The possibility of a Harris presidency can no longer be discounted given her recent surge in the polls, and Trump’s consequent decline. I have read many dire proclamations on social media of the hellscape that awaits should she win. But pundits are terrible at predicting the future, and campaign promises and policy platforms are of little predictive value for how the candidate will govern if elected, or the policy enacted.
In 2000, George W. Bush campaigned on tax cuts and reforms to Social Security. After a lengthy recount process, he was declared the winner, and soon after his promised tax cuts were ratified. But then 911 happened and rerouted the course of his presidency, making the rest of his campaign promises irrelevant.
In 2004, he was reelected on then-success of the Iraq War, the Global War on Terrorism (which at the time was a popular policy, as 911 was still fresh in the collective consciousness), and the strong economy. But by 2007 the Iraq War become a quagmire during the rebuilding phase, and the housing market collapsed by the time he left office, disgraced. Hurricane Katrina also was a major surprise, which diverted political capital to the rebuilding of the Gulf Coast.
Trump campaigned heavily on border control and ‘returning jobs to America’, but was stonewalled for much of his term fighting pointless legal battles. And then there was Covid, which tied up the remaining little time he had, which, like 911, was unforeseen. His promised tax cuts passed, which goes to show that tax cuts are among the few policy positions that can be predicted with some degree of success. Border control or returning jobs to America, not so much, unless predicted to fail.
Biden was similarly sidetracked in 2022 by Russia’s unexpected invasion of Ukraine. And in 2023-2024, the Israel, Iran, and Gaza conflicts. I predict that a Harris presidency will embolden autocratic leaders, contrary to the popular notion that Trump ‘pals around with dictators’. Autocrats want a Harris presidency, as she is perceived, rightly, as being softer. Trump is anti-war, but at the same time is not averse to America flexing its might to impose its values.
In 2012, Wisconsin House Representative Paul Ryan built a brand for himself and became something of a household name by taking a hardline stance on the national debt. Forecasts of debt collapse in the not-so-distant future were presented by the House Budget Committee, which Mr. Ryan chaired at the time, based on scary-looking graphs that extrapolated healthcare and other spending into the future. This came to a head during the debt ceiling standoff in January 2013.
Sure enough, although spending has surged, the U.S. economy is also much bigger, and no collapse of the dollar or economic crisis either (there was Covid, but this was unrelated to the debt). It seems like the U.S. has a bottomless capacity to spend without it hurting its economic might and dominance. Everyone keeps predicting that at some point the U.S. will default or ‘the bill will come due’, but it never does.
Despite the general futility of forecasts, a Harris presidency will be the most left-wing of any president, and lie somewhere between Obama and Biden of championing a progressive activist government that is also friendly to big business interests. Given that she is not that smart, like Biden, a puppeteer or secret committee will run her presidency. The stock market will do well (but the stock market tends to do well regardless of who is in charge). It will be similar to Obama’s presidency in this regard of a sort of watered-down woke capitalism.
It will not lead to Venezuela-style hyperinflation or Marxist-led lynch mobs as some on Twitter are predicting. But crime may get worse, although this is not enough to establish causality, as this is against backdrop of multigenerational societal decay and loss of social trust regardless of who is in charge. I am expecting an emphasis on student loan forgiveness/relief, as this is a safe and popular position with her base.
As for myself, I have no intent to vote for any candidate, though I support Trump on principle. I don’t care about things like protecting or securing the border or immigration, as those are meaningless, empty promises. There is no legislative path, nor the political will, to making substantiative immigration or border reform a reality. Second, it’s a problem that can be handled at a state or local level, not a national one. I would support a candidate who makes more practical promises, like addressing societal decay (e.g. homelessness, beggars, mentally ill on the streets ). Or scaling back the post-911 security-state outlay. 911 was 2 decades ago. The problem and solution has been identified–it does not mean having to subject innocent civilians to screening under the presumption of guilt.