Muslim World Report

Trump's Approval Drops as Economic Concerns Grow Amid Tariffs

Dr. Anthony Lindsay | Apr 14, 2025 10:14 AM | 9 min read | 1729 words

TL;DR: As economic dissatisfaction grows, Donald Trump’s approval rating falls to new lows. His ongoing tariffs threaten U.S. stability and could have global repercussions. While 91% of Republicans trust his policies, sentiments among independents (43%) and Democrats (16%) starkly contrast. As the situation evolves, potential economic disengagement and radical advisory influence could lead to severe consequences for both domestic and international markets.

The Economic Quagmire: Understanding the Implications of Trump’s Declining Approval Ratings

Recent polling data indicates a troubling trend: as of April 2025, former President Donald Trump’s approval rating has plummeted, with 59% of Americans expressing dissatisfaction with the state of the economy. This sentiment reveals a stark political divide:

  • 91% of Republicans trust Trump’s economic strategies, particularly his aggressive tariff and trade policies.
  • Only 43% of independents and a mere 16% of Democrats share this confidence (Kurt Weyland, 2020).

This disparity not only highlights fractures within the American political landscape but also underscores the precariousness of the U.S. economy as a whole.

The significance of this situation extends beyond domestic borders. Trump’s aggressive tariff regime threatens to destabilize not just the American market, but the global economy as well. As noted by Fetzer and Schwarz (2020):

  • The trade escalation between the USA and its partners demonstrates that retaliatory tariffs are politically targeted.
  • These tariffs carry significant ramifications for the interconnectedness of global trade.

Economists warn that the repercussions of these tariffs, particularly those on Chinese goods, could soon ripple through the market, intensifying criticism of Trump’s management of economic affairs. Alarmingly, a substantial portion of the population still perceives the economy as sound, indicating a disconnect between public perception and economic realities.

Trump’s declining approval ratings pose a significant threat to the stability of the U.S. dollar. As economic concerns mount, the credibility of the dollar as a safe haven currency may waver. This could lead to:

  • Seismic shifts in global trade dynamics.
  • An opportunity for European and UK leadership to capitalize on U.S. vulnerabilities.

Historically, shifts in economic alliances, such as the formation of the European Union post-World War II, could prompt current European leaders to explore the establishment of a Global Customs Union to facilitate smoother trade relations (Sang-Seung Yi, 1996). However, this opportunity comes with risks:

  • Increased protectionism.
  • Currency devaluation.
  • Shifting geopolitical alliances could create further instability in an already tenuous global landscape (Mansfield, 1994).

What If Trump Gains Control Over the Federal Reserve?

Should Trump regain significant influence over the Federal Reserve, the implications could be dire for both the U.S. economy and the global financial system. Currently headed by Jerome Powell, the Fed has pursued cautious growth amid rising inflation. However, if Trump succeeds in appointing a more compliant chairperson, we might witness a drastic shift toward:

  • Aggressive monetary policies designed to bolster his political standing rather than stabilize the economy.

Such a scenario could lead to:

  • Reckless interest rate cuts.
  • An unchecked issuance of currency.

These actions could trigger hyperinflation and a rapid decline in the dollar’s value. As countries worldwide rely on the U.S. dollar for trade and investment, a collapse could incite a global crisis, impacting economies heavily dependent on exports to the U.S. and exacerbating global inequalities.

Notably, 41% of surveyed individuals still believe the economy is in good shape under Trump’s policies. This raises questions about the accuracy and implications of polling—are these respondents detached from the realities of grocery prices and everyday living costs? The stark contrast between perceptions and reality could lead to complacency, deepening the economic crisis as the effects of his tariffs begin to manifest in the coming quarters.

What If European and UK Leadership Capitalizes on U.S. Economic Instability?

In light of the current turmoil, a strategic opportunity exists for European and UK leaders to strengthen their positions within the global market. Collaborative formation of a new trade coalition, as recent analyses suggest, could yield a more stable economic arrangement. The formation of a Global Customs Union among like-minded economies could:

  • Facilitate smoother trade relations.
  • Promote growth amid American uncertainty.

Such an alliance would enable the establishment of standardized trade regulations, reducing tariffs, and facilitating investment flows between member nations. By pursuing a modern cooperative trade system, the EU and UK can pivot away from reliance on the erratic economic policies of the United States, fostering greater independence and resilience in their economies.

However, this scenario is not without risks. European leaders must be cautious about:

  • Overreliance on a solely Euro-centric framework, which could provoke U.S. retaliation.
  • Aligning too closely with one another may alienate emerging markets seeking diverse economic partnerships.

It is essential for European and UK leaders to strike a balance between consolidating their economic power and engaging with other global players to ensure long-term stability without descending into isolationism.

What If Trump’s Advisors Continue to Influence Policy?

The potential repercussions of Trump’s advisors—individuals like Stephen Miller, Peter Navarro, and others—extend far beyond his immediate decision-making. Their radical beliefs and ideological commitments raise concerns about the long-term effects on both U.S. policy and global stability. Should Trump return to power with these advisors influencing key policies, we could witness a shift toward:

  • More extreme protectionist measures.
  • Further isolation of the U.S. from the global economic community.

Continued influence from such advisors could lead to the implementation of:

  • Draconian trade policies prioritizing nationalist agendas over international cooperation.

Economically, these policies could drive up prices for American consumers while politically fostering tensions with other nations critical for trade relationships. Moreover, if these advisors persist in advocating for radical territorial negotiations, it could destabilize longstanding agreements that have maintained relative global harmony. The questioning of treaties and trade agreements may provoke retaliatory measures from other nations, possibly igniting new conflicts.

The Role of U.S. Economic Policy Under Trump

Trump’s administration has already demonstrated a proclivity for unilateral decision-making. The imposition of tariffs on Chinese goods, for example, was executed in a manner that sidestepped traditional diplomatic negotiations. The outcome of these policies has been mixed:

  • Some sectors benefitted from protectionist measures.
  • Others, particularly those reliant on imported materials, face increased costs.

The inability to reconcile these diverging interests underscores a critical failure in economic policymaking.

As we assess the potential future of economic policy under a resurgent Trump, particular attention must be paid to:

  • The consequences of his advisors’ radical beliefs extending beyond mere economic considerations.
  • The shift toward more extreme protectionist measures prioritizing nationalist agendas over international cooperation (Kurt Weyland, 2020).

Such isolationist policies threaten not only the U.S. economy but also longstanding agreements that have maintained relative global harmony. The growing narrative supporting Trump’s economic management—despite rising evidence of an economic downturn—indicates a potential normalization of protectionist attitudes among the Republican base. This phenomenon could set the stage for a more entrenched form of economic nationalism, affecting domestic policies and international relations alike. As countries that traditionally align with U.S. economic interests look for alternatives to mitigate their exposure to American instability, we may witness a significant realignment of global economic alliances.

Consequences of Economic Disengagement

As the U.S. grapples with its internal economic questions, the potential for economic disengagement from traditional allies could have dire consequences. The rise of protectionism not only undermines existing trade agreements but also fosters an environment of suspicion and competition among nations that were previously partners.

The prolonged period of economic isolation could catalyze a decline in collaborative efforts to address global challenges, such as:

  • Climate change.
  • Health crises.
  • International security threats.

In this context, it becomes crucial to analyze the broader implications of Trump’s economic policies for the functionality of global trade systems. A disengaged United States could hinder performance in international organizations reliant on U.S. participation and leadership, leading to a vacuum of influence that other countries, notably China and Russia, could exploit to promote alternative governance frameworks that may not prioritize democratic values or economic equity.

Conversely, if U.S. lawmakers can find common ground across party lines, there is potential for revitalizing America’s role in global trade. By reinstating multilateral agreements and emphasizing cooperation over competition, the U.S. could help stabilize international markets and counteract the rise of protectionism.

Strategic Maneuvers: Actions for All Players Involved

In light of the current economic crisis and its potential consequences, all players involved must undertake strategic maneuvers to mitigate risks and leverage opportunities. For U.S. lawmakers, a bipartisan approach to economic policy could serve as a powerful antidote to growing polarization. Key actions include:

  • Actively engaging with independent and Democratic voices to foster a balanced and inclusive economic dialogue.
  • Prioritizing consumer protection, particularly regarding tariffs disproportionately impacting lower-income families.

For European leaders, the creation of a Global Customs Union must be prioritized. By bringing together diverse economies under a single umbrella, they can set a standard for international trade that prioritizes stability and fairness. Collaborating with emerging markets and aligning with their interests will be crucial for creating a sustainable alliance that can withstand U.S. protectionism.

Additionally, it would be prudent for European and UK leaders to engage in direct dialogues with U.S. lawmakers, emphasizing the need for collective economic strategies that prioritize global stability over aggressive nationalism. Building coalitions that include voices from parts of the world often marginalized in economic discussions can contribute to a more holistic approach to global trade.

Finally, civil society organizations, scholars, and economists should continue to shed light on the ramifications of Trump’s policies and his advisors’ ideologies. By raising awareness of the dire consequences of extreme protectionism, they can mobilize public opinion to advocate for more equitable, just policies that protect not just the interests of a few but the welfare of the global community.

The stakes are immensely high, and the time for decisive action is now. Collectively, these strategic actions can steer the trajectory of global economic relations toward a more balanced and inclusive future, ultimately benefiting not just the United States but the global community at large.

References
Emirhan Ilhan, Zacharias Sautner, & Grigory Vilkov. (2020). Carbon Tail Risk. Review of Financial Studies. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhaa071

Kurt Weyland. (2020). Populism’s Threat to Democracy: Comparative Lessons for the United States. Perspectives on Politics. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592719003955

Fetzer, T., & Schwarz, C. (2020). Tariffs and Politics: Evidence from Trump’s Trade Wars. The Economic Journal. https://doi.org/10.1093/ej/ueaa122

Sang-Seung Yi. (1996). Endogenous formation of customs unions under imperfect competition: open regionalism is good. Journal of International Economics. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-1996(96)01429-8

Mansfield, E. D. (1994). Alliances, Preferential Trading Arrangements and Sanctions. Journal of International Affairs. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.438502

← Prev Next →