The 2024 presidential race took a fiery turn on Tuesday night as Donald Trump and Kamala Harris engaged in a heated debate over China policy, hosted by ABC News. The focus of the debate centered on the impact of tariffs, a subject that has become a significant point of contention between the two candidates.
Harris, a vocal critic of Trump’s economic policies, launched into an attack on his tariff strategy, branding it a “Trump sales tax” that would place a 20% tax on everyday goods, ultimately burdening middle-class families. She argued that Trump’s approach had resulted in a substantial trade deficit and had “invited trade wars.”
Trump, on the other hand, defended his tariff plans, suggesting further duties of 60% to 100% on Chinese goods. He claimed that his tariffs had generated “billions and billions of dollars” from China and highlighted the Biden-Harris administration’s continuation of many of his policies, including raising tariffs on $18 billion worth of Chinese goods in May.
The debate extended beyond economic implications, with Harris emphasizing the need for strategic alliances and investments in American technology to secure victory in the global competition for dominance in areas like AI and quantum computing. She expressed concern over Trump’s actions, stating, “Under Donald Trump’s presidency, he ended up selling American chips to China to help them improve and modernize their military. [He] basically sold us out when a policy about China should be in making sure the United States of America wins the competition for the 21st century.”
The exchange underscored the significance of China policy in the 2024 race, with U.S. intelligence officials highlighting the varying interests of foreign powers in the election outcome. While Russia is allegedly attempting to influence voters towards Trump and Iran favors Harris, China is reportedly focusing on down-ballot races.
Trump’s potential return to the White House has ignited concerns regarding the future of trade with China. He has hinted at imposing a universal tariff on all goods imported into the U.S., a move that could profoundly impact the $3 trillion worth of goods imported annually. He has also suggested using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to control economic transactions and gradually phase out imports of essential goods from China over a four-year period.
The debate has fueled speculation about the future of U.S.-China relations. Regardless of who wins the election, both Harris and Trump seem likely to continue the strategic decoupling from China, potentially leading Chinese companies to outsource operations to Southeast Asia or Mexico to maintain their presence in the U.S. market. Financial analysts have expressed concerns about the potential for extensive tariffs under a Trump presidency but anticipate a more passive approach from Harris.
The debate over China policy serves as a microcosm of the larger 2024 presidential race, highlighting the complexities of international relations and the far-reaching consequences of economic decisions for individuals and nations alike.
