Trump and Harris supporters have fundamentally different views when it comes to cultural issues and government. A new analysis from Pew Research highlights several of them:
89% of Trump supporters believe gun ownership does more to increase safety by allowing law-abiding citizens to protect themselves compared to 18% of Harris supporters
80% of Harris supporters believe the legacy of slavery affects the position of black people in American society today a great deal/fair amount compared to 24% of Trump supporters
88% of Harris supporters believe that America's openness to people from all over the world is essential to who we are as a nation compared to 34% of Trump supporters
60% of Harris supporters believe that someone can be a man or a woman even if that is different than the sex they were assigned at birth compared to 7% of Trump supporters
83% of Trump supporters believe that the criminal justice system in this country is generally not tough enough on criminals compared to 39% of Harris supporters
60% of Trump supporters believe that society is better off if people make marriage and having children a priority compared to 17% of Harris supporters
84% of Trump supporters prefer a smaller government providing fewer services compared to 22% of Harris supporters
91% of Harris supporters believe the government has a responsibility to make sure all American have health care coverage compared to 32% of Trump supporters
72% of Trump supporters believe that government aid to the poor does more harm than good compared to 18% of Harris supporters
These divides are generally not bridgeable. Campaigns emphasize them to keep their bases energized, but poll after poll shows that economic issues are voters' highest priority. A new University of Chicago Institute of Politics survey of young people makes the case:
It’s no surprise the nation’s economy looms large in the minds of voters as they prepare to head to the polls in November.
Despite all the talk and numbers showing the country’s economic landscape has improved over the past four years, many people — and that includes younger adults — are not feeling it where it counts most: Their pockets.
So says a national poll of 2,000 young adults between the ages of 18 and 40 released last week by the University of Chicago Institute of Politics.
Overall, 25% of those polled cited income inequality (11%) or economic growth (14%) as the biggest problems facing the country. That’s a far higher figure than the percentage of respondents who cited the environment and climate change (4%), immigration (10%), gun control (5%), LGBTQ rights (1%) or some other issue on a long list of concerns.
In addition, 56% of respondents described the nation’s economy as either “somewhat” (32%) or “very” (24%) poor.
These results shouldn't surprise anybody who's been paying attention. The residual effects of inflation have diminished workers' wages. "Median usual weekly real earnings: Wage and salary workers: 16 years and over" peaked in the second quarter of 2020. They are down 6.4% as of the second quarter of this year. Use this link if you want to see the data:
A 6.4% pay cut really hurts if you live pay check to pay check, as do many Americans. It's no wonder that so many people have negative views about the economy.
The University of Chicago survey shows Harris gaining 38% of the votes of young people compared to 37% for Trump. All the talk about "freedom," "joy," and "weird"may resonate with Democrats, but the candidate who can make the strongest "kitchen table" argument will probably win the election.
I have a lot of respect for the folks who run the Penn Wharton Budget Model. That said, long-term economic forecasts are often inaccurate, especially when analysts try to flesh out the details of proposals before final legislation is or isn't completed.
Caveats noted, Trump's plan seems to be worse for the deficit over the next 10 years, but better than the Harris plan for overall economic growth based upon the "Key Points" sections of both assessments. Trump's plan creates shared prosperity across all income groups. The Harris plan provides more of an income boost for the bottom income quintile, but is a net negative for the top 5-10%. (See Table 3 of both assessments).
The Harris plan has drawn a lot of criticism from center-left newspapers, including the Washington Post Editorial Board:
They said it was full of gimmicks and called it a "disappointment" at the close of their post.
It's not clear whether the Harris plan could pass Congress.
Harris' goal of building three million new homes within four years is unrealistic even if Congress adopted her plan. Single family housing starts were at an 851,000 annual rate as of July, according to the US Census Bureau:
Harris seems to be suggesting that she can boost that by an extra 750,000 units per year (3 million new homes over four years), if I understand her plan. A look at how slowly Team Biden has built out new EV charging stations (seven new stations in the two years since Congress approved $7.5 billion to build out up to 500,000) helps set expectations:
Charging stations are much easier to build than single family homes, so suffice it to say that many analysts are skeptical that an additional 750,000 single family homes per year could be built. The Harris proposal to give $25,000 to first time home buyers would mostly benefit home sellers, not buyers, unless the supply of homes grew a lot faster than seems likely.
Presidential campaigns often make promises that don't come to fruition after elections. Voters should take the economic plans from both campaigns with a big grain of salt. .
Trump and Harris supporters have fundamentally different views when it comes to cultural issues and government. A new analysis from Pew Research highlights several of them:
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2024/08/26/the-political-values-of-harris-and-trump-supporters/
Here are a few examples:
89% of Trump supporters believe gun ownership does more to increase safety by allowing law-abiding citizens to protect themselves compared to 18% of Harris supporters
80% of Harris supporters believe the legacy of slavery affects the position of black people in American society today a great deal/fair amount compared to 24% of Trump supporters
88% of Harris supporters believe that America's openness to people from all over the world is essential to who we are as a nation compared to 34% of Trump supporters
60% of Harris supporters believe that someone can be a man or a woman even if that is different than the sex they were assigned at birth compared to 7% of Trump supporters
83% of Trump supporters believe that the criminal justice system in this country is generally not tough enough on criminals compared to 39% of Harris supporters
60% of Trump supporters believe that society is better off if people make marriage and having children a priority compared to 17% of Harris supporters
84% of Trump supporters prefer a smaller government providing fewer services compared to 22% of Harris supporters
91% of Harris supporters believe the government has a responsibility to make sure all American have health care coverage compared to 32% of Trump supporters
72% of Trump supporters believe that government aid to the poor does more harm than good compared to 18% of Harris supporters
These divides are generally not bridgeable. Campaigns emphasize them to keep their bases energized, but poll after poll shows that economic issues are voters' highest priority. A new University of Chicago Institute of Politics survey of young people makes the case:
https://politics.uchicago.edu/uploads/homepage/2024-08-August-Toplines-Public-Young-Adult-Sample-Race-x-Gender.pdf
Here's a link to a Chicago Sun-Times Editorial Board piece about the survey if you want the highlights:
https://chicago.suntimes.com/editorials/2024/08/26/economy-young-adults-2024-presidential-election-university-of-chicago-survey-editorial
Here's an excerpt:
It’s no surprise the nation’s economy looms large in the minds of voters as they prepare to head to the polls in November.
Despite all the talk and numbers showing the country’s economic landscape has improved over the past four years, many people — and that includes younger adults — are not feeling it where it counts most: Their pockets.
So says a national poll of 2,000 young adults between the ages of 18 and 40 released last week by the University of Chicago Institute of Politics.
Overall, 25% of those polled cited income inequality (11%) or economic growth (14%) as the biggest problems facing the country. That’s a far higher figure than the percentage of respondents who cited the environment and climate change (4%), immigration (10%), gun control (5%), LGBTQ rights (1%) or some other issue on a long list of concerns.
In addition, 56% of respondents described the nation’s economy as either “somewhat” (32%) or “very” (24%) poor.
These results shouldn't surprise anybody who's been paying attention. The residual effects of inflation have diminished workers' wages. "Median usual weekly real earnings: Wage and salary workers: 16 years and over" peaked in the second quarter of 2020. They are down 6.4% as of the second quarter of this year. Use this link if you want to see the data:
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LES1252881600Q
A 6.4% pay cut really hurts if you live pay check to pay check, as do many Americans. It's no wonder that so many people have negative views about the economy.
The University of Chicago survey shows Harris gaining 38% of the votes of young people compared to 37% for Trump. All the talk about "freedom," "joy," and "weird"may resonate with Democrats, but the candidate who can make the strongest "kitchen table" argument will probably win the election.
If you have seen it, how do you feel about UPenn’s assessment of the Harris and Trump economic plans?
Harris
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/55693d60e4b06d83cf793431/t/66ccc9d07441b47ed5cb5b07/1724697040304/The+2024+Harris+Campaign+Policy+Proposals_Budgetary%2C+Economic+and+Distributional+Effects.pdf
Trump
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/55693d60e4b06d83cf793431/t/66ccc99178eb2a27a4419a0d/1724696977394/The+2024+Trump+Campaign+Policy+Proposals_Budgetary%2C+Economic+and+Distributional+Effects.pdf
I have a lot of respect for the folks who run the Penn Wharton Budget Model. That said, long-term economic forecasts are often inaccurate, especially when analysts try to flesh out the details of proposals before final legislation is or isn't completed.
Caveats noted, Trump's plan seems to be worse for the deficit over the next 10 years, but better than the Harris plan for overall economic growth based upon the "Key Points" sections of both assessments. Trump's plan creates shared prosperity across all income groups. The Harris plan provides more of an income boost for the bottom income quintile, but is a net negative for the top 5-10%. (See Table 3 of both assessments).
The Harris plan has drawn a lot of criticism from center-left newspapers, including the Washington Post Editorial Board:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/08/16/harris-economy-plan-gimmicks/
They said it was full of gimmicks and called it a "disappointment" at the close of their post.
It's not clear whether the Harris plan could pass Congress.
Harris' goal of building three million new homes within four years is unrealistic even if Congress adopted her plan. Single family housing starts were at an 851,000 annual rate as of July, according to the US Census Bureau:
https://www.census.gov/construction/nrc/current/index.html
Harris seems to be suggesting that she can boost that by an extra 750,000 units per year (3 million new homes over four years), if I understand her plan. A look at how slowly Team Biden has built out new EV charging stations (seven new stations in the two years since Congress approved $7.5 billion to build out up to 500,000) helps set expectations:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-solutions/2024/03/28/ev-charging-stations-slow-rollout/
Charging stations are much easier to build than single family homes, so suffice it to say that many analysts are skeptical that an additional 750,000 single family homes per year could be built. The Harris proposal to give $25,000 to first time home buyers would mostly benefit home sellers, not buyers, unless the supply of homes grew a lot faster than seems likely.
Presidential campaigns often make promises that don't come to fruition after elections. Voters should take the economic plans from both campaigns with a big grain of salt. .
Thanks again
My pleasure