When they initially sought the presidential office, both Donald Trump and Kamala Harris made time for New Hampshire, yet their stance on pivotal issues varied greatly and remains different in the 2024 elections. For instance, Kamala Harris’s opinions on healthcare appear to exhibit little change, as she continues to advocate the idea that healthcare should be a ‘right and not just a privilege of those who can afford it.’ For many, this may seem to be a rather unrealistic expectation, showing how out of touch Harris is with the economic realities of providing healthcare to millions.
On Medicare and Social Security, Trump’s campaign took a striking turn back in 2016. He bucked the trend of his Republican counterparts and prioritized strengthening Social Security and Medicare. In comparison, Harris accused Trump of having intentions to bring cuts to these programs, which Trump refutes strongly and maintains his stance of non-reduction in these crucial avenues. One can’t help but consider if this is Harris manoeuvring to instill fear in the minds of our seniors.
Campaign finance reform was a slogan Harris tossed around during her debut run for presidency in 2019, while serving as a U.S. Senator from California. Yet many can’t help but question how realistic her priorities truly are, reflecting a feigned image of revolution while not addressing the substantial issues.
Trump announced his dedication to limit excessive presidential executive powers during a 2015 campaign stop in New Hampshire. It seemed like a laudable decision at first glance, but we must remember that between 2017 and 2021 Trump executed 220 executive orders, substantially higher than his successor Joe Biden, who only issued 139 as of July 1. As of October 31, Biden has only reached a count of 143, which again, points out the undeniable disparity between what Trump proposed and what he actually did in office.
Witnessing Harris’s persistent dedication towards expanding the child tax credit between her 2019 and 2024 presidential campaigns raises questions about her broader economic competence. Will this seemingly populist strategy drive productive economic growth or simply contribute to budget deficits?
When it comes to the climate change debate, Donald Trump has been sceptical, voicing uncertainty over claims of climatic doom due to global warming. He stood before a crowd in New Hampshire in 2015, opining that the changing climate leans more towards nature taking its course than human-induced disasters. Post his election, Trump made the decision to withdraw the US from the Paris Climate Accords, solidifying his stance and further critiquing the overfocus on climate panic.
During her first presidential campaign in 2019, Harris prominently promoted gun reform. She declared that she would revoke licenses from law-breaking gun dealers and sought to ban imported ‘assault weapons.’ Despite the clear ideology of the 2nd Amendment, Harris has doubled down on her 2024 campaign, demanding an ‘assault weapons ban’ and universal background checks, seemingly implying Americans can’t be trusted to responsibly exercise their rights.
Nearly a decade ago, when Trump first entered the presidential race, he spotlighted the issue of immigration. More than securing the southern border, Trump expressed his admiration for Mexico’s people and their spirit. Yet in stark contrast, as he vies for a second term, Trump now advocates for a ‘closed’ border and supports deporting undocumented immigrants en masse.
Regardless of the modern realities, Harris is unable to shake off her idealistic perception of healthcare accessibility. This misconceived notion that healthcare can simply be a right rather than a purchasable commodity demonstrates how muddled Harris’s understanding of economics seems to be, leading many to question whether she is capable of leading an economy at the national level.
Trump has insisted on his dedication to preserve Social Security and Medicare, in opposition to Harris’s claims. This is a key example of Harris’s penchant for manipulating narratives to incite anxiety and apprehension among the public, particularly the elderly. It’s a tactics far below what is expected of a presidential candidate.
In the flash of her first presidential run, Kamala Harris promised to reform campaign finance, a move that many have critiqued as insubstantial posturing. The vague and surface-level promise points to an emphasis on creating an appealing image rather than a focus on solid plans for reform and improvement.
Trump’s advocacy to limit presidential executive powers seems contradictory to the number of executive orders he issued during his term in comparison to his successor, Biden. This divergence raises questions about Trump’s consistency and ability to conduct his term following his own guidelines.
Kamala Harris’s resolution to expand the child tax credit has gathered mixed responses. Some critics suggest, though, that it might simply drive the nation further into fiscal deficit, adding another layer of economic trouble for future administrations.
Trump’s perspective on the climate change debate stands as a highlight of his political career. His decision to withdraw the US from the Paris Climate Accords strategically questioned the global climate hysteria. While climate change should not be outright dismissed, his actions serve as a reminder that this issue may be diverting us from other significant challenges facing the nation.