Buzz
During an election year, a flood of misinformation targets voters. Although there are promising signs that individuals are becoming more adept at recognizing false information, a particularly harmful form of 'fake news' thrives across political lines: forming conclusions based on incomplete or out-of-context information. This tactic, frequently used by politicians, peaks during election cycles. Let’s examine two prominent examples of such misleading narratives—one from the conservative side and one from the liberal side.
The answer is always 'supply and demand'
Gas price fluctuations are a popular topic, likely because they impact us every time we fill up. Whether you attribute high prices to corporate greed or low prices to Donald Trump's policies, both views are incorrect. The primary factor influencing gas prices is the fundamental principle of supply and demand. The low gas prices in 2021 were largely due to a global decline in petroleum demand caused by reduced economic activity during COVID-19 lockdowns. The president in office at the time had little to do with it; there’s no magic lever in the Oval Office controlling commodity prices.
This isn’t to suggest that government policies don’t influence prices. For instance, the 2022 inflation surge was partly driven by the $2 trillion American Rescue Plan enacted in 2021. While the situation is complex and involves numerous factors, a general principle applies: injecting more money into the economy to avoid or mitigate a recession leads to inflation. However, it also stimulates economic growth and prevents a recession, which is far more damaging than higher inflation. Once again, it all comes down to supply and demand.
Politicians on both sides lie
Similar to the right-wing meme, this chart isn’t fake or altered, but it excludes a critical factor: the impact of COVID-19. Many of the jobs 'created' under the Biden administration were actually people returning to work after pandemic-related layoffs. When adjusted for COVID, the net job growth from Biden’s inauguration to February 2024 was 5.5 million. While impressive, it doesn’t look as dramatic on a chart.
In his State of the Union address, Biden claimed, 'The only president other than Donald Trump to lose jobs during their term was Herbert Hoover.' This statement is partially true, but only if you disregard the economic chaos caused by COVID and the fact that job loss data during Hoover’s presidency is unreliable—the Bureau of Labor Statistics wasn’t established until after his term.
How the same data can tell a different story
While Biden highlighted his job growth achievements and criticized Trump’s record, the same data can be interpreted differently. In a speech on August 5th, Trump stated, 'During Biden’s first 30 months in office, only 2.1 million new jobs were created, whereas during my first 30 months, we created 4.9 million new jobs.'
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, when Trump assumed office, there were 145.6 million non-farm jobs in the U.S. Thirty months later, that number rose to 150.8 million (interestingly, Trump understated his own success in this speech). When Biden took office, there were 143 million non-farm jobs. By his 30th month, the number had increased to 156.2 million.
Trump isn’t entirely lying (this time)—he’s attempting to have it both ways. He refuses to acknowledge Biden’s role in recovering jobs post-pandemic while absolving himself of any responsibility for job losses during COVID. By focusing only on the 30-month period before the pandemic disrupted the economy, he skews the narrative. As Dean Baker, co-founder of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, explained to Politifact, Trump’s stance is essentially: 'Everything bad is Biden’s fault, and everything good would have happened regardless.'
Manipulating statistics to paint a favorable picture isn’t new, but what if you genuinely seek the truth? Chances are, you’ll never fully uncover it.
Which administration has the stronger economy?
Despite polls indicating Trump leads Biden by 11 to 20 points on economic handling, the economy performed well under Trump—if you exclude the COVID crisis. Similarly, the economy is thriving under Biden—if you don’t hold him accountable for the pandemic’s impact. (Of course, 'doing well' depends on how you define economic success.)
This brings us to tribalism and perceptions, two elements that have likely always influenced U.S. elections. If you’re thinking, 'That applies to most politicians, but not my favorite! They’re honest!'—you’re being deceived. A candidate who truly refused to engage in deceit or self-promotion would struggle to succeed in any election beyond a local school board. Imagine a presidential candidate campaigning on the platform: 'There’s little I can do about the economy; it’s all about supply and demand.'
