Blog

29 Jul 2016
Share

Compare Trump and Clinton on Spending and Economy

The media circus that always accompanies Donald Trump was in stark contrast to the staid and comparatively dull Democratic National Convention(DNC). Trump managed to steal some of the focus from what is an historic event- the first woman to be nominated as a presidential candidate for a major party, saying: “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,00 emails that are missing”, a statement he later called sarcasm. The US does, in fact, suspect that Russia is behind the timely leak.

While Bernie Saunders supporters lamented the fact that the DNC hadn’t shown impartial support for all candidates, the hacked emails only proved what Bernie and his supporters had all along suspected.

Husband Bill tried hard to paint a ‘real image’ of his spouse as the “best darned change-maker” he’d ever seen, making the case that Hillary hasn’t. As a person associated with maintaining the status quo-which few Americans wish to maintain, Hillary has yet to even embrace a slogan, while Trump’s ‘Make America Great Again’ is a clear rallying cry. In an attempt to shed some of her more managerial style and inspire trust, she often sought to praise America, suggesting Trump was the one who couldn’t be trusted.

His speech seemed inspired to galvanise fear and anger, while hers was occasionally retrospective, admitting she found the ‘service’ aspect of public service easier than the public part. Her overall tone was robustly combative, her speech peppered with Trump attacks. She said: “A man you can bait with a tweet is not a man we can trust with nuclear weapons.”

Trump retorted, naturally-with a series of tweets.

Compare the two conventions fiscally- who spent more on their party’s party?

The total for the Republican National Convention came to about $114 million (or according to our calculator £86,303,845.) which, by law, US taxpayers pay half of.

Philadelphia’s hotels stood to benefit the most from the DNC, as 40,000 party delegates saw the prices of rooms rise. When bidding to host the convention, Philadelphia set a $84 budget million for the event. The Democratic National Convention Committee raised over $7 million and the Philadelphia 2016 Host Committee raised $60, both with private donors. Also, Philadelphia requested federal government funds of $43million for security personnel, equipment and supplies.

That makes the total cost of the Democratic convention $127 million, $14 million more expensive than the Republican convention. The Democratic convention lists donors including AT&T, Microsoft, Samsung, Twitter, and Facebook, among others.

Most Importantly-Who would be better for the US economy?

Moody’s Analytics prepared a detailed analysis of each candidate’s economic proposals and concluded that Hillary Clinton’s plans would result in a somewhat stronger US economy. Trump criticised the report, pointing out that lead author Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody’s Analytics, is a registered Democrat who has donated money to Hillary Clinton. Trump didn’t dispute the details of the report, however.

According to the report: “Income will stagnate, and stock prices and real house values will decline.” Trump’s economic plans are dramatic: cease or renegotiate key trade deals, impose tariffs on cheap imports, slash federal taxes and deport 11 million illegal immigrants.

Clinton’s ideas are incremental: a boost in federal spending on roads, bridges and other infrastructure, more spending on education, 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave for every worker, all funded by tax hikes on the wealthy. In her speech she also called on corporations to pay their share of taxes and not outsource jobs.

As we have seen with Obamacare and other bills the president has attempted to pass, presidents don’t have the power to pass legislation they envisage; that’s not how the American system works. Many who wanted Bernie expected he could transform the deadlock in Washington, just as those who now support Trump are imagining. Neither candidate can single-handedly change the economy, country or the government, in spite of Trump’s boasting he can.