Kamala Harris lost the election primarily due to high inflation, which significantly impacted living standards across various demographics. The failure to adopt effective measures against inflation, such as price controls, and the reliance on increasing interest rates, which did little to help ordinary Americans, undermined the Democrats' economic narrative.
Donald Trump's appeal to young white men is rooted in their feelings of economic insecurity, loneliness, and alienation. The right has effectively tapped into these emotions, offering a sense of belonging and immediate solutions, even if those solutions are often based on harmful ideologies like sexism and racism.
The economic data, such as GDP growth and headline inflation rates, failed to capture the real-life experiences of Americans because it does not accurately reflect the prices of essential goods like food, energy, and housing. The basket of goods used to calculate inflation includes items that many people, especially those with lower incomes, do not frequently purchase.
James Meadway blames mainstream economics for the Democrats' defeat because the profession's response to inflation was ineffective and out of touch with ordinary people's experiences. The focus on raising interest rates did little to address the root causes of inflation, such as supply-side issues and profiteering, and instead made life harder for most Americans.
The Kamala Harris campaign's focus on price gouging backfired because the mainstream economic and media response was to criticize and undermine these proposals. This made the campaign appear indecisive and weak, failing to offer concrete solutions to the economic challenges faced by voters.
The Democrats' support for Israel's actions in Gaza, particularly the ongoing conflict, likely depressed turnout among certain demographics, especially in swing states like Wisconsin and Michigan. This stance made the party appear morally inconsistent and unprincipled, further alienating voters who were already disillusioned with the economy.
James Meadway argues that the Democrats' response to inflation is a disaster because it protects the interests of the wealthy by making borrowing more expensive and potentially increasing unemployment, rather than addressing the immediate needs of ordinary people. This approach exacerbates economic inequality and fails to mitigate the impact of rising prices on essential goods.
Unconventional responses to inflation, such as price controls on essential goods, have been shown to work in countries like Spain and Switzerland. These measures can protect the most vulnerable from price surges and reduce the overall impact of inflation, especially when combined with targeted subsidies and support for essential services.
James Meadway believes there is continuity between the Trump and Biden administrations on foreign policy because both have used tariffs and trade as instruments of power. Trump is likely to continue this approach, using the US's economic clout to negotiate favorable terms, while also potentially expanding domestic support for industries affected by tariffs.
James Meadway thinks the left's approach to the climate crisis is flawed because it often focuses on manufacturing jobs and large infrastructure projects, which do not address the immediate economic and social impacts of climate change. Instead, the left should focus on the service sector, reducing working hours, and adapting to the realities of a changing climate.
Today we're publishing a crossover episode with our friends at the Macrodose podcast, hosted by James Meadway. In the episode talk about the economics of Donald Trump's election victory and why James lays much of the blame for Kamala Harris' defeat at the door of mainstream economics. We also talked about why Donald Trump did so well amongst young white men, and about what role the Democrats' enabling of the Gaza genocide had in the election results.
You can get more excellent economic analysis from James at the Macrodose podcast: