11/6/24, 3:17 PM How bad could a second Trump presidency get?

Menu Try for free Log in

Briefing | A sting in the tail risks

How bad could a second Trump presidency

get?
The damage to America’s economy, institutions and the world would be huge

illustration: olivier heiligers

Oct 31st 2024 | washington, dc Share

https://www.economist.com/briefing/2024/10/31/how-bad-could-a-second-trump-presidency-get?utm_content=ed-picks-image-link-1&etear=nl_s… 1/11
11/6/24, 3:17 PM How bad could a second Trump presidency get?

Listen to this story.

0:00 / 0:00

O n the stump, Donald Trump makes lots of eye-widening pledges. He will deport
illegal immigrants by their millions; he will launch missiles at Mexico’s drug
cartels; he will use the army to crack down on the “far-left lunatics” who run the
Democratic Party. Yet Mr Trump’s tenure as president, whatever its merits or failings,
was not the cataclysm that many Democrats had predicted. The economy hummed
along, until the pandemic struck. There were no big foreign-policy crises. And although
Mr Trump tried to steal the presidential election of 2020, he failed.
So what would a second Trump term be like? Many voters will dismiss Mr Trump’s
overheated rhetoric as just that. They may see the election as a finely balanced decision
about which candidate would manage the economy better, or as a choice between
divergent stances on such issues as abortion and immigration. But Mr Trump not only
seems intent on following through on some of his wilder pronouncements if elected, but
would also be in a better position to do so than last time. That suggests another way of
looking at America’s choice: how badly wrong could things go?

Read more of our coverage of America’s presidential election

Kamala Harris, the sitting vice-president, is running as the candidate of the status quo.
Her unofficial slogan is “We are not going back.” Mr Trump, in contrast, implies that
radical change is needed, and that he will provide it. In all likelihood, if he returns to the
White House, he will have trouble implementing many of his most extreme ideas, just as
in his first term. He may be stymied by Congress, the courts and the bureaucracy or
distracted by events or dissuaded by aides or foiled by his own incompetence. But there
is a chance—and not a negligible one—that he might succeed in doing some of the
things he talks about, with disastrous consequences for America’s economy, its
institutions and the world. Fears that he may permanently damage American democracy
and the rule of law are not far-fetched.
Battle-hardened
After eight years of institutionalisation, Trumpism is much more organised than when it
crashed into the Oval Office in 2017 Mr Trump’s agenda was slowed then by
https://www.economist.com/briefing/2024/10/31/how-bad-could-a-second-trump-presidency-get?utm_content=ed-picks-image-link-1&etear=nl_s… 2/11
11/6/24, 3:17 PM How bad could a second Trump presidency get?
crashed into the Oval Office in 2017. Mr Trump s agenda was slowed then by
inexperienced acolytes who did not know enough about administrative law and the
workings of the civil service to make things happen. What is more, Mr Trump, wanting
to make his administration appear distinguished, appointed grandees to senior jobs even
though they often disagreed with his ideas. The leaders of a second Trump
administration, by contrast, would be loyal veterans. Many of them would arrive in office
with plans already in mind. The architects of Project 2025—a 900-page policy agenda for
the next Trump administration drawn up by the Heritage Foundation, a Trumpist think-
tank—fell out with Mr Trump after Democrats began using it to attack him. But Mr
Trump nonetheless embraces the underlying idea that he should return to office with
pre-vetted personnel and detailed plans. The Supreme Court’s recent decision setting
out extremely wide immunity for presidents also seems likely to embolden him.

Mr Trump’s economic plans are certainly bold—but not in a good way. The first iteration
of Trumponomics was lucky enough to be implemented during a period of high growth
and low inflation. Its next incarnation would not only be adopted in less benign
circumstances, but would also itself be of a much more disruptive nature. His campaign
is proposing a second, much bigger hike in tariffs, lavish tax cuts, a labour-supply shock
in the form of mass deportations and attacks on the independence of the Federal
Reserve.
These are all terrible ideas. “Normally, if you’re cutting off migrant labour, you try to get
goods from outside. And if you’re cutting off goods from outside, you try to get migrant
labour. If you cut off both, you almost certainly get inflation, if not stagflation,” says
Adam Posen of the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a think-tank.
JPMorgan Chase, a bank, has estimated that a tariff hike half the size of the one Mr
Trump is advocating would knock a third to half a percentage point off gdp growth in
its first year and increase inflation by 1.5-2 percentage points.
Whether Mr Trump would be able to put all his plans into practice is doubtful. The
president has the authority to raise tariffs on national-security grounds or as retaliation
for unfair trade practices. Mr Trump’s pledge of an across-the-board tariff of 20% on all
imports, and 60% on imports from China, does not really seem to fit under these
headings. But while the courts debated this question, businesses would suffer ruinous
disruption, presumably made worse by retaliatory tariffs imposed by other countries.
Some advisers think Mr Trump would raise tariffs gradually, as a means to extract
concessions from trading partners. That might only draw out the agony, however, and
would not reduce the risks of a trade war.

https://www.economist.com/briefing/2024/10/31/how-bad-could-a-second-trump-presidency-get?utm_content=ed-picks-image-link-1&etear=nl_s… 3/11
11/6/24, 3:17 PM How bad could a second Trump presidency get?

illustration: olivier heiligers

The personal-tax cuts Mr Trump signed into law in 2017 are due to expire next year and
he would have to negotiate with Congress to extend them. He wants to renew them all,
as well as end taxation on tips, overtime and Social Security payments. If Mr Trump
wins the presidency, our election model gives the Democrats a 34% chance of
controlling the House of Representatives. They have different, less profligate plans.
Moreover, were Mr Trump to steer America onto an even more irresponsible fiscal course
than its current one, the bond markets might eventually rebel, prompting a
reassessment.

Mass deportations of the magnitude that Mr Trump has proposed are also unlikely to
happen. The federal government simply would not have the capacity to hunt down and
deport millions of people unless Mr Trump were to enlist the armed forces or deputise
state and local law enforcement. There would be public uproar, resistance from
Democratic-led states and cities, and endless legal challenges. “I don’t think that there’s
any world, even in Donald Trump’s fantasy, that you’re actually going to try to send…ice
agents door to door, to round up 12m residents of this country and deport them,” says
Mike Johnston, the Democratic mayor of Denver. “There’s just no infrastructure
capacity for that and Denver would never participate in it.” Shortages in industries that
rely on immigrant labour such as agriculture, construction and slaughterhouses would
also be inflationary.
Unreserved
If the Federal Reserve tightened monetary policy to counteract the inflationary
pressures of higher tariffs, a shrinking workforce or lavish spending, Mr Trump would be
minded to attack it. Already, some in his orbit are suggesting that a Trump
administration undermine Jerome Powell, the chair of the Federal Reserve whose time in
that job (but not as a member of its board) expires in 2026, by appointing a “shadow”
chair to make less hawkish recommendations about interest rates. Yet an attack on the
https://www.economist.com/briefing/2024/10/31/how-bad-could-a-second-trump-presidency-get?utm_content=ed-picks-image-link-1&etear=nl_s… 4/11
11/6/24, 3:17 PM How bad could a second Trump presidency get?

Fed would be almost certain to horrify the markets. “The stockmarket is a very effective
and instantaneous feedback mechanism for economic policy which provides a
constraint on crazy tariffs, a constraint on crazy Fed stuff, but probably not much
constraint on unsustainable fiscal policy,” says Jason Furman, a former Democratic
policymaker who is now a professor of economics at Harvard University.
Even assuming Mr Trump would eventually relent and water down or abandon some of
these policies, he could still cause huge damage in the process. Many optimistic
scenarios rely on markets tanking, inflation jumping or growth slumping to curb his
enthusiasm. Moreover, there is no amount of deportations, tariff increases or Fed-
bashing that is good for the economy; the only question is how much damage Mr Trump
would inflict. Were he really to stick to his guns, inflation, higher interest rates and
recession beckon.
Foreign policy also presents alarming risks. Although Mr Trump’s advisers may try to
sketch out clear doctrines in rough alignment with America First rhetoric, their boss
thinks that foreign policy succeeds or fails owing to force of personality, not policies.
His stochastic style is inconsistent and unpredictable. “If former president Trump is re-
elected, we are going to pay an enormous chaos premium” as allies scramble to work out
what his policies will be, says Kori Schake of the American Enterprise Institute, another
think-tank. Whereas, during his first term, the world was relatively calm, Mr Trump
would return this time as America grappled with wars in the Middle East and in
Ukraine.
Mr Trump says his commanding presence would be enough to settle the war in Ukraine
within 24 hours of his election—before he was even inaugurated. What this means, if
anything, is hard to gauge. The leading candidates for top national-security jobs in a
second Trump administration have a wide range of views on Ukraine. Mike Pompeo, a
former secretary of state and potential future defence secretary, argues for giving
Ukraine a massive $600bn in weaponry to force Russia to the negotiating table. J.D.
Vance, who would be vice-president, seems to think any dollar spent on Ukraine is a
dollar wasted. Who Mr Trump ultimately listens to is maddeningly unpredictable—often
his view is decided by the last person to speak to him.

No matter who is elected president, it seems increasingly likely that Ukraine will have to
abandon or at least shelve its ambition to reclaim much of the territory Russia has
stolen. Given Republicans’ hostility to the military aid for Ukraine proposed by Mr
Biden’s administration, it seems unlikely that a Republican-led House of
Representatives would approve another big dollop—and it is hard to imagine Mr Trump
protesting very stridently. But an abrupt and haphazard American abandonment of
Ukraine would embolden Vladimir Putin, Russia’s dictator, and increase the risk he
poses to his neighbours.
There are man other nightmare scenarios Might Mr Trump in effect oid the
https://www.economist.com/briefing/2024/10/31/how-bad-could-a-second-trump-presidency-get?utm_content=ed-picks-image-link-1&etear=nl_s… 5/11
11/6/24, 3:17 PM How bad could a second Trump presidency get?
There are many other nightmare scenarios. Might Mr Trump, in effect, void the
collective-security guarantee at the heart of the nato alliance by refusing to counter
further Russian aggression? Would he decline to send American forces to help Taiwan in
the event of a Chinese blockade or invasion? Would Israel be given a completely free
hand to do as it wishes in the Middle East, including striking Iranian oil-production and
nuclear-weapons facilities? All of these are possible. Mr Trump has a deep aversion to
war, but also a strong urge to avoid looking weak.
Some vague but worrying trends can be guessed at. “You would assume that the us
reaction function is more escalatory because their doctrine is peace through strength,”
says Jon Lieber of the Eurasia Group, a geopolitical consultancy. Both Mr Trump and his
party are disinclined to sign up to any meaningful international initiatives on climate
change. But most important are the possibilities that cannot be ruled out: of a forced
capitulation of Ukraine, of the collapse of nato, of an expanding war in the Middle
East and so on.
Perhaps most serious of all are the threats Mr Trump poses to American democracy and
the rule of law. There is no doubt about his autocratic instincts. To stay in power after
his election loss in 2020, Mr Trump tried to suborn electoral officials and fomented a
mob, ultimately leading to the ransacking of the Capitol by his supporters on January
6th 2021. He has not recanted since. He still insists the election was stolen; he calls
those convicted of crimes on January 6th “political prisoners” and has pledged to
pardon them; he has mused about cancelling the licences of critical broadcasters; he
calls his political opponents “the enemy within” that may need to be dealt with using
military force. An astonishing number of those who work closely with Mr Trump come
away appalled. John Kelly, a former chief of staff, became the latest in recent days to
declare him a “fascist”.
The real question, instead, is whether America’s institutions would be able to constrain
him. America’s courts and constitution would be the best check on Mr Trump’s
autocratic whims. Mr Trump’s many lawsuits seeking to overturn the election result in
2020 got nowhere, after all. Mr Trump would not be able to get Congress to adopt
constitutional changes, allowing him a third term, for instance. Nor would he have much
sway over state governments led by Democrats. Although he has consolidated his
control over the Republican Party, making it almost impossible that he would be
impeached, there would still be some Republicans in Congress who would resist his
worst instincts.
For these reasons, some political scientists think that American institutions will
comfortably absorb the shock of a second Trump presidency. Of the 40 populist
governments around the world between 1985 and 2020 identified by Kurt Weyland of
the University of Texas, only seven devolved into authoritarianism. And those
unfortunate countries had weak institutions and suffered precipitating crises. “I would
not think that Trump would be able to do more damage in a second government than in
https://www.economist.com/briefing/2024/10/31/how-bad-could-a-second-trump-presidency-get?utm_content=ed-picks-image-link-1&etear=nl_s… 6/11
11/6/24, 3:17 PM How bad could a second Trump presidency get?

the first,” says Mr Weyland. The Democrats may control the House of Representatives,
ensuring divided government from the start. But even if Republicans began a second
Trump term in control of both chambers of Congress, Democrats would be likely to do
well in the midterm elections in 2026, constraining Mr Trump for the remainder of his
presidency.

illustration: olivier heiligers

Even if the risk of a catastrophic breakdown in American democracy is low, a second

Trump term would still corrode democratic institutions. Benjamin Wittes, the editor-in-
chief of Lawfare, a national-security publication, warns that Mr Trump would be a worse
danger to the rule of law for three reasons: first, “the grown-ups will not be in the room”,
unlike in his first term; second, “he does at least rhetorically seem very fixated on
revenge” after enduring four separate criminal proceedings; and third, he will be
emboldened by his triumph “partly legally and partly electorally over the forces that
tried to restrain him”.
Mr Trump is all but certain to dismiss the federal charges against himself. He is also
likely to pardon the January 6th rioters. He has promised to end the independence of the
Department of Justice, a norm since the Watergate scandal. That would allow him to
initiate investigations of his political enemies, which seem likelier than not. “There’s a
whole set of second-order considerations that flow from this. Once you know those sorts
of selective prosecutions are on the table, you will calibrate your behaviour very
differently,” says Brendan Nyhan of Dartmouth College.
Intimidating
The notion that Mr Trump might use the institutions of state to cow potential critics
https://www.economist.com/briefing/2024/10/31/how-bad-could-a-second-trump-presidency-get?utm_content=ed-picks-image-link-1&etear=nl_s… 7/11
11/6/24, 3:17 PM How bad could a second Trump presidency get?

was raised this week when Jeff Bezos, the billionaire owner of the Washington Post,
stopped it from publishing an endorsement of Ms Harris. Mr Bezos said he was trying to
bolster the paper’s reputation for independence, not curry favour with Mr Trump, but
roughly a tenth of the Post’s subscribers have reached the opposite conclusion and
cancelled their subscriptions. There is also the risk that violent extremists, such as the
Proud Boys militia, may feel emboldened to harry Mr Trump’s political opponents.

Mr Trump is also likely to try to put his stamp on the federal bureaucracy. He might
invoke an authority known as Schedule f, which would allow him to dismiss many low-
level civil servants. He has also talked about sacking America’s top generals, whom he
considers too “woke”. There is a chance that he tries to hound Mr Powell into resigning
or claims the (legally untested) authority to fire him. All this would politicise parts of the
government that have been relatively free from such meddling until now.
These scenarios may sound mundane compared with a stolen election or the institution
of a dictatorship, but they would have grave consequences. Selective, politically
motivated law enforcement would not only be an injustice in itself, it would also be a
threat to America’s economic might, frightening businesses and deterring investment.
What is more, such abuses would be unlikely to stop when Mr Trump left office. Given
the political polarisation of recent decades, once one of America’s parties has broken a
norm, the other is likely to follow suit, if only to remain competitive. Confidence in the
rule of law would be difficult to restore.
Many Americans find Democratic ranting about the risks of another Trump term
hypocritical. They think that Democrats have weaponised the justice system against Mr
Trump, not the other way round. They see Mr Biden’s tenure as a litany of foreign-policy
failures far worse than anything that occurred on Mr Trump’s watch. The surge in
inflation under Mr Biden is proof in their eyes that Mr Trump is a better economic
manager. There is some merit to all these contentions—and a second Trump term might
prove no more catastrophic than the first. But voting for Mr Trump on that assumption
would be risky in the extreme to America and the world. ■
Explore more

The US elections of 2024 Donald Trump United States

This article appeared in the Briefing section of the print edition under the headline “A sting in the tail risks”

Briefing
November 2nd 2024
→ How bad could a second Trump presidency get?

https://www.economist.com/briefing/2024/10/31/how-bad-could-a-second-trump-presidency-get?utm_content=ed-picks-image-link-1&etear=nl_s… 8/11
11/6/24, 3:17 PM How bad could a second Trump presidency get?

From the November 2nd

2024 edition
Discover stories from this section
and more in the list of contents

⇒ Explore the edition

Share Reuse this content

the economist today

Handpicked stories, in your inbox
A daily newsletter with the best of our journalism

example@email.com Sign up

Yes, I agree to receive exclusive content, offers and updates to

products and services from The Economist Group. I can change
these preferences at any time.

https://www.economist.com/briefing/2024/10/31/how-bad-could-a-second-trump-presidency-get?utm_content=ed-picks-image-link-1&etear=nl_s… 9/11
11/6/24, 3:17 PM How bad could a second Trump presidency get?

Discover more

GLP-1s like Ozempic are among the most important drug

breakthroughs ever
Their far-reaching potential could transform how chronic diseases are managed

The rockets are nifty, but it is satellites that

make SpaceX valuable
Elon Musk’s space venture may soon be more valuable than Tesla

Who will control the next Congress?

The new president is much less likely than usual to see allies take
charge on Capitol Hill

Has the war in Gaza radicalised young Palestinians?

After Gaza, how will the Palestinians try to build their state?

https://www.economist.com/briefing/2024/10/31/how-bad-could-a-second-trump-presidency-get?utm_content=ed-picks-image-link-1&etear=nl_… 10/11
11/6/24, 3:17 PM How bad could a second Trump presidency get?

A year on, Israeli society is divided about the lessons of October 7th
Hawks and doves, religious and secular, right and left—all the old cleavages are resurfacing

The bloodshed in the Middle East is fast expanding

Israel seems certain to retaliate to Iran’s missile attack

Subscribe Reuse our content

Economist Enterprise Help and contact us

Keep updated

Published since September 1843 to take part in “a severe contest between

intelligence, which presses forward, and an unworthy, timid ignorance
obstructing our progress.”

The Economist The Economist Group

About The Economist Group Working here

Advertise Economist Intelligence Economist Education Courses
Press centre Economist Impact Executive Jobs
SecureDrop Economist Impact Events

To enhance your experience and ensure our website runs smoothly, we use cookies and similar technologies.

Manage Cookies

Terms of Use Privacy Cookie Policy Accessibility Modern Slavery Statement Sitemap Your Data Rights
Copyright © The Economist Newspaper Limited 2024. All rights reserved.

https://www.economist.com/briefing/2024/10/31/how-bad-could-a-second-trump-presidency-get?utm_content=ed-picks-image-link-1&etear=nl_s… 11/11