Why the Election Wasn’t a Biden Landslide - The Atlantic | Canada News Media
Connect with us

Economy

Why the Election Wasn’t a Biden Landslide – The Atlantic

Published

 on


The Atlantic

Why didn’t the pandemic recession precipitate a landslide for Joe Biden?

That is a central mystery stemming from what, at the moment, looks like a narrow, if decisive, loss for President Donald Trump. Even though the unemployment rate is more than double what it was a year ago, even though 1 million Americans a week are applying for jobless aid, even though Congress has failed for six months to pass desperately needed additional stimulus, even though Trump has the worst job-creation record of any president going back to World War II, voters gave the incumbent decent marks on the economy up to Election Day, and he expanded his 2016 vote count by at least 5.7 million.

At least five factors seemed to be at work, turning what should have been a gale-force headwind against Trump into little more than a breeze, and allowing the president to continue running on the strength of an economy that the coronavirus destroyed.

The first is that the general election occurred when the economy was bouncing back, not when it was falling apart. Voters, as a general point, care a lot about the direction of the economy: They are more prone to punish a ruling party if the unemployment rate is low but rising than if it is high but falling. Trump fell into that latter category, as did Barack Obama in 2012. The terrible-but-improving economy let Trump run on a record of restoring jobs and reopening businesses, and meant that as voters made up their mind, they saw historic growth numbers and strong jobs reports, not a sharp drop in year-over-year GDP and awful unemployment rates.

The second factor is that household finances have held up better than economic headlines would suggest, because of the trillions of dollars of stimulus passed by Congress back in the spring. The one-off, $1,200 checks that Uncle Sam sent to most Americans a few months ago, combined with the massive $600-a-week temporary boost to unemployment-insurance benefits, meant that the catastrophic job losses of the spring and summer did not translate into income losses, on net, for American families, government data show. Because many households cut back spending on things such as travel, doctors’ visits, entertainment, and restaurant meals, they ended up with more cash on hand and higher savings.

That shoring-up is coming to an end, as many families spend through their stimulus payments and struggle to find work. The recovery is slowing down. Still, congressional efforts on household finances have translated into shockingly good polling on the economy for Republicans. As of September, half of Americans said they saw Trump as an effective leader on the economy, versus 43 percent for Joe Biden. Surveys conducted in October showed voters approving of Trump’s handling of the economy by a significant margin.

A third factor is that the people most hurt by Trump’s horrific mismanagement of the federal public-health response and the ensuing economic fallout were more likely to be Democrats who were not voting for Trump in the first place. In geographic terms, coastal states have suffered worse job losses and sharper contractions than many of the square states of the interior: Hawaii’s jobless rate is more than 15 percent and California’s is more than 10 percent, versus 5 percent or less in Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota, Iowa, and Utah. Moreover, the jobs crisis is harsher in dense, urban areas than in sparse, rural ones. As a result, the economist Jed Kolko estimates, the unemployment rate was four percentage points higher for likely Democrats than for likely Republicans as of July. Demographics and wage dispersion matter here too: The COVID-19 recession has caused disproportionate job losses for young, Black, and low-wage workers—who tend to vote Democratic. Their older, whiter, higher-income counterparts, more likely to support Trump, have come through the viral recession relatively unscathed.

More broadly, as a fourth factor, Americans seem not to blame Trump for the wreckage caused by the coronavirus or the ensuing recession, treating it more like an act of God than a product of policy choices. In an October poll, just over half of Americans said that Trump’s administration had a “great” deal of responsibility for the situation, whereas three in four Americans blamed George W. Bush for the Great Recession a year into Obama’s first term. Trump’s endless blame-shifting might have worked: He never took responsibility for the 230,000 deaths or the millions of job losses, instead blaming China and Democrats for shutting down the economy. Voters seem to have listened.

Finally, political polarization is altering how voters perceive the economy. Throughout Trump’s tenure, Democrats never wavered in their disdain for him and his economic management. Republicans never wavered in their support. His approval and disapproval ratings were freakishly steady. Even a colossal recession and a pandemic could not change that. Democrats see the world through blue-colored glasses and Republicans see through red-colored ones, and that means real-life economic conditions might have less of an effect on elections than they did in the past.

Many voters were buffered from the financial repercussions of joblessness, unequal in terms of their experience of the downturn, and polarized in terms of their understanding of who was responsible for it and how bad things were. That helped Trump in 2020. Just not enough.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.

Annie Lowrey is a staff writer at The Atlantic, where she covers economic policy.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Economy

B.C.’s debt and deficit forecast to rise as the provincial election nears

Published

 on

 

VICTORIA – British Columbia is forecasting a record budget deficit and a rising debt of almost $129 billion less than two weeks before the start of a provincial election campaign where economic stability and future progress are expected to be major issues.

Finance Minister Katrine Conroy, who has announced her retirement and will not seek re-election in the Oct. 19 vote, said Tuesday her final budget update as minister predicts a deficit of $8.9 billion, up $1.1 billion from a forecast she made earlier this year.

Conroy said she acknowledges “challenges” facing B.C., including three consecutive deficit budgets, but expected improved economic growth where the province will start to “turn a corner.”

The $8.9 billion deficit forecast for 2024-2025 is followed by annual deficit projections of $6.7 billion and $6.1 billion in 2026-2027, Conroy said at a news conference outlining the government’s first quarterly financial update.

Conroy said lower corporate income tax and natural resource revenues and the increased cost of fighting wildfires have had some of the largest impacts on the budget.

“I want to acknowledge the economic uncertainties,” she said. “While global inflation is showing signs of easing and we’ve seen cuts to the Bank of Canada interest rates, we know that the challenges are not over.”

Conroy said wildfire response costs are expected to total $886 million this year, more than $650 million higher than originally forecast.

Corporate income tax revenue is forecast to be $638 million lower as a result of federal government updates and natural resource revenues are down $299 million due to lower prices for natural gas, lumber and electricity, she said.

Debt-servicing costs are also forecast to be $344 million higher due to the larger debt balance, the current interest rate and accelerated borrowing to ensure services and capital projects are maintained through the province’s election period, said Conroy.

B.C.’s economic growth is expected to strengthen over the next three years, but the timing of a return to a balanced budget will fall to another minister, said Conroy, who was addressing what likely would be her last news conference as Minister of Finance.

The election is expected to be called on Sept. 21, with the vote set for Oct. 19.

“While we are a strong province, people are facing challenges,” she said. “We have never shied away from taking those challenges head on, because we want to keep British Columbians secure and help them build good lives now and for the long term. With the investments we’re making and the actions we’re taking to support people and build a stronger economy, we’ve started to turn a corner.”

Premier David Eby said before the fiscal forecast was released Tuesday that the New Democrat government remains committed to providing services and supports for people in British Columbia and cuts are not on his agenda.

Eby said people have been hurt by high interest costs and the province is facing budget pressures connected to low resource prices, high wildfire costs and struggling global economies.

The premier said that now is not the time to reduce supports and services for people.

Last month’s year-end report for the 2023-2024 budget saw the province post a budget deficit of $5.035 billion, down from the previous forecast of $5.9 billion.

Eby said he expects government financial priorities to become a major issue during the upcoming election, with the NDP pledging to continue to fund services and the B.C. Conservatives looking to make cuts.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 10, 2024.

Note to readers: This is a corrected story. A previous version said the debt would be going up to more than $129 billion. In fact, it will be almost $129 billion.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Economy

Mark Carney mum on carbon-tax advice, future in politics at Liberal retreat

Published

 on

 

NANAIMO, B.C. – Former Bank of Canada governor Mark Carney says he’ll be advising the Liberal party to flip some the challenges posed by an increasingly divided and dangerous world into an economic opportunity for Canada.

But he won’t say what his specific advice will be on economic issues that are politically divisive in Canada, like the carbon tax.

He presented his vision for the Liberals’ economic policy at the party’s caucus retreat in Nanaimo, B.C. today, after he agreed to help the party prepare for the next election as chair of a Liberal task force on economic growth.

Carney has been touted as a possible leadership contender to replace Justin Trudeau, who has said he has tried to coax Carney into politics for years.

Carney says if the prime minister asks him to do something he will do it to the best of his ability, but won’t elaborate on whether the new adviser role could lead to him adding his name to a ballot in the next election.

Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland says she has been taking advice from Carney for years, and that his new position won’t infringe on her role.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 10, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Economy

Nova Scotia bill would kick-start offshore wind industry without approval from Ottawa

Published

 on

 

HALIFAX – The Nova Scotia government has introduced a bill that would kick-start the province’s offshore wind industry without federal approval.

Natural Resources Minister Tory Rushton says amendments within a new omnibus bill introduced today will help ensure Nova Scotia meets its goal of launching a first call for offshore wind bids next year.

The province wants to offer project licences by 2030 to develop a total of five gigawatts of power from offshore wind.

Rushton says normally the province would wait for the federal government to adopt legislation establishing a wind industry off Canada’s East Coast, but that process has been “progressing slowly.”

Federal legislation that would enable the development of offshore wind farms in Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador has passed through the first and second reading in the Senate, and is currently under consideration in committee.

Rushton says the Nova Scotia bill mirrors the federal legislation and would prevent the province’s offshore wind industry from being held up in Ottawa.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 10, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Exit mobile version