Is Wall Street hedging on a Trump win in 2020? Let our experts tell you why.

Apr 16, 2019

2 min

“The economy, stupid!” It’s a famous quote that Bill Clinton campaigner James Carville used in 1992. And the Ragin’ Cajun was right – odds are, when it comes to Americans casting a vote in presidential elections – the economy calls the shots on how they vote.


And despite the scandals, the Tweets, the gaffes and the indictments – the economy under President Donald Trump is booming.


So, while convention and traditional politics would likely write of the presidency of Donald Trump as a one term wonder - an article about a recent report commissioned by Goldman Sachs says Democrats and pundits shouldn’t be so sure to write him off.


‘In a comprehensive report released late Saturday, the investment bank gave its preliminary thoughts on a general election that’s still more than a year away.


While Trump re-election is far from assured, Goldman’s economists believe the president is bolstered by “the advantage of first-term incumbency and the relatively strong economic performance,” in what is sure to be a “close call” election.’ - Yahoo! Finance


Are you covering the race for 2020?


Should Democrats change their focus away from the scandals and the Mueller Report and focus on economics? If not, what are the issues that will sway undecideds next year?


And what will a potential run by an Independent candidate mean for the race?


There are so many storylines already at play and a long way to go before November 2020 – but the election is already daily news and that’s where our experts can help.


Dr. Marc Clauson is a professor of history and law at Cedarville. Marc is an expert in the fields of political and economic philosophy Dr. Clauson is available to speak with media – simply click on his icon to arrange an interview.



Powered by

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from Cedarville University

From the Pump to the Bond Market: Why Rising Oil Prices Matter for Borrowing Costs featured image

2 min

From the Pump to the Bond Market: Why Rising Oil Prices Matter for Borrowing Costs

From the Pump to the Bond Market: Why Rising Oil Prices Matter for Borrowing Costs Rising oil prices are often felt first at the gas pump, but their effects can quickly extend to the broader economy. As higher costs for gasoline, diesel and jet fuel work their way through transportation, manufacturing and food production, investors are increasingly concerned that inflation could remain elevated longer than expected. That concern is helping push Treasury yields higher. When investors expect inflation to erode the future value of fixed-income returns, they typically demand higher yields on government bonds. The result can be a ripple effect across the economy: mortgage rates, auto loans, credit-card rates and business borrowing costs may all remain high or move higher. This is an important second stage of the oil-price story. The first concern is the direct impact on consumers and businesses as energy costs rise. The next concern is whether those higher costs become embedded in the economy, causing inflation expectations to increase and making it more difficult for the Federal Reserve to ease interest rates. For policymakers, the dilemma is clear. Raising or maintaining higher interest rates can help slow inflation, but it also makes borrowing more expensive for families, businesses and the federal government. If high energy prices persist, the Federal Reserve may face added pressure to prioritize inflation control even as consumers and employers feel the effects of tighter financial conditions. The issue is also global. Oil markets respond quickly to geopolitical instability and supply disruptions, while Treasury yields influence borrowing and investment decisions far beyond the United States. Together, high energy prices and rising yields can become a powerful test of economic resilience—affecting household budgets today and financial decisions for months to come. 

White House Pushes Back on Calls for Broader AI Safety Guardrails featured image

1 min

White House Pushes Back on Calls for Broader AI Safety Guardrails

As calls grow from technology leaders, researchers and lawmakers for stronger artificial intelligence safety rules, the White House is signaling a different priority: keeping the United States at the forefront of AI innovation. The administration has pushed back on proposals that could slow development or create sweeping federal approval requirements for new models, arguing that excessive regulation could weaken America’s competitive position—especially against China. That does not mean the administration is ignoring AI-related risks. Its approach emphasizes national security, cybersecurity and enforcement against criminal misuse of AI. Recent White House action has encouraged voluntary collaboration between government and AI developers to assess the cyber capabilities of advanced models, protect critical infrastructure and strengthen defenses against malicious actors. But the framework specifically avoids mandatory licensing or government preclearance before companies develop or release new AI systems. The debate raises important questions for business leaders, policymakers and the public: How can innovation move quickly without sacrificing security, privacy and public trust? And where should responsibility rest—within individual companies, through voluntary government-industry partnerships or through enforceable federal safeguards? 

View all posts