Hillary Clinton plans to pummel Donald J. Trump’s economic proposals on Tuesday, portraying Mr. Trump as an uncaring and unscrupulous businessman whose reckless policies would lead to a new financial crisis and a surge in unemployment.
Appearing in Columbus, Ohio, Mrs. Clinton, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, will argue that Mr. Trump’s proposals to increase tariffs on imported goods, cut taxes for the wealthiest Americans and try to get creditors to accept less than full payment on the national debt would lead to a financial meltdown worse than that of 2008, her aides said in interviews.
Her campaign manager, Robby Mook, told Sirius XM radio on Monday that Mr. Trump’s proposals “would send us into an economic ice age.”
Mrs. Clinton will also tear into Mr. Trump’s private-sector record, part of an effort by her campaign and Democratic allies to turn Mr. Trump’s business reputation against him and persuade voters that he has trampled over working people at every stage of his career.
“The core proposition is that if you put Donald Trump behind the steering wheel of the American economy, he is very likely to drive us off a cliff,” said Jake Sullivan, Mrs. Clinton’s top policy aide. That argument will include “his record of causing harm in the private sector,” Mr. Sullivan added.
Among the examples Mrs. Clinton will point to, aides said, are Mr. Trump’s multiple bankruptcies and the allegations of fraud leveled at him over his for-profit educational venture, Trump University.
“To disqualify him, you have to deconstruct that story” that he is a successful businessman, said David Brock, who runs Correct the Record, a “super PAC” that coordinates with the campaign to defend Mrs. Clinton. “Then, I think the credential that he has gets destroyed in the process.”
Mrs. Clinton will deliver her speech, part of a two-day effort to assail Mr. Trump and then to advance Mrs. Clinton’s own economic agenda, two weeks after she laced into Mr. Trump on foreign policy, warning in a well-received address in San Diego that his “very thin skin” would lead the United States into war.
The economic argument is of particular urgency for Mrs. Clinton: While voters tend to view her as better prepared to be commander in chief than Mr. Trump, he has made inroads with working-class voters who gravitate to his opposition to global trade deals and to his vow to create jobs.
A Bloomberg Politics poll released last week, which gave Mrs. Clinton a double-digit lead over all, found that 55 percent of likely voters said Mr. Trump was more knowledgeable about what it takes to create jobs. Forty percent said Mrs. Clinton knew more, though a majority of voters said she would fight harder for the middle class.
“This speech gives her the opportunity to pass the steward-of-our-economic-health test,” said Felicia Wong, president and chief executive of the Roosevelt Institute, a liberal think tank. “And I think the bar will be higher for her on that than on foreign policy.”
On Wednesday, in Raleigh, N.C., Mrs. Clinton will shift to a more positive message as she outlines her vision for what she calls a “growth and fairness economy,” recapping her plans to raise the minimum wage, expand benefits for working families and close tax loopholes that allow companies to benefit from moving jobs overseas.
Mrs. Clinton only recently emerged from a prolonged Democratic primary battle in which Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont repeatedly faulted her for supporting trade deals that many blame for the loss of manufacturing jobs. She now confronts a similar argument from Mr. Trump, who has assailed trade pacts like the North American Free Trade Agreement, which Mrs. Clinton’s husband, President Bill Clinton, signed into law in 1993. Mr. Trump has called the agreement “a catastrophe for our country” and “the worst economic deal in U.S. history.”
Mrs. Clinton has said she would renegotiate parts of Nafta and has spoken out against President Obama’s signature trade pact, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, though she promoted it as secretary of state.
“It is a challenge for Hillary Clinton as an establishment Democrat to make the case that she is not just different from her husband but from Barack Obama on trade,” said Jared Bernstein, an economist at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and former chief economic adviser to Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.
In criticizing Mr. Trump, aides said Mrs. Clinton would draw heavily on a new report from Moody’s Analytics — co-written by Mark Zandi, an economic adviser to Senator John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign who has also donated to Mrs. Clinton — which predicted that Mr. Trump’s proposals would yield a protracted downturn and significant job losses.
The analysis, reported by The Wall Street Journal, provided ample fodder for Mrs. Clinton. It called Mr. Trump’s prescriptions for taxation, trade policy, immigration and spending “fiscally unsound” and said they would cost 3.5 million jobs and leave the economy “more isolated and diminished,” with particular strain on low- and middle-income workers.
It also suggested that if Mr. Trump’s immigration and trade proposals were taken at face value, the economy would experience a “negative supply shock.”
“Requiring millions of undocumented immigrants to leave the country reduces the size of the labor force,” the Moody’s economists wrote, “and the higher tariffs on imports from two of our largest trading partners increase the price of imported goods.”
Appearing in Columbus, Ohio, Mrs. Clinton, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, will argue that Mr. Trump’s proposals to increase tariffs on imported goods, cut taxes for the wealthiest Americans and try to get creditors to accept less than full payment on the national debt would lead to a financial meltdown worse than that of 2008, her aides said in interviews.
Her campaign manager, Robby Mook, told Sirius XM radio on Monday that Mr. Trump’s proposals “would send us into an economic ice age.”
Mrs. Clinton will also tear into Mr. Trump’s private-sector record, part of an effort by her campaign and Democratic allies to turn Mr. Trump’s business reputation against him and persuade voters that he has trampled over working people at every stage of his career.
“The core proposition is that if you put Donald Trump behind the steering wheel of the American economy, he is very likely to drive us off a cliff,” said Jake Sullivan, Mrs. Clinton’s top policy aide. That argument will include “his record of causing harm in the private sector,” Mr. Sullivan added.
Among the examples Mrs. Clinton will point to, aides said, are Mr. Trump’s multiple bankruptcies and the allegations of fraud leveled at him over his for-profit educational venture, Trump University.
“To disqualify him, you have to deconstruct that story” that he is a successful businessman, said David Brock, who runs Correct the Record, a “super PAC” that coordinates with the campaign to defend Mrs. Clinton. “Then, I think the credential that he has gets destroyed in the process.”
Mrs. Clinton will deliver her speech, part of a two-day effort to assail Mr. Trump and then to advance Mrs. Clinton’s own economic agenda, two weeks after she laced into Mr. Trump on foreign policy, warning in a well-received address in San Diego that his “very thin skin” would lead the United States into war.
The economic argument is of particular urgency for Mrs. Clinton: While voters tend to view her as better prepared to be commander in chief than Mr. Trump, he has made inroads with working-class voters who gravitate to his opposition to global trade deals and to his vow to create jobs.
A Bloomberg Politics poll released last week, which gave Mrs. Clinton a double-digit lead over all, found that 55 percent of likely voters said Mr. Trump was more knowledgeable about what it takes to create jobs. Forty percent said Mrs. Clinton knew more, though a majority of voters said she would fight harder for the middle class.
“This speech gives her the opportunity to pass the steward-of-our-economic-health test,” said Felicia Wong, president and chief executive of the Roosevelt Institute, a liberal think tank. “And I think the bar will be higher for her on that than on foreign policy.”
On Wednesday, in Raleigh, N.C., Mrs. Clinton will shift to a more positive message as she outlines her vision for what she calls a “growth and fairness economy,” recapping her plans to raise the minimum wage, expand benefits for working families and close tax loopholes that allow companies to benefit from moving jobs overseas.
Mrs. Clinton only recently emerged from a prolonged Democratic primary battle in which Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont repeatedly faulted her for supporting trade deals that many blame for the loss of manufacturing jobs. She now confronts a similar argument from Mr. Trump, who has assailed trade pacts like the North American Free Trade Agreement, which Mrs. Clinton’s husband, President Bill Clinton, signed into law in 1993. Mr. Trump has called the agreement “a catastrophe for our country” and “the worst economic deal in U.S. history.”
Mrs. Clinton has said she would renegotiate parts of Nafta and has spoken out against President Obama’s signature trade pact, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, though she promoted it as secretary of state.
“It is a challenge for Hillary Clinton as an establishment Democrat to make the case that she is not just different from her husband but from Barack Obama on trade,” said Jared Bernstein, an economist at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and former chief economic adviser to Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.
In criticizing Mr. Trump, aides said Mrs. Clinton would draw heavily on a new report from Moody’s Analytics — co-written by Mark Zandi, an economic adviser to Senator John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign who has also donated to Mrs. Clinton — which predicted that Mr. Trump’s proposals would yield a protracted downturn and significant job losses.
The analysis, reported by The Wall Street Journal, provided ample fodder for Mrs. Clinton. It called Mr. Trump’s prescriptions for taxation, trade policy, immigration and spending “fiscally unsound” and said they would cost 3.5 million jobs and leave the economy “more isolated and diminished,” with particular strain on low- and middle-income workers.
It also suggested that if Mr. Trump’s immigration and trade proposals were taken at face value, the economy would experience a “negative supply shock.”
“Requiring millions of undocumented immigrants to leave the country reduces the size of the labor force,” the Moody’s economists wrote, “and the higher tariffs on imports from two of our largest trading partners increase the price of imported goods.”
No comments:
Post a Comment