Like Donald Trump, I grew up in Queens, New York during the 1950s and 1960s. Some perspective on how things have changed since then can shed light on both Trump’s appeal and the good he has done.
The New York Republican Party in the mid-20th century was still the progressive party that Teddy Roosevelt helped build as Governor, before he became US President. Politicians seeking election in New York would typically run on the Republican Party line and the Liberal Party line, or on the Democratic Party line and the Conservative Party line. Progressive Republican ideas influenced Trump; they are apparent today in many of his positions. However, they are foreign to the contemporary Republican Party.
One key event in this great transformation was making Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater the Republican nominee for President in 1964 rather than liberal New York Governor Nelson Rockefeller. While this led to an election disaster, liberal Republicans recognized that they had to move right to survive in their party. The sharp shift right was also fueled by the importance of TV advertising, and the high cost of advertising. This made money considerably more important in politics. And with money comes influence. The Republican Party of Teddy Roosevelt became the party of big business, low taxes, small government and libertarian values.
Democrats followed the Republican march right, hoping to stake out a centrist position that could help them win elections; and, like Republicans, Democrats needed money from the rich and conservative.
Ronald Reagan assembled a strange Republican coalition, comprised of (formerly Democratic) blue-collar workers, affluent suburbanites, religious conservatives, and business interests. Working-class Americans really had nothing in common with Republican business interests. In fact, they had conflicting interests. Optimism that free enterprise and free trade would create a rising tide that would lift all boats kept these two groups together. Large tax cuts helped as well; they did increase living standards for average workers, despite the fact that the large majority of gains from these tax cuts went to the very rich and the benefit reductions needed to pay for these tax cuts hurt average workers.
Also helping the Reagan coalition survive was some ostrich-like behavior. Thomas Frank’s 2004 best-seller, What’s the Matter with Kansas?, describes the uneasy alliance between business interests and cultural warriors in the Republican Party. Champions of business stressed tax cuts, free trade, and reduced government regulation; religious conservatives focused on cultural issues, such as gay marriage and abortion.
Donald Trump, in contrast, still displays his old “New York values” to quote Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX). He has endorsed progressive positions on economic issues, putting him far outside the current Republican mainstream.
Trump appeals to working-class Republicans by supporting Social Security, promising to keep “good” jobs in America and keeping immigrants from taking them. After becoming the presumptive Republican Party nominee for President, he even suggested raising the minimum wage. On social issues Trump also stands outside mainstream Republican beliefs, opposing the North Carolina transgender bathroom legislation. Only on issues of deregulation and cutting taxes has Trump espoused the standard Republican line.
Still, Trump’s positions were far better than any Republican alternative during the US primary season. He is actually reasonably good when it comes to economics. He is correct that the large US trade deficit (especially with Mexico and China) has cost the US jobs and incomes by forcing US workers to compete with foreign workers willing to work for much less. Trade barriers would help his main supporters; so too would the building of his infamous wall between the US and Mexico. This would all stimulate the US economy, creating jobs and incomes in the US.
It is not hard to understand the appeal of these policies. Most Americans have not recovered from the Great Recession. Median household income (adjusted for inflation) is down since 2007 and has stagnated over the past several decades. At the same time, household debt levels are rising, and bankruptcy has been made more difficult. Working-class and middle-class Americans have been hurting badly. They have also been cut out of the political discussion because the two major political parties cater mainly to the rich. They are mad as hell.
Government debt is the main area where Trump gets his economics wrong. While debt is not always bad, the large increase in debt from the tax cuts and spending increases that Trump proposes are a big concern. Even more disconcerting are his statementsthat, if US debt becomes a problem, he will renegotiate that debt. Statements like this can only dissuade lending to the US government, with severe negative consequences.
Besides Trump being the least objectionable on economic issues of all the Republicans who ran for President this year, he is also the least dangerous when it comes to the actual Presidential election. The reason here is very different—Trump is highly unlikely to become the next US President.
First, Trump is far too inexperienced in the world of politics; he doesn’t seem to understand what it takes to win a US Presidential election. Soon after Trump became the presumptive Republican nominee, Hillary Clinton began a series of blistering TV ads attacking Trump in swing states. These ads showed clips of Trump talking extemporaneously about women and portrayed him as a misogynist. Rather than immediately responding to these attacks, Trump was busy trying to assemble a campaign team to devise a strategy for winning the November election. He has also spent too much time traveling abroad (as in today’s visit to the UK) and raising money for the November election, things he should have done long ago. At this point in the election cycle, he really needs to be out campaigning in key battleground states.
Second, too many Republicans are not supporting him, including the Bush former Presidents, former New Jersey Governor Christine Todd Whitman, Ohio Governor John Kasich, Mitt Romney, and New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez. Ohio Senator Rob Portman and Kasich have even said that they may not attend the Republican nominating convention in Cleveland, Ohio next month. On the other hand, Democrats will likely unite against Trump. In such situations, the united party usually win. This was true in 1968 when anti-war Democrats failed to support Hubert Humphrey and in 2008 when many Republicans abandoned their party, fearful of Sarah Palin.
Third, Democrats start out with a big advantage– 240-250 of the 270 electoral votes necessary to win the Presidency. Republicans start out with only 180-190 solid electoral votes; they need to win virtually every swing state (including Ohio, where two prominent Republican officials have serious concerns about Trump) to reach 270.
Finally, there is the problem of being Donald Trump—constantly alienating people with his bullying, as well as his hostile and offensive comments about women, minorities and foreigners. America’s anger is turning toward him.
Steven Pressman is Professor of Economics at Colorado State University, Professor Emeritus of Economics and Finance, Monmouth University, North American Editor of the Review of Political Economy and author of Understanding Piketty’s Capital in the 21st Century (Routledge, 2015) and Fifty Major Economists, 3rd ed. (Routledge, 2013)
