By Tony Bruce | Tuesday, October 15, 2024 | 5 min read
As the 2024 presidential election draws near, the economic landscape and candidates’ policies are hot topics. Politico recently highlighted Vice President Kamala Harris’ campaign amidst a “dream economy,” citing the nation’s current economic metrics: a 4.1% unemployment rate, over 20% growth in the S&P 500, a steady GDP growth of 3%, rising middle-class optimism, and falling gas prices. The U.S. economy even added over a quarter million jobs in September, exceeding expectations.
While these figures present a strong case for the Biden-Harris administration’s economic management, the question remains: Can Harris translate this “dream economy” into political support? For voters prioritizing business and economic issues, the upcoming election may indeed be viewed as a “business decision.”
A significant portion of Donald Trump’s supporters base their decisions on economic considerations. For many, the appeal lies not in the personality or controversies surrounding Trump but in the belief that his policies could foster economic growth. Even prominent Republicans, like Georgia Governor Brian Kemp, have made this argument, urging voters to consider the policies over personal attributes. Kemp, who faced pressure from Trump to overturn the 2020 election results, recently endorsed Trump for 2024, framing his choice as a business decision focused on policies rather than personality.
Amidst these discussions, The Economist released a special report on the U.S. economy, describing it as “the envy of the world.” According to the publication, America’s economic performance under the Biden-Harris administration has outpaced other wealthy nations and even surpassed the growth experienced during Trump’s presidency. With the current job market boasting record highs and broad economic stability, the U.S. appears to be thriving.
Given this economic success, one might assume that voters focusing on economic outcomes would lean toward Harris. If the economy is indeed a priority for voters, then it becomes important to weigh the Biden-Harris administration’s results against what a potential second Trump administration would deliver.
For some, the election’s business decision revolves around fiscal responsibility. Concerns over inflation, budget deficits, and government spending play a significant role in shaping these decisions. However, according to a survey by The Wall Street Journal, economists overwhelmingly agree that inflation, interest rates, and deficits would likely be higher under Trump’s proposed policies than under Harris’. Specifically, 65% of economists believe Trump’s policies would exert more upward pressure on the federal deficit. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates that Trump’s plans could more than double the expected increase in federal budget deficits compared to Harris’ proposals.
When considering inflation, the data is similarly unfavorable for Trump. About 68% of economists surveyed expect higher price increases under a second Trump administration. These projections suggest that Trump’s economic policies could contribute to more fiscal instability than the current administration’s approach.
When voters speak of making a “business decision” in choosing a candidate, they often reference a desire for a moderate, centrist leader who can appeal to reasonable people across the political spectrum. In this context, Harris’ candidacy seems to attract notable bipartisan support, with endorsements from prominent Republicans, including the Republican mayor of a major Arizona city and former officials from Trump’s administration.
Such cross-party endorsements signal confidence in Harris’ leadership and economic policies among influential figures from the opposite party. By contrast, Trump lacks a comparable level of support from former officials in the Biden or Obama administrations, which raises questions about his broader appeal.
Trump’s track record includes significant controversies that go beyond economic issues. He was impeached twice, and is currently facing multiple legal battles, including 34 felony convictions, with more charges pending. His past comments on using government power to target opponents and the media, as well as radical proposals to address immigration through military interventions, have raised concerns even among his supporters.
While some voters may disregard these controversies in favor of economic policies, others see them as a red flag regarding his fitness for office. Statements about “bad genes” and plans to use the military for rounding up individuals have unsettled those who prioritize stability and restraint in governance.
For voters assessing the candidates through a business-oriented lens, there are various considerations. Is it about overall economic performance and job creation, where the Biden-Harris administration shows strong results? Or is it about specific policies such as deficit reduction, where economists predict Trump’s approach would likely worsen the situation?
Alternatively, some voters might be weighing the candidates’ leadership styles and potential for fostering bipartisanship. The endorsements Harris has garnered from across the aisle could appeal to those who seek moderation and cooperation. By contrast, Trump’s campaign faces significant criticism even from within his own party.
The 2024 election poses a distinct choice between maintaining the economic trajectory established under Biden and Harris or returning to the policies championed by Trump. With economic indicators favoring the current administration, voters who base their decisions on economic performance might lean toward Harris. However, the complexities of fiscal policy, inflation concerns, and broader leadership qualities will also play a pivotal role in shaping voter preferences.
Ultimately, framing the decision as a “business decision” involves a broader assessment than just economic data; it encompasses leadership, policy implications, and the potential risks associated with each candidate’s proposals. The economy will remain a central issue, and voters will need to carefully weigh the merits and risks of each candidate’s approach as they cast their ballots.
Copyright 2024 FN, NewsRoom.