by Why does Donald Trump continue to generate so many polls among voters?
As unpleasant as a second Trump term would be, many experts addressing this question have ignored a surprising fact: The standard of living of the typical household improved during Trump’s three years before the pandemic. Under President Biden, Americans have (at best) struggled to keep up with inflation.
Trump’s enormous personal negatives — his petty personality, his adulation of dictators and his rejection of American allies, and his inexcusable effort to steal an election — should more than offset his economic record. The old saying that Mussolini got the trains running on time should not be understood as an endorsement.
But it’s one thing to hate Trump and hope for his defeat. It’s another to wish his successes would go away or, as has become common, to attribute his popularity to voter prejudices or character weaknesses. The leitmotiv of such arguments is that blue voters are rational political actors who vote on merit, while Trump appeals primarily, if not exclusively, to irrational semi-citizens devoid of even selfish calculations.
That could be it. But it can’t be ignored that they might also have experienced the sharp increase, after adjusting for inflation, in median family income (how the typical family lives) before the pandemic: 10.5 percent from 2016 to 2019. And inequality contracted noticeably. Therefore, the 2020 Federal Reserve Consumer Finances Survey about (roughly) the Trump era: “By grouping families by wealth, families at the top of the distribution experienced a sharp decline in median income (following particularly outsized gains during the 2010-16 period), while “Families in the lower and middle portions of the wealth distribution all saw modest gains.”
This is not to say that Trump’s policies caused a drop in inequality (a complicated issue) or were responsible for most of the improvement in the economy. While his tax cuts were a stimulant, his tariffs on imported steel, a signature policy, were likely cost The country created more manufacturing jobs than it gained in the steel sector, at great cost to American consumers.
And modern economies are not puppets that dance to the rhythm of a president; They are susceptible to many influences beyond an official’s control, even those of an Oval Office bully. Furthermore, Trump inherited a strong tailwind; Real median household income rose nearly 12 percent during the second term of his predecessor, Barack Obama. Trump was lucky.
But voters are not economists. They often judge presidents based on their coincidental economic performance. Jimmy Carter had to deal with severe inflation and George HW Bush endured a recession; each one was eliminated. Bush’s successor, Bill Clinton, reaped the recovery; They gave him four more years.
Biden inherited a heavy hand: an economy disrupted by Covid and supply chain disruptions. However, he presided over a return to growth and avoided a much anticipated recession. (Knock on wood.) Jobs came roaring back. At the beginning of last year, unemployment submerged below the pre-pandemic low of 3.5 percent under Trump, and still an impressive 3.7 percent.
Wage inequality too hire under the Biden administration. I would argue that voters care less about inequality than experts do. What voters care most about is whether they are doing better.
And this is where Biden has fallen short. Inflation has taken profits away from even a very strong labor market. During its first two years, as price increases outpaced wages, real median household income fell 2.7 percent. The census has yet to report median income for 2023, but since actual wages were above about 1 percent through November, the cumulative change in inflation-adjusted median household income over Biden’s first three years is likely to be in the range of slightly negative to very slightly positive. In other words, in the important category of improving living standards, the country made no progress.
This shows that employment and production, while very important, are not the only economic indicators that matter. Inflation matters too, because high taxes kill prosperity. This is an area where I think the president, along with the Federal Reserve, has some responsibility. Voices from his own party, notably Larry Summers, warned him that his first budget package, enacted nearly a year after the Covid recession ended, was too big relative to needs. He pressed ahead and inflation in 2022 soared to 8 percent, a 40-year high.
While Mr. Biden remains a great deficit spender, the Federal Reserve has cut inflation by more than half. Economic growth in the remainder of his term may well contribute to raising living standards. I hope voters judge him by this improved outlook. And I hope they take non-economic factors into account, including Trump’s continued refusal to acknowledge his 2020 defeat, which has poisoned the public square and eroded the civic fabric that supports the country’s democracy. In one sentence, Trump is unfit for office.
That doesn’t mean we should avoid honestly evaluating performance, including economic performance, under both Trump and Biden. Trump is so unlikeable that many find it difficult to evaluate him rationally, as we would anyone else. But it is right to do it, and we learn by keeping our eyes wide open, not closed. And (something Democrats should have learned by now) patronizing Trump voters won’t win over many of them.
Roger Lowenstein is a journalist and author of “Ways and Means: Lincoln and His Cabinet and the Financing of the Civil War.”
The Times agrees to publish a variety of letters to the editor. We would like to know what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here is our email: letters@nytimes.com.
Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, instagram, Tik Tok, x and Threads.
