Editor’s Note: Lanhee J. Chen, PhD, is a regular contributor to CNN Opinion and the David and Diane Steffy Fellow in American Public Policy Studies at the Hoover Institution. He was a candidate for California State Controller in 2022. Chen has played senior roles in both Republican and Democratic presidential administrations and been an adviser to four presidential campaigns, including as policy director of Romney-Ryan 2012. The views expressed in this commentary are his own. View more opinion on CNN.
President Joe Biden’s recent adoption of “Bidenomics,” an economic theory based on using the power and resources of the federal government to help generate jobs and economic growth, has become fodder for the Republican presidential candidates competing to run against him. Recently, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ campaign released a memo tying the term to higher prices and inflation, while South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott took to the airwaves with a similar critique.
Biden’s embrace of the term, which is reminiscent of former President Barack Obama’s doubling down on the term “Obamacare” to describe his then-controversial health care law, might leave some scratching their heads — and for good reason.
After all, Americans are generally dissatisfied with Biden’s handling of the economy. Recent surveys from the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, Gallup and others concluded that many more Americans (in the case of the AP survey, about two-thirds) disapprove of how Biden is stewarding the nation’s economy. Meanwhile, an April CNN poll found that about 70% of those surveyed think that the economy is in “poor shape.”
The actual economic data has been mixed. While the unemployment picture remains favorable for Biden, the pace of recent job creation has lagged behind estimates. And Americans’ views of Biden’s handling of the economy may still be influenced by the significant inflation the US economy experienced in 2022 or the widely held belief that recession is on the horizon.
So why is Biden looking to talk about his record on and plans for the economy, when it would seem as though campaigning as the alternative to former President Donald Trump would be the clearer route to reelection?
In most presidential elections, public perceptions around the incumbent’s handling of the economy have been influential in his success or failure. When former President Bill Clinton ran for reelection in 1996 and Obama in 2012, both directed the public’s attention to their policies and made the case that they were responsible for any gains that had been seen in the country’s economic condition.
For Biden, therefore, the goal is to persuade voters with his economic record at a time when most voters are either unaware of the policies he has advocated for or frankly don’t see the economy as being in great shape.
Whether it’s the Inflation Reduction Act, which will pour hundreds of billions of dollars of government spending into the US economy, the CHIPS Act, which invests public dollars to promote US leadership in the semiconductor space, or the bipartisan infrastructure law, which will spawn new construction projects throughout America, the trick for Biden is to emphasize his accomplishments while not appearing to declare prematurely that the battles against inflation and recession have been won.
Biden’s focus on the economy serves two political purposes. First, it arms Democrats with information about why he deserves reelection and perhaps, more importantly, galvanizes them to turn out. The importance of this base partisan turnout in a time of hyper-partisanship is obvious. Without Democratic turnout in key swing states such as Pennsylvania, Georgia and Wisconsin, Biden’s path to reelection becomes exceedingly difficult.
Second, Biden needs an argument to convince wary independents that he deserves four more years in office. For these voters, Biden’s argument that he is “not Trump” may simply not be compelling enough the second time around.
Biden’s support is weak in Pennsylvania, where a Quinnipiac University poll recently found that independents support Trump over Biden by a 14-point margin, with the overall race in the state a dead heat. Similarly, in Arizona, Biden’s lead over Trump is just three points, both among independents and overall. And, there is also the possibility that someone other than Trump may be the Republican nominee.
Biden’s team doesn’t want to be left with too little time or too few resources to tell the story of the president’s economic record, should Trump not emerge with the Republican nomination. They understand that trying to explain Bidenomics and its benefits next summer or fall may be too late.
But, more significantly, some voters — particularly those who don’t strongly affiliate with one party or another — will assess incumbents based on what they’ve done in office. The president’s record therefore becomes important in evaluations of whether to give him four more years — a concept known in political science as “retrospective voting.”
Most potentially troubling for the Biden camp: A Washington Post and ABC News survey from earlier this year found that over 60% of those polled — including 59% of self-identified moderate voters — believed Biden has accomplished “not very much” or “little or nothing” since taking office. The same survey found that 60% of voters did not believe that Biden had made progress “creating more good jobs” in their communities.
These figures are daunting for Biden’s team. The lack of awareness around his economic record is likely driving Biden’s and his team’s consistent (and recently relentless) focus on defining Bidenomics before his political opponents do so for him. As if the perceived economic headwinds weren’t enough, Biden is dealing with the public perception that his potential opponent, Trump, did a better job of stewarding the economy during his time in office than Biden has.
For Biden, the key to success will be telling voters about Bidenomics and why they should see it favorably before Republicans fully paint him into a corner. And fundamental to all of this will be his ability to do so before many voters firmly establish a negative perspective regarding the state of the economy and the role the president has played in making things the way they are.
