The Trump Economy: A Descent from Ascent?
Dace Potas, a USA TODAY opinion columnist, delivers a scathing critique of Donald Trump’s economic policies and their perceived impact on the American economy. Potas argues that Trump inherited a burgeoning economy from his predecessor but has since steered it toward contraction through impulsive decisions, particularly the imposition of tariffs. The article paints a picture of an administration stubbornly clinging to the narrative of a "massive mandate" that, according to Potas, never truly existed, while ignoring the growing disapproval from the American public.
Potas highlights the recent contraction of the economy as a pivotal turning point, marking the end of a period of growth that began before Trump took office. This economic downturn, the author contends, is a direct consequence of Trump’s policies, particularly his reliance on tariffs as a tool of economic leverage. Potas suggests that these tariffs, rather than benefiting the American economy, are instead leading to rising prices for consumers and a decline in the stock market.
The article accuses the Trump administration and its allies of actively dismissing or downplaying the negative economic indicators. Potas alleges a deliberate attempt to conceal the true state of the economy behind the facade of a popular mandate. However, the author asserts that the American public is not buying into this narrative, pointing to Trump’s plummeting approval ratings as evidence of widespread dissatisfaction with his policies.
Potas emphasizes that Trump’s approval rating during his first 100 days in office was the lowest of any president in the last 80 years, suggesting a lack of public confidence from the outset. The author contends that Trump is exceeding the boundaries of what the American people entrusted him to do, pushing policies that are unpopular and detrimental to the country’s economic well-being.
The article challenges the notion of a broad mandate for Trump’s policies, arguing that voters are quick to disapprove when they see the negative consequences of his actions. Potas cites polls indicating that a significant portion of Americans disapprove of Trump’s actions, suggesting that the public is not willing to tolerate the radical changes he is attempting to implement.
Potas delves into the complexities of presidential mandates, arguing that they are often overstated and misinterpreted. The author suggests that presidents are often elected as the "lesser of two evils" rather than on the strength of a clear mandate for specific policies. Potas argues that the concept of a mandate is more applicable to Congress when one party gains a majority, allowing them to enact their legislative agenda.
The article criticizes the Republican Party for its apparent inaction in the face of Trump’s policies. Potas notes that Republicans control Congress and have the power to shape Trump’s policies into law, yet they seem hesitant to challenge or rein in his actions. The author questions what Republicans are proud of, suggesting that they are complicit in Trump’s perceived destruction of the economy.
Potas takes aim at Vice President JD Vance’s interpretation of electoral victories, arguing that Vance believes a win, even by a narrow margin, grants the victor a license to do whatever they want. The author disagrees, asserting that Americans did not elect Trump to impose his complete worldview on the country but rather to fulfill the duties of the presidency.
The article uses examples such as the Supreme Court’s rejection of Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan and court challenges to Biden’s vaccine mandates to illustrate the limitations of presidential power, even after an election victory. Potas argues that these instances demonstrate that even elected leaders cannot act unilaterally without facing legal and political constraints.
Potas acknowledges that Trump is being the kind of president many expected him to be, implementing his vision for America regardless of the consequences. The author points to tariffs as a prime example of Trump’s long-held policy beliefs, which he is now free to pursue without the constraints of winning elections.
Potas expresses a sense of nostalgia for Trump’s first term, when the Republican establishment acted as a check on his more impulsive tendencies. The author suggests that Americans would be happier with a Trump who was restrained and guided by more experienced political figures.
The article concludes with a dire warning for the Republican Party, suggesting that Trump’s unpopular policies are jeopardizing their chances of success in future elections. Potas urges Republican politicians to acknowledge that Trump is overreaching his mandate, which was simply to be the alternative to Joe Biden or Kamala Harris. The author emphasizes that the Republicans’ true mandate should be to represent the interests of their constituents rather than blindly supporting Trump’s agenda.
The underlying message of the article is that Trump’s economic policies are misguided and harmful to the American economy. Potas argues that Trump’s actions are driven by ego and a desire to impose his worldview on the country, regardless of the consequences. The author calls for Republicans to step up and rein in Trump’s excesses, reminding them that their primary responsibility is to serve the American people, not to blindly follow a president who is leading the country down a dangerous path.
