividend . It seems sentiment may turn back in Pfizer's favor once all this political noise settles down, making Pfizer a contrarian stock idea with a high upside. 3. Johnson & Johnson Medical device and pharmaceutical conglomerate Johnson & Johnson ( JNJ -0.21% ) is another stock that's steadily drifted lower in recent weeks. The stock is now 18% off its high and sits at 15 times Johnson & Johnson's 2024 earnings estimates. Plus, the company is still trying to resolve its talcum powder litigation, which could cost billions of dollars when it's all said and done. The sell-off makes sense in that light. However, the critical takeaway with Johnson & Johnson is that these challenges likely don't dent the company's fantastic fundamentals and, thus, the stock's appeal to long-term investors. The company has over $20 billion in cash sitting on its balance sheet, and a large settlement would likely be paid out over many years, anyway. Johnson & Johnson is a Dividend King with a perfect AAA credit rating from Standard & Poor's . Corporate coffers don't get much deeper than Johnson & Johnson's. Johnson & Johnson constantly innovates and acquires new assets to drive steady growth. Analysts estimate the company's earnings will grow by an average of 5% to 6% annually over the next three to five years. That alone should push the dividend higher, and that's without factoring in a pretty modest 50% payout ratio (based on 2024 earnings estimates). Johnson & Johnson isn't a get-rich-quick stock but offers a generous 3.2% yield and a continually growing dividend. That steady growth and ironclad balance sheet look pretty good at just 15 times earnings.Turning sunflower seeds into sustainable, cocoa-free chocolate has netted Munich-based B2B food tech startup Planet A Foods (formerly QOA ) a $30 million Series B funding round. Now, the Y Combinator alum is gearing up for industrialization, with the funds set to be deployed to scale its production capacity by around 7.5x. The round fast follows a $15.4 million Series A back in February . Currently, the startup is producing 2,000 tons of ChoViva, as it calls its cocoa-free, lower carbon chocolate alternative, per year. It plans to step that up to over 15,000 tons as it adds capacity and kicks off international expansion outside an initial trio of European markets. Opening its first U.S.-based production facility is on the cards. Building on the three local markets (Germany, Austria, and Switzerland) where its chocolate substitute is already in food products that aim to tempt sweet-toothed consumers, it is also eyeing launches into the U.K. and France during the first quarter of 2025. Brands buying into ChoViva so far include Lambertz, Lindt, Rewe Group, and even the German train operator, Deutsche Bahn, which doubtless pops a lot of chocolate treats on customers’ tea trays every day. So far, the startup has around 20 customers for its alt chocolate ingredients, mostly major European food manufacturers but also some U.S. brands. As it grows capacity, it’ll be aiming to add more strategic partners too. Cocoa, not so sweet The problem Planet A Foods is tackling is making a staple sweet treat (chocolate) less of an environmental horror. Traditional cocoa-based chocolate production raises serious sustainability issues, since the crop grows in areas with rainforest, which can be cut down to make way for cocoa bean plantations. Global demand is also outstripping an increasingly fragile (and ethically fraught) supply, leading to inflated costs and fears for the future of the cocoa bean in a rapidly warming world. Supplying the food industry with an alternative chocolate-esque ingredient that — just like the real deal — can be baked into or folded onto snack products like breakfast cereals, confectionary, and cakes is Planet A’s mission. And it’s not a trivial goal: The startup reckons an annual toll of some 500 million tons of CO 2 could be avoided through switching bulk chocolate production away from cocoa beans to its more sustainable method that avoids deforestation and localizes ingredients sourcing. The ingredients it uses to produce ChoViva have been selected in part as they can be grown locally (oats are another of its staples) — hence it claims a carbon footprint that’s up to 80% lower than conventional chocolate (but note that higher bound is for the vegan version of ChoViva which, unlike other blends, doesn’t contain any milk products). “We’re not against chocolate,” stresses co-founder and CEO Dr. Maximilian Marquart, one half of the brother-sister founder team behind Planet A Foods. CTO Dr. Sara Marquart is the food scientist who developed the process for making the cocoa-free chocolate. “That’s very important. So we’re not taking away your [premium] chocolate. We’re after all the snacking applications — [confectionary such as] M&Ms, Snickers, Mars, Bounty, you know, all that stuff.” Premium chocolate is a tiny market compared to the bulk business of mass market confectionary that Planet A Foods is targeting. And in this domain, where environmental degradation occurs at terrible scale, the quality of the chocolate that’s used is generally lower, often because it’s lower in actual cocoa-content — hence [Maximilian] Marquart argues there’s no difference between how ChoViva tastes, and the stuff consumers are routinely being sold in mass market products. “It’s indistinguishable,” he suggests. “My sister Sara . . . found out that actually 80% of the typical chocolate flavors come from the processing of the cocoa beans and not from the beans itself — so . . . if eight out of 10 flavors are actually coming from fermentation roasting, why do you need cocoa beans?” Scaling for impact The economics also make ChoViva an attractive switch for the industrial food industry, as the startup tells it, since the product is not subject to the price volatility that can hit cocoa beans as a limited resource. But for such a switch to happen, the startup needs to be able to produce its alternative at the volumes that food giants demand — so there’s a long road of scaling ahead for the team. At this point, the production capacity for ChoViva still represents an incredibly tiny portion of the global cocoa bean harvest — which [Maximilian] Marquart notes is between 4 million and 5 million tons annually. So it will require giant leaps in production capacity to have the massive positive sustainability change the Marquarts want. “We’ve already acquired the machines [for this stage of industrialization]. So we are already in the scale-up runs, and we have some real industrial clients already, so we’re currently just trying to cope with the demand in Europe,” he says, adding: “We’re automating. We’re improving the processes. We are also commissioning new machines. Plus, we are currently planning another facility in the States.” They are also exploring how the business might respond to demand from Asia ([Maximilian] Marquart happens to be on a business trip to Japan when we talk). But he says they also recognize that, as a startup, they do need to focus, too. “We’re a startup . . . we’re not naive. So we can’t conquer the world alone,” he tells TechCrunch. “I think U.K. and U.S. are the main markets where we will expand. However, in Asia we have a lot of demand, so we’re currently investigating what we do here — what we can do alone, and together with partners eventually.” Supply chain all-nighters Being in the (quasi) chocolate-making business might conjure up quaint images of high-hatted chocolatiers gently whipping batches of sweet stuff in charmingly rustic environs. But don’t be fooled: the business of manufacturing ChoViva is already sweating toil. Having everything in place to be able to precisely produce tons of cocoa-free chocolate to ship out exactly when customers need it has required the founders to pull some all-nighters at the plant. And [Maximilian] Marquart says a big focus for this tranche of scaling is automation — so they can reduce the risk of human errors causing supply chain headaches. We slept under those machines . . . Every day our life is a hell given the challenges that we have in the supply chain.” “I think currently we’re at a scale — industrial scale — that no one else is,” he suggests when asked about the competitive landscape for cocoa-free chocolate. Other startups he name-checks are Foreverland, Nukoko, WinWin, and Voyage Foods. They are using various methods and base ingredients (including cereals, broad beans, carob, grape seeds, and more) to blend up rival cocoa-free chocolate products. So there’s a range of approaches in play. In this context, and, indeed, for almost any kind of startup, succeeding “takes more than just developing a product” — or, in this case, an ingredient in a lab — and [Maximilian] Marquart says this invention element represents only 5% of the challenge they’ve set themselves. “The main challenge lies in building up production, building up quality management, building up the supply chain. Every day, two 40-ton lorries leave our factory with our product. And that’s something that someone else needs to figure out. It’s really a challenge,” he emphasizes, adding: “Sara — my sister — and I, we slept under those machines. We really figured out the supply chain. It’s a big hassle. Every day our life is a hell given the challenges that we have in the supply chain.” “Most of the other competitors, they have great products, but they need to bring that into reality, and need to be really able to deliver it to their customers, and that lies ahead of them. It’s incredibly difficult to deliver 40 tons of chocolate to a customer in time, at the right place, at the right recipe, the right quality.” Planet A Foods’ Series B was co-led by Burda Principal Investments and Zintinus, with participation from AgriFoodTech Venture Alliance, Bayern Kapital, Cherry Ventures, Omnes Capital, Tengelmann Ventures, and World Fund. R&D Scaling aside, funding will also go on further research and development, as the team is working on an alternative to cocoa butter, which is another key ingredient for the food industry. Being able to offer a replacement for palm oil is another goal, as that also creates huge sustainability problems. The startup also believes its approach could work to replace other specialty fats that are used in food production, such as stearin, an animal fat, or coconut oil, per [Maximilian] Marquart. “[Sara] developed a kind of full fermentation platform where we can make bio identical coco butter,” he notes, saying bio identical in this context “means the right mouthful, the right snap, the right melting point, the right properties.” “With our fermentation technology, we can offer a bio identical cocoa butter using fermentation at a much lower price than conventional cocoa butter, and that’s really a game changer in the future,” he suggests. “I think we’re the only company that is actually able to produce cocoa butter using fermentation at a lower price than natural cocoa butter.” There’s an additional challenge here, though. For one version of the cocoa butter, which [Maximilian] Marquart suggests yields the best set of properties, they use precision fermentation. It’s a biotech method that involves genetically engineered microorganisms. This version of the product has to be approved as a novel food before it can be sold. And since European regulations are more stringent, he suggests it could hit the U.S. market first.
School tax relief spirits set to hover over incoming UnicameralThe video game industry has come a long way since the pixelated sprites of Pac-Man and Donkey Kong. Today, we’re immersed in stunningly realistic worlds, with characters that look almost lifelike and environments that are breathtaking in their detail. But this graphical fidelity comes at a cost, one that’s increasingly difficult for even AAA game studios to bear. The pursuit of photorealism is pushing budgets to the breaking point, forcing developers to make tough choices that impact game design, pricing, and even the very future of the industry. This isn’t just about more detailed textures or higher polygon counts. The demand for realism encompasses everything from complex physics engines and lifelike animations to advanced lighting and rendering techniques. Each of these elements adds layers of complexity and cost to the development process. As gamers, we crave these immersive experiences, but the financial strain on studios is becoming undeniable . We’re seeing longer development cycles, increased game prices, and a greater reliance on microtransactions, all in an attempt to recoup the soaring costs of creating these digital masterpieces. This begs the question: is the relentless pursuit of realism sustainable, or are we heading towards a breaking point? The Escalating Costs of Development Creating a AAA game today is akin to producing a Hollywood blockbuster. Teams of hundreds, sometimes thousands, of artists, programmers, and designers work for years to bring these projects to life. And just like in filmmaking, advancements in technology drive up production costs. To put this in perspective, the development budget for Rockstar’s “Grand Theft Auto V” was estimated to be around $265 million, a staggering figure at the time of its release in 2013. Fast forward to today, and industry insiders estimate that developing a comparable title could easily exceed $500 million. The Pressure to Deliver Blockbuster Experiences The gaming landscape is fiercely competitive. With millions of games vying for attention, AAA studios face immense pressure to deliver groundbreaking experiences that push the boundaries of graphics and gameplay. This often leads to a “graphical arms race,” where each new release aims to outdo the last in terms of visual fidelity. This pressure is compounded by the rise of “games as a service.” Many AAA titles are now designed to be played for years, with ongoing content updates and expansions. This requires studios to maintain large teams even after a game’s launch, further adding to the financial burden. The Impact on Gamers While we all benefit from the incredible visuals of modern games, the rising development costs have a direct impact on gamers: A Personal Perspective As an avid gamer, I’ve witnessed this evolution firsthand. I remember being blown away by the graphics of “Half-Life 2” back in 2004. At the time, it felt like the pinnacle of visual realism. But now, looking back, it seems almost quaint compared to the graphical fidelity of games like “Red Dead Redemption 2” or “Horizon Forbidden West.” While I appreciate the stunning visuals of modern games, I also worry about the sustainability of this trend. The increasing reliance on microtransactions and the rising cost of games are concerning. I fear that we may reach a point where only the biggest studios with the deepest pockets can afford to create AAA experiences. Finding a Sustainable Path The pursuit of realism is not inherently bad. It’s driven by a desire to create more immersive and engaging experiences. However, the industry needs to find a more sustainable path forward. Here are some potential solutions: Ultimately, the future of AAA gaming depends on finding a balance between graphical fidelity and financial sustainability. Developers need to be mindful of the costs involved and explore innovative ways to create compelling experiences without breaking the bank. As gamers, we can also play a role by supporting studios that prioritize creativity and innovation over sheer graphical horsepower. The Future of Gaming The video game industry is constantly evolving. New technologies, changing player expectations , and economic pressures will continue to shape the future of AAA gaming. While the pursuit of realism will likely remain a driving force, it’s crucial for the industry to find a sustainable path that allows for creativity, innovation, and financial viability. Only then can we ensure that the future of gaming is as bright and exciting as the visuals on our screens.
Govt cancels auction of 11 critical mineral blocksSharps technology CEO Robert Hayes acquires $10,072 in stock
By BILL BARROW, Associated Press ATLANTA (AP) — Jimmy Carter, the peanut farmer who won the presidency in the wake of the Watergate scandal and Vietnam War, endured humbling defeat after one tumultuous term and then redefined life after the White House as a global humanitarian, has died. He was 100 years old. The longest-lived American president died on Sunday, more than a year after entering hospice care , at his home in the small town of Plains, Georgia, where he and his wife, Rosalynn, who died at 96 in November 2023 , spent most of their lives, The Carter Center said. Related Articles Businessman, Navy officer, evangelist, politician, negotiator, author, woodworker, citizen of the world — Carter forged a path that still challenges political assumptions and stands out among the 45 men who reached the nation’s highest office. The 39th president leveraged his ambition with a keen intellect, deep religious faith and prodigious work ethic, conducting diplomatic missions into his 80s and building houses for the poor well into his 90s. “My faith demands — this is not optional — my faith demands that I do whatever I can, wherever I am, whenever I can, for as long as I can, with whatever I have to try to make a difference,” Carter once said. A moderate Democrat, Carter entered the 1976 presidential race as a little-known Georgia governor with a broad smile, outspoken Baptist mores and technocratic plans reflecting his education as an engineer. His no-frills campaign depended on public financing, and his promise not to deceive the American people resonated after Richard Nixon’s disgrace and U.S. defeat in southeast Asia. “If I ever lie to you, if I ever make a misleading statement, don’t vote for me. I would not deserve to be your president,” Carter repeated before narrowly beating Republican incumbent Gerald Ford, who had lost popularity pardoning Nixon. Carter governed amid Cold War pressures, turbulent oil markets and social upheaval over racism, women’s rights and America’s global role. His most acclaimed achievement in office was a Mideast peace deal that he brokered by keeping Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin at the bargaining table for 13 days in 1978. That Camp David experience inspired the post-presidential center where Carter would establish so much of his legacy. Yet Carter’s electoral coalition splintered under double-digit inflation, gasoline lines and the 444-day hostage crisis in Iran. His bleakest hour came when eight Americans died in a failed hostage rescue in April 1980, helping to ensure his landslide defeat to Republican Ronald Reagan. Carter acknowledged in his 2020 “White House Diary” that he could be “micromanaging” and “excessively autocratic,” complicating dealings with Congress and the federal bureaucracy. He also turned a cold shoulder to Washington’s news media and lobbyists, not fully appreciating their influence on his political fortunes. “It didn’t take us long to realize that the underestimation existed, but by that time we were not able to repair the mistake,” Carter told historians in 1982, suggesting that he had “an inherent incompatibility” with Washington insiders. Carter insisted his overall approach was sound and that he achieved his primary objectives — to “protect our nation’s security and interests peacefully” and “enhance human rights here and abroad” — even if he fell spectacularly short of a second term. Ignominious defeat, though, allowed for renewal. The Carters founded The Carter Center in 1982 as a first-of-its-kind base of operations, asserting themselves as international peacemakers and champions of democracy, public health and human rights. “I was not interested in just building a museum or storing my White House records and memorabilia,” Carter wrote in a memoir published after his 90th birthday. “I wanted a place where we could work.” That work included easing nuclear tensions in North and South Korea, helping to avert a U.S. invasion of Haiti and negotiating cease-fires in Bosnia and Sudan. By 2022, The Carter Center had declared at least 113 elections in Latin America, Asia and Africa to be free or fraudulent. Recently, the center began monitoring U.S. elections as well. Carter’s stubborn self-assuredness and even self-righteousness proved effective once he was unencumbered by the Washington order, sometimes to the point of frustrating his successors . He went “where others are not treading,” he said, to places like Ethiopia, Liberia and North Korea, where he secured the release of an American who had wandered across the border in 2010. “I can say what I like. I can meet whom I want. I can take on projects that please me and reject the ones that don’t,” Carter said. He announced an arms-reduction-for-aid deal with North Korea without clearing the details with Bill Clinton’s White House. He openly criticized President George W. Bush for the 2003 invasion of Iraq. He also criticized America’s approach to Israel with his 2006 book “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid.” And he repeatedly countered U.S. administrations by insisting North Korea should be included in international affairs, a position that most aligned Carter with Republican President Donald Trump. Among the center’s many public health initiatives, Carter vowed to eradicate the guinea worm parasite during his lifetime, and nearly achieved it: Cases dropped from millions in the 1980s to nearly a handful. With hardhats and hammers, the Carters also built homes with Habitat for Humanity. The Nobel committee’s 2002 Peace Prize cites his “untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development.” Carter should have won it alongside Sadat and Begin in 1978, the chairman added. Carter accepted the recognition saying there was more work to be done. “The world is now, in many ways, a more dangerous place,” he said. “The greater ease of travel and communication has not been matched by equal understanding and mutual respect.” Carter’s globetrotting took him to remote villages where he met little “Jimmy Carters,” so named by admiring parents. But he spent most of his days in the same one-story Plains house — expanded and guarded by Secret Service agents — where they lived before he became governor. He regularly taught Sunday School lessons at Maranatha Baptist Church until his mobility declined and the coronavirus pandemic raged. Those sessions drew visitors from around the world to the small sanctuary where Carter will receive his final send-off after a state funeral at Washington’s National Cathedral. The common assessment that he was a better ex-president than president rankled Carter and his allies. His prolific post-presidency gave him a brand above politics, particularly for Americans too young to witness him in office. But Carter also lived long enough to see biographers and historians reassess his White House years more generously. His record includes the deregulation of key industries, reduction of U.S. dependence on foreign oil, cautious management of the national debt and notable legislation on the environment, education and mental health. He focused on human rights in foreign policy, pressuring dictators to release thousands of political prisoners . He acknowledged America’s historical imperialism, pardoned Vietnam War draft evaders and relinquished control of the Panama Canal. He normalized relations with China. “I am not nominating Jimmy Carter for a place on Mount Rushmore,” Stuart Eizenstat, Carter’s domestic policy director, wrote in a 2018 book. “He was not a great president” but also not the “hapless and weak” caricature voters rejected in 1980, Eizenstat said. Rather, Carter was “good and productive” and “delivered results, many of which were realized only after he left office.” Madeleine Albright, a national security staffer for Carter and Clinton’s secretary of state, wrote in Eizenstat’s forward that Carter was “consequential and successful” and expressed hope that “perceptions will continue to evolve” about his presidency. “Our country was lucky to have him as our leader,” said Albright, who died in 2022. Jonathan Alter, who penned a comprehensive Carter biography published in 2020, said in an interview that Carter should be remembered for “an epic American life” spanning from a humble start in a home with no electricity or indoor plumbing through decades on the world stage across two centuries. “He will likely go down as one of the most misunderstood and underestimated figures in American history,” Alter told The Associated Press. James Earl Carter Jr. was born Oct. 1, 1924, in Plains and spent his early years in nearby Archery. His family was a minority in the mostly Black community, decades before the civil rights movement played out at the dawn of Carter’s political career. Carter, who campaigned as a moderate on race relations but governed more progressively, talked often of the influence of his Black caregivers and playmates but also noted his advantages: His land-owning father sat atop Archery’s tenant-farming system and owned a main street grocery. His mother, Lillian , would become a staple of his political campaigns. Seeking to broaden his world beyond Plains and its population of fewer than 1,000 — then and now — Carter won an appointment to the U.S. Naval Academy, graduating in 1946. That same year he married Rosalynn Smith, another Plains native, a decision he considered more important than any he made as head of state. She shared his desire to see the world, sacrificing college to support his Navy career. Carter climbed in rank to lieutenant, but then his father was diagnosed with cancer, so the submarine officer set aside his ambitions of admiralty and moved the family back to Plains. His decision angered Rosalynn, even as she dived into the peanut business alongside her husband. Carter again failed to talk with his wife before his first run for office — he later called it “inconceivable” not to have consulted her on such major life decisions — but this time, she was on board. “My wife is much more political,” Carter told the AP in 2021. He won a state Senate seat in 1962 but wasn’t long for the General Assembly and its back-slapping, deal-cutting ways. He ran for governor in 1966 — losing to arch-segregationist Lester Maddox — and then immediately focused on the next campaign. Carter had spoken out against church segregation as a Baptist deacon and opposed racist “Dixiecrats” as a state senator. Yet as a local school board leader in the 1950s he had not pushed to end school segregation even after the Supreme Court’s Brown v. Board of Education decision, despite his private support for integration. And in 1970, Carter ran for governor again as the more conservative Democrat against Carl Sanders, a wealthy businessman Carter mocked as “Cufflinks Carl.” Sanders never forgave him for anonymous, race-baiting flyers, which Carter disavowed. Ultimately, Carter won his races by attracting both Black voters and culturally conservative whites. Once in office, he was more direct. “I say to you quite frankly that the time for racial discrimination is over,” he declared in his 1971 inaugural address, setting a new standard for Southern governors that landed him on the cover of Time magazine. His statehouse initiatives included environmental protection, boosting rural education and overhauling antiquated executive branch structures. He proclaimed Martin Luther King Jr. Day in the slain civil rights leader’s home state. And he decided, as he received presidential candidates in 1972, that they were no more talented than he was. In 1974, he ran Democrats’ national campaign arm. Then he declared his own candidacy for 1976. An Atlanta newspaper responded with the headline: “Jimmy Who?” The Carters and a “Peanut Brigade” of family members and Georgia supporters camped out in Iowa and New Hampshire, establishing both states as presidential proving grounds. His first Senate endorsement: a young first-termer from Delaware named Joe Biden. Yet it was Carter’s ability to navigate America’s complex racial and rural politics that cemented the nomination. He swept the Deep South that November, the last Democrat to do so, as many white Southerners shifted to Republicans in response to civil rights initiatives. A self-declared “born-again Christian,” Carter drew snickers by referring to Scripture in a Playboy magazine interview, saying he “had looked on many women with lust. I’ve committed adultery in my heart many times.” The remarks gave Ford a new foothold and television comedians pounced — including NBC’s new “Saturday Night Live” show. But voters weary of cynicism in politics found it endearing. Carter chose Minnesota Sen. Walter “Fritz” Mondale as his running mate on a “Grits and Fritz” ticket. In office, he elevated the vice presidency and the first lady’s office. Mondale’s governing partnership was a model for influential successors Al Gore, Dick Cheney and Biden. Rosalynn Carter was one of the most involved presidential spouses in history, welcomed into Cabinet meetings and huddles with lawmakers and top aides. The Carters presided with uncommon informality: He used his nickname “Jimmy” even when taking the oath of office, carried his own luggage and tried to silence the Marine Band’s “Hail to the Chief.” They bought their clothes off the rack. Carter wore a cardigan for a White House address, urging Americans to conserve energy by turning down their thermostats. Amy, the youngest of four children, attended District of Columbia public school. Washington’s social and media elite scorned their style. But the larger concern was that “he hated politics,” according to Eizenstat, leaving him nowhere to turn politically once economic turmoil and foreign policy challenges took their toll. Carter partially deregulated the airline, railroad and trucking industries and established the departments of Education and Energy, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency. He designated millions of acres of Alaska as national parks or wildlife refuges. He appointed a then-record number of women and nonwhite people to federal posts. He never had a Supreme Court nomination, but he elevated civil rights attorney Ruth Bader Ginsburg to the nation’s second highest court, positioning her for a promotion in 1993. He appointed Paul Volker, the Federal Reserve chairman whose policies would help the economy boom in the 1980s — after Carter left office. He built on Nixon’s opening with China, and though he tolerated autocrats in Asia, pushed Latin America from dictatorships to democracy. But he couldn’t immediately tame inflation or the related energy crisis. And then came Iran. After he admitted the exiled Shah of Iran to the U.S. for medical treatment, the American Embassy in Tehran was overrun in 1979 by followers of the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. Negotiations to free the hostages broke down repeatedly ahead of the failed rescue attempt. The same year, Carter signed SALT II, the new strategic arms treaty with Leonid Brezhnev of the Soviet Union, only to pull it back, impose trade sanctions and order a U.S. boycott of the Moscow Olympics after the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. Hoping to instill optimism, he delivered what the media dubbed his “malaise” speech, although he didn’t use that word. He declared the nation was suffering “a crisis of confidence.” By then, many Americans had lost confidence in the president, not themselves. Carter campaigned sparingly for reelection because of the hostage crisis, instead sending Rosalynn as Sen. Edward M. Kennedy challenged him for the Democratic nomination. Carter famously said he’d “kick his ass,” but was hobbled by Kennedy as Reagan rallied a broad coalition with “make America great again” appeals and asking voters whether they were “better off than you were four years ago.” Reagan further capitalized on Carter’s lecturing tone, eviscerating him in their lone fall debate with the quip: “There you go again.” Carter lost all but six states and Republicans rolled to a new Senate majority. Carter successfully negotiated the hostages’ freedom after the election, but in one final, bitter turn of events, Tehran waited until hours after Carter left office to let them walk free. At 56, Carter returned to Georgia with “no idea what I would do with the rest of my life.” Four decades after launching The Carter Center, he still talked of unfinished business. “I thought when we got into politics we would have resolved everything,” Carter told the AP in 2021. “But it’s turned out to be much more long-lasting and insidious than I had thought it was. I think in general, the world itself is much more divided than in previous years.” Still, he affirmed what he said when he underwent treatment for a cancer diagnosis in his 10th decade of life. “I’m perfectly at ease with whatever comes,” he said in 2015 . “I’ve had a wonderful life. I’ve had thousands of friends, I’ve had an exciting, adventurous and gratifying existence.” ___ Former Associated Press journalist Alex Sanz contributed to this report.Coreline Soft Receives Innovation Award for Bio-Medical Technology at Seoul R&D Sharing EventCoreline Soft, a medical AI specialist led by CEO Jinkook Kim, announced that it received an award for its outstanding R&D project results at the "2024 Seoul-type R&D Performance Sharing Event" held at the SETEC Convention and Seminar Hall on the afternoon of December 5. The award recognized the company's achievements in the Bio-Medical Technology Commercialisation Support Project under the Seoul R&D Support Programme. The Bio-Medical Technology Commercialisation Support Project of the Seoul-type R&D Support Project was designed to promote the commercialization of bio-medical technology and support innovative research by Seoul-based companies. Core Line Soft carried out the project from September 2022 to August 2024 to develop and commercialize innovative technologies for pulmonary embolism and pulmonary hypertension. It was recognized for its achievements as a venture company with outstanding technological and management innovation capabilities, excellent external competitiveness, and high social contribution. With this support project, Coreline Soft successfully developed an AI-based diagnostic support software for pulmonary embolism and pulmonary hypertension (AVIEW PE) and obtained clinical trial approval and approval from the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety. The software has also been designated as an innovative medical device, recognizing its advanced technology and performance. AVIEW PE will be commercialized and used alongside existing products to build a portfolio for the emergency medicine market. "This achievement is a good example of how Coreline Soft's technology can create value in the domestic and international medical environment," said Jinkook Kim, CEO of Coreline Soft. He added, "We will continue successfully developing and commercializing technology and strive for sustainable medical innovation. Coreline Soft is systematically building a range of solutions optimized for the emergency room medical environment. Products for diagnosing cerebral hemorrhage, aortic dissection, and pulmonary embolism have all been designated as innovative medical devices, securing a leading position in the field of emergency medical software. Coreline Soft plans to disseminate these products by maintaining their reimbursement as innovative medical technology for three years, proving their clinical efficacy and eventually formally registering them with health insurance companies. In addition, when the Acute Coronary Syndrome solution, which is currently under development, is released, it will provide comprehensive solutions for the top three thoracic emergencies (aortic dissection, pulmonary embolism and acute coronary syndrome). With this award, Coreline Soft plans to accelerate the research and development of AI-based medical solutions.