in Kamala Harris, Politics, Trump

Obama Claims Trump’s Robust Economy Was His Doing

Barack Obama

During a campaign event for Vice President Kamala Harris that took place in Pittsburgh, former President Barack Obama voiced the argument that the initial robust economic performance under former President Donald Trump’s administration was in fact the fruit of policies initiated during his own term. According to Obama, the favorable economy that Trump experienced at the dawn of his presidency was, in fact, a result of the groundwork laid down by his own administration.

Casting his mind back, Obama mentioned the economic stats during his transition from office to his successor, Trump. His administration saw job growth that persistently spanned over a stretch of 75 months. This economic thrust, he implies, wasn’t triggered by any action undertaken by Trump, but rather by the measures his own administration had set in motion.

Check out our Trump 2025 Calendars!

Obama didn’t hold back in his appraisal of former President George W. Bush’s tenure. He stated unequivocally that he spent his entire eight-year term bearing the load of the aftermath left by the Republican’s economic strategies. However, his ownership of this cleanup operation, especially in relation to the Trump economy, sparked discussion among social media users and analysts.

There were reactions from various quarters pertaining to Obama’s declaration. Among the critics was Mollie Hemingway, the Editor-in-Chief of The Federalist. Hemingway countered Obama’s claim, espousing the belief that the slower pace of the Obama economy was a significant factor that catapulted Trump towards his election victory.

An unidentified commentator also pointed out that in the last year of Obama’s presidency, the GDP growth was measured at only 1.6%. This data prompted the contention that Trump didn’t step into a thriving economy as suggested by Obama’s narrative. The GDP growth figures in Obama’s reign showed a dip, from 3.7% in the first quarter of 2015 to 0.7% in the fourth quarter of the same year, further highlighting the contrary argument.

However, there was a marginal ascent in GDP during Obama’s final year. When Trump took the helm in the first quarter of 2017, the GDP growth rate stood at 2%. Upon the heralding of Trump’s first full year as president, the GDP growth showed a more dynamic leap to reach 4%.

Trump’s administration sustained that growth, boosting GDP to a peak of 4.8% in 2019 before the onslaught of the COVID-19 pandemic inflicted a global economic mishap. With the pandemic altering the economic landscape, the economy became a central theme in the subsequent 2024 campaign.

Trump directed his campaign narrative towards the economic track record of the Biden-Harris administration. According to voters, key topics of concern tied to their decision-making in the elections relate to the economy and inflation, which peaked at a staggering 9.1% during Biden’s term.

As part of his own economic reform plans, Trump rallied in Michigan with a focus on slashing the cost of food and groceries for American households. He further accentuated the pivotal role of energy in managing these costs, speaking ambitiously about his proposal to cut energy bills drastically by 50% within just one year.

Part of Trump’s energy cost reduction plan involved the implication that dropping energy costs would be followed by subsequent decreases in interest rates. It was a significant marker in his campaign promises, spelling relief for average American families burdened by cost inflation.

Vice President Kamala Harris was also keen to address economic concerns during her campaign efforts. According to her, the escalated prices were primarily attributable to corporate profiteering.

Harris proposed strong measures to combat what she saw as the central issue. In August, she outlined plans for a federal ban aimed at corporate price-gouging, which she presented as a critical solution in taming the escalating prices.

The economic policies proposed by both sides aptly demonstrate their understanding and handling of economic trends, acknowledging the primacy of economy-related discourse for the voters. However, the opposing views regarding the state of the economy left by Obama’s administration revealed a partisan divide in how economic success is perceived and communicated.