An Appeal to the Savvy Trump Voter

There is a class of voters who voted for Trump in 2016, and are considering voting for him again, who are too sophisticated to believe his many lies, or to take the Fox News propaganda machine seriously. These are the people who might say something like this, at least pre-pandemic: “O.K. it’s true. Trump is a racist, misogynist, divisive, childish, mean-spirited bully. But hey, he’s done great on the economy.” 

Since then we’ve had a pandemic that has resulted in 225,000 deaths with no end in sight, caused at least in part by the misinformation and inaction of the Trump Administration. And we have a nearly eight percent unemployment rate, with many unemployed long term. Also, Trump has made clear his willingness to upend our unbroken 230-year constitutional tradition of permitting the peaceful transfer of power, based on baseless accusations against mail-in voting. This stance alone, together with his lack of leadership on Covid-19, should disqualify Trump from a second term. But for those who are still considering voting for him because he’s “good for the economy,” maybe it’s time to re-examine that claim. 

First, it’s pretty well accepted that a president’s role – any president’s – in the economy is exaggerated: he gets more credit and more blame than is warranted for an economy largely determined by forces beyond his control. It’s also true, as these charts published by Business Insider back in October 2019 show, that Trump’s record on the economy was very similar to Obama’s in terms of job creation and overall economic growth. In fact it was Obama/Biden who did the heavy lifting of pulling the economy out of a deep recession, and under Trump, the economy finally reaped the benefits of a long recovery, when employment, which had been steadily rising since 2010, finally began to push wages up. (See Ben Casselman, Why Wages Are Finally Rising, 10 Years After the Recession, N.Y. Times, May 2, 2019) 

Trump’s economic policy initiatives scarcely helped those who needed it the most. Tax cuts that were urged by Republican donors and carried by the Republican Congress mainly benefitted the rich and had a only small and temporary stimulating effect on economic growth and business investment, but increased the deficit and inequality. 

His program of deregulation, while it may have pruned back some unnecessary regulations, took a wrecking ball to environmental protections, reversing or now in the process of reversing about 100 environmental regulations, many designed to fight climate change. The Trump voter who is smart enough not to believe Trump/Fox News propaganda is also smart enough to know that climate change has become an extremely serious threat. And this is not like some environmental issues, e.g., save the spotted owl, where the connection between the environment and the economy is obscure. Morgan Stanley has estimated that climate change already has cost the economies of North America $415 billion over the past three years in the form of damage from hurricanes, wildfires and other extreme weather events. The impact is projected to be much greater as the planet’s temperature rises. How can someone who labels climate changes a hoax be a good steward of our economy? 

One thing I would give Trump credit for is changing the conversation about trade. The elites in both parties underestimated the pain caused by so-called free trade. In this respect Trump had areas of commonality with the progressive Democrats, whom he routinely bashes, in their skepticism of NAFTA and unfair trade relations with China. The skepticism has now become mainstream in the Democratic Party and is reflected in Biden’s “Buy American” trade policy. But to actually implement fairer trade, and counter the expansionist initiatives of the Chinese Communist Party, we need a carefully built coalitions with our European and Asian allies. Building coalitions and being careful aren't part of Trump’s skill set.

We should be clear that there is no evidence that Trump has some kind of great competence on the economy that somehow compensates for his flagrant attempt to discredit democratic elections, his fatal mishandling of the coronavirus crisis, and the other Trump failures and outrages. The savvy Trump voter won’t be a Trump voter this time around.

Robert Katz

Robert Katz served as a staff attorney and supervising attorney at the California Supreme Court from 1993-2018. Before that he was in private practice representing public agencies, and worked as a newspaper reporter covering local government in Santa Cruz County. 

Subscribe to this blog by email: click here.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Dobbs and Brown v. Board of Education: A Comparison

  As we mark the 50th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, I note that the supporters of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization , the decision revoking the constitutional right to an abortion, have sought to draw celebratory parallels between that decision and Brown v. Board of Education. This was the case that recognized the principle that “separate but equal” treatment of Blacks and Whites in segregated schools was incompatible with the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Like Brown , Dobbs overturned a foundational precedent that had been in force for decades, and according to anti-abortion proponents, established an important right – the right to fetal life -- denied by the discredited precedent. The Dobbs opinion itself referenced Brown a number of times, and Mitch McConnell said of the Dobbs decision: “The Court has corrected a terrible legal and moral error, like when Brown v. Board overruled Plessy v. Ferguson.”   But the differences between Brow...
Read more

Thoughts on Transgender Issues

   The treatment of transgender people is one of the most active fronts in our never-ending culture wars. Any nuance gets lost on both sides of the debate. At the risk of being caught in the cross-fire, this post attempts to formulate a sensible framework for understanding these issues.  My starting point is the affirmation of two principles. First, people should be able to express their gender identity as they wish, not in conformity with other people's ideas. That principle is rooted in the fundamental right to express oneself linked to the First Amendment protection of freedom of speech.  Second, gender dysphoria, the strong sense of belonging to a gender other than the biological gender into which one was born, is real. The causes of gender dysphoria are not well understood, but seems to have a physiological basis, at least in some  cases . From this emerges the principle that people experiencing gender dysphoria should be given “reasonable accommodation,” a...
Read more

The Supreme Court's Second Amendment Folly

  You may have seen this news item and thought it was some kind of joke. A Federal District Court in Texas, and then the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, ruled in   Rahimi v. United States , that a Texas law prohibiting people subject to domestic violence protective orders from owning guns was unconstitutional. Why? Because no such prohibition was recognized when the Second Amendment to the Constitution protecting the right to “keep and bear arms” was enacted back in 1789 or, in 1868, when the Fourteenth Amendment applied federal constitutional rights to the states. After all, these were the bad ol’ days when there was no such thing as a domestic violence protective order. This court decision was the kind of absurd news item worthy of the Onion. But it was no joke. The explanation for this bit of judicial nonsense is to be found in the Supreme Court’s decision last term,  New York Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen . Back in 2008, on a 5-4 vote, the Court decided that t...
Read more