COVID-19: Trump’s Waterloo
After his State of Union address in early February, many pundits were confident that Donald Trump would win a second term in office. The American media provided partisan and predictable reviews on the event. House speaker Nancy Pelosi even ripped up her copy of Trump’s speech, galvanizing much of the Democratic base. However, despite being impeached several months earlier, it was clearly evident that the President had accumulated political capital. Polls suggested that Trump’s approval ratings were at numbers not seen since 2017, reaching roughly 44-45%.
Trump ran on creating economic growth in 2016. Statistics indicate that his administration oversaw a sustained economic expansion. Since his election, unemployment had hit record-lows, consumer spending and confidence had been strong, and stock markets were at record highs. He promised tax cuts; Paul Ryan delivered. It is exceedingly rare that an incumbent President, with a robust economy, fails to be re-elected. Moreover, the competition Trump was facing earlier in the year was weak. Bernie Sanders was the Democratic front runner in February. Bernie’s views lie on the far-left end of the political spectrum. He is a self-described democratic socialist, a “dirty” characterization for many Americans. Bernie believes in exorbitant income and corporate taxes and massive spending packages. Bernie’s negative favourable against Trump reflected independents and moderates’ distaste for his proposed policies. (It is worth noting that Joe Biden, a centrist, is now the presumptive Democratic nominee.) Thus, a Trump landslide in November appeared likely.
As the year progressed, COVID-19 garnered heightened attention across the globe. The media began to focus on the disease’s spread. Fear crept into Europe and North America as horror stories emerged from Asia. However, unlike other leaders, Trump did not appear worried. Observing the experiences of other countries, the President had a plethora of opportunities to implement preventative measures throughout February. On February 5, senators even expressed their concerns that the President was downplaying the threat of the Coronavirus. Whilst addressing a group of governors Trump stated, “I think it’s going to work out fine. I think when we get into April, in the warmer weather, that has a very negative effect on that and that type of a virus”. Later in the month, the White House Coronavirus task force and aides warned Trump of the possibility that many Americans could die from the disease. The next day, Trump tweeted that the coronavirus was very much under control in the United States.
Fast-forwarding to the present, the numbers contradict Trump’s predictions. Currently, America has recorded approximately two million COVID-19 cases and has suffered 115,000 deaths from the virus. These statistics are atrocious relative to those of other developed countries (e.g. Canada). On May 16, 2020, The Lancet, a peer-reviewed journal, published a scathing critique of the President’s response to the pandemic. The crux of the article was that the “agency [the Centre for Disease Control] needs a director who can provide leadership without the threat of being silenced and who has the technical capacity to lead today’s complicated effort.” Trump’s lack of action, early in the disease’s spread, is largely to blame for the United States’ deluge of cases.
The President’s mismanagement of the pandemic will hamper his chances of returning to the Oval Office in January 2021. The American economy, previously the biggest success story of his tenure, is challenged on a variety of fronts. If Trump had acted swiftly, the economy would still have been negatively affected in the short-run due to an intensively implemented lockdown. However, the recovery would likely have been accelerated with a more aggressive impairment of the virus’ transmission. America’s public debt has increased dramatically to approximately $25 trillion due to crisis-related relief and stimulus packages. The country’s debt-to-GDP is now above 100%. The burden of increased debt repayments will create budgetary headwinds for many generations to come. Employment levels have also been adversely impacted. The Economist offered a sobering commentary on May’s job numbers, stating that unemployment will probably remain well above normal levels. Americans have also been saving a higher percentage of their income throughout this contraction. This is a troubling statistic given that the consumers are the largest engine of economic growth. History has shown that presidents who preside over American recessions, facilitated by a lack of executive action, do not tend to be rewarded at the ballot box.
When Trump assumed office, he promised to run the country like an efficient business by consulting experts when making decisions. This would appear to be a logical and effective approach towards governance. However, it has become clear that Trump has no interest in listening to experts, especially if they disagree with his creed. Renowned economists, statesmen, and doctors have all been ignored at critical times throughout his administration. Dr. Anthony Fauci’s absence from many of the recent White House briefings epitomizes Trump’s reluctance to heed specialists’ advice. Closely following Fauci’s counsel could have saved thousands of lives. Much like Napoleon, Trump’s early promises were eclipsed by grander ambitions. Napoleon’s downfall was a product of poor decisions, driven by his unquenchable thirst for power. The results of the November 3rd presidential elections will determine if Trump’s political career is captive to the same irony.