Assessing candidates: who worsens America’s deficit crisis?

As the November 2024 presidential election approaches, fiscal responsibility appears to be a low priority for candidates Kamala Harris and Donald Trump. Despite the significant national deficit, both candidates have proposed policies that lack depth and seriousness. Trump's suggestions, which include utilizing cryptocurrency and increasing oil drilling, have been criticized as unrealistic and nonsensical. These proposals do not address the complexities of the national debt and may mislead voters about feasible solutions. On the other hand, Harris has made a commitment to reduce the deficit but has not articulated a substantive plan to achieve this goal. This lack of detail raises questions about her dedication to financial reform and whether her promises can be taken seriously. The absence of clear strategies from both candidates reflects a broader trend where fiscal issues are not prioritized in political discourse. The current political climate indicates that many Americans are not focused on the deficit and debt, viewing them as secondary concerns. This detachment from fiscal responsibility may have significant implications for the country's economic future, especially if neither candidate offers a viable path forward. Ultimately, the proposals from both Harris and Trump suggest a troubling trend in American politics, where serious discussions about financial management are overshadowed by more immediate electoral strategies. Voters may need to critically assess the candidates' commitments to addressing the deficit as they head to the polls.