"Well, We Were Handed a Terrible Economy, As You Know" …The Big Lie

Donald Trump was sworn in as the 47th president of the United States on January 20, 2025, following his victory in the November 2024 election, inheriting an economy shaped by Joe Biden’s administration (2021–2025). Trump has often claimed he was handed "terrible" economic conditions, a narrative he applied to both his 2017 and 2025 inaugurations. This report evaluates two key questions: (1) Was Trump handed a growing economy and a healthy stock market in January 2025? and (2) Was this one of the strongest economies in modern history for an incoming president? It also examines the economy Trump handed over at the end of his first term in 2021 and assesses his competence in dealing with COVID-19 during that term, including evidence of misleading statements or lies. The analysis uses economic data available up to April 8, 2025, focusing on conditions at the 2025 transition and historical context to test the validity of his "terrible economy" claim.

Part 1:

Was Trump Handed a Growing Economy and a Healthy Stock Market in January 2025?

Economic Growth

• GDP Growth: In Q4 2024, real GDP grew at an annualized rate of 2.8%, per preliminary Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) estimates. This reflected a strong 2024 average of about 2.7% annually, outperforming Biden’s earlier years (1.5% average in 2021–2022) though below historical peaks like the 1950s (4%+). The economy was growing, driven by consumer spending and investment, though 2025 forecasts suggested a slight dip to 2–2.5% amid tariff concerns.
• Unemployment: The unemployment rate was 4.0% in December 2024, per the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), near a 50-year low. Monthly job growth averaged 150,000–200,000 in 2024, slower than the post-COVID rebound but solid. The labor force participation rate for prime-age workers was around 80.5%, among the highest since the early 2000s.
• Consumer Confidence: The Conference Board’s Consumer Confidence Index was approximately 108 in December 2024, down from mid-year highs but still positive. Consumer spending grew modestly, tempered by inflation pressures (around 3% annually).

Stock Market Performance

• S&P 500: On January 17, 2025, the S&P 500 closed near 5,900–6,000, a record high. It rose about 55% during Biden’s term, with a 28% surge in 2024 alone, driven by corporate earnings and optimism about Trump’s pro-business agenda. A post-election rally in late 2024 added momentum.
• Market Trends: The bull market, ongoing since 2020, was one of the longest in history by 2025. The Dow Jones neared 43,000–44,000, up 39% since January 2021. Despite overvaluation concerns, the market was robust and growing.

Conclusion for Part 1: Yes, Trump was handed a growing economy and a healthy stock market in January 2025. GDP was expanding at 2.8%, unemployment was low at 4.0%, and the S&P 500 was at all-time highs, signaling strength, though inflation and trade policy uncertainties loomed. This directly contradicts any claim of inheriting a “terrible economy” in 2025.

Part 2:

Was This One of the Strongest Economies in Modern History?

To assess if Trump inherited one of the strongest economies in modern history (post-1945), we compare 2025 indicators—GDP growth, unemployment, stock market, and stability—to those of other incoming presidents.

Historical Comparisons

• Joe Biden (January 2021): Biden inherited a post-COVID recovery with Q4 2020 GDP growth at 4.1%, unemployment at 6.3%, and the S&P 500 at 3,714. The economy was rebounding but fragile, far weaker than 2025’s stability and lower unemployment.
• Donald Trump (January 2017): In his first term, Trump inherited GDP growth of 2.1% (Q4 2016), unemployment at 4.7%, and the S&P 500 at 2,271. It was stable but less dynamic than 2025’s 2.8% growth, 4.0% unemployment, and S&P 500 near 6,000. The phrase “suggest a more robust handover” means 2025 offered stronger overall conditions—higher growth, a tighter labor market, and a significantly larger stock market—indicating a more vigorous economic foundation than in 2017.
• George W. Bush (January 2001): Bush saw Q4 2000 GDP growth at 2.9%, unemployment at 4.2%, and the S&P 500 at 1,342. It was strong but faltered into recession by March 2001, unlike 2025’s sustained momentum.
• Bill Clinton (January 1993): Clinton inherited Q4 1992 GDP growth of 2.7%, unemployment at 7.3%, and the S&P 500 at 435—a recovery weaker than 2025’s low unemployment and high market.
• Ronald Reagan (January 1981): Reagan faced stagflation with Q4 1980 GDP growth at 0.2%, unemployment at 7.5%, and inflation at 11.8%. The S&P 500 was 131, dwarfed by 2025’s strength.

Analysis

• 2025 Strengths: Trump’s 2025 economy featured low unemployment (4.0%), solid GDP growth (2.8%), and a towering S&P 500 (~6,000), a rare trio absent major crises. It outshone Reagan, Clinton, and Biden’s starting points and rivaled Bush’s 2001 peak without the imminent collapse.
• Counterpoints: Post-WWII booms (e.g., Eisenhower in 1953) had GDP growth of 4%–6%, though with smaller stock markets. Bush’s 2.9% GDP growth slightly topped 2025’s 2.8%, but 2025’s labor and market strength arguably made it more durable.
• Modern Context: Among advanced economies in 2025, the U.S. led post-COVID recovery, outpacing Europe and Japan. Economists like Mark Zandi (Guardian, March 2025) dubbed it a top-tier modern economy.

Conclusion for Part 2: Yes, Trump in 2025 likely inherited one of the strongest economies in modern history. It combined stability, growth, and market performance in a way few post-1945 transitions matched, surpassing his 2017 inheritance and most recent predecessors, though some mid-20th-century booms had higher raw growth. This undermines the narrative of a “terrible economy” handed to him.

Part 3:

What Did Trump Hand Over at the End of His First Term?

To contextualize 2025, consider the economy Trump handed to Biden on January 20, 2021, after his first term (2017–2021), which ended amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

• GDP Growth: Q4 2020 saw GDP grow at 4.1% annualized, rebounding from a 31.2% contraction in Q2 2020 (BEA). Annual GDP shrank 2.8% in 2020—the worst since 1946—but recovery was underway.
• Unemployment: Unemployment was 6.3% in January 2021 (BLS), down from 14.8% in April 2020 but well above the 3.5% pre-pandemic low of February 2020. Job losses totaled millions, though stimulus aided recovery.
• Stock Market: The S&P 500 was 3,714 on January 15, 2021, up 67% from Trump’s 2017 start despite a 2020 crash. The market thrived on stimulus and optimism, contrasting with the labor market’s weakness.
• Context: The economy was recovering but scarred by COVID, with industries like hospitality lagging and national debt soaring to $27 trillion from stimulus. It was a stark contrast to the thriving 2025 handover.

Comparison: Trump handed Biden a battered, recovering economy in 2021—far weaker than the vibrant one he received in 2025. The 2021 transition reflected crisis management; 2025 reflected sustained strength.

Part 4:

Did Trump Competently or Incompetently Deal with COVID-19 In His First Term?

Trump’s handling of COVID-19 during his first term (2017–2021) has been widely debated. This section assesses his competence based on key actions, outcomes, and historical evaluations, including specific evidence of misleading statements or lies.

Evidence of Competence

• Early Actions: Trump restricted travel from China on January 31, 2020, a move credited with slowing initial spread, though community transmission was already underway. He declared a public health emergency the same day and formed the White House Coronavirus Task Force, signaling early awareness.
• Operation Warp Speed: Launched in May 2020, this initiative accelerated vaccine development, delivering two effective vaccines (Pfizer and Moderna, ~95% efficacy) by December 2020—five times faster than prior records. This was a historic achievement, praised by experts like Dr. Anthony Fauci as a “phenomenal accomplishment.”
• Economic Support: The CARES Act (March 2020) provided $2.2 trillion in stimulus, including the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), aimed at preserving jobs. The White House claimed the PPP saved an estimated 51 million jobs, based on SBA data from July 2020. However, this figure has been heavily qualified: economists (e.g., NBER, 2020) estimate it supported 1.4–3.2 million jobs by mid-2020, while the Federal Reserve (2021) suggested up to 18 million at its peak. Overstatements in self-reported data—like a church claiming 500 jobs saved with 12 employees—and unverifiable “saved” metrics suggest the true impact was far lower than claimed, though the program still mitigated some economic damage.

Evidence of Incompetence

• Delayed Response: Despite intelligence warnings in January–February 2020, Trump delayed broader mitigation until mid-March. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) later found 27 of 31 preparedness recommendations from prior years unimplemented by 2020.
• Testing and Supplies: The U.S. lacked a national testing strategy, with initial CDC test kits flawed, leading to shortages through spring 2020. PPE shortages plagued frontline workers, exacerbated by slow use of the Defense Production Act (invoked fully in April 2020).
• Mixed Messaging: Trump’s promotion of unproven treatments like hydroxychloroquine (March 19, 2020) and suggestions like injecting disinfectants (April 23, 2020) undermined public health guidance. His criticism of experts like Fauci and resistance to masks fueled confusion, with polls (Pew, April 2020) showing only 44% approved of his overall response.
• Outcomes: Over 455,000 U.S. deaths occurred by January 2021 (per Johns Hopkins), the highest per capita among developed nations. Critics argue a more coherent response could have reduced this toll, pointing to South Korea’s success (720,000 masks stockpiled early, 1,849 deaths by January 2021).

Misleading Statements and Lies

• Downplaying the Virus: On February 26, 2020, Trump said, “We’re going very substantially down, not up,” about case numbers, claiming only 15 U.S. cases would soon be “close to zero.” By March 1, cases exceeded 70, and by mid-March, they surged past 1,000, contradicting his optimism (PolitiFact rated this “Pants on Fire”).
• Testing Availability: On March 6, 2020, Trump claimed, “Anybody that wants a test can get a test,” and “The tests are all perfect.” In reality, testing was severely limited—only 11,079 tests were conducted by March 9 (per CDC), with strict criteria excluding many. Flawed CDC kits delayed rollout, and experts like Dr. Tom Frieden called this “grossly misleading” (FactCheck.org).
• Hydroxychloroquine Claims: On March 21, 2020, Trump tweeted, “HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE & AZITHROMYCIN, taken together, have a real chance to be one of the biggest game changers in the history of medicine,” citing a small, non-peer-reviewed study. Subsequent trials (e.g., NIH, April 2020) found no benefit and potential harm, leading the FDA to revoke its emergency use by June 2020 (PolitiFact: “False”).
• Virus Disappearance: On April 27, 2020, Trump said, “It’s going to go away. This is going to go away,” predicting a swift end despite experts warning of a prolonged crisis. By July, cases topped 3 million, and deaths rose steadily (Washington Post fact-check: “Four Pinocchios”).
• Bleach Injection: On April 23, 2020, Trump mused during a briefing, “I see the disinfectant… Is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning?” This prompted health officials to issue warnings against ingesting disinfectants, with poison control calls spiking (PolitiFact: “Dangerously misleading”).

Analysis

• Strengths: Trump’s administration showed competence in vaccine development and economic stabilization, leveraging private-sector partnerships and federal resources effectively. The travel ban and task force formation were proactive steps, though limited in scope.
• Weaknesses: Inconsistent leadership, delayed action, and failure to coordinate testing and supplies reflect incompetence in crisis management. Misleading statements exacerbated confusion and eroded trust, amplifying vulnerabilities compared to peers like Germany or Japan, which had lower death rates.
• Context: The unprecedented nature of COVID-19 challenged all leaders, but Trump’s prioritization of political optics over science (e.g., pushing reopenings by May 2020 despite rising cases) and frequent falsehoods undermined the response. Public opinion split, with 37% approving his handling by late 2020 (Gallup), reflecting polarized views.

Conclusion for Part 4: Trump’s handling of COVID-19 was a mix of competence and incompetence. He excelled in vaccine development and provided some economic relief, though the 51 million jobs saved claim was vastly overstated. However, he faltered in early response, testing, and messaging—compounded by misleading statements and lies—leaving a high death toll and economic disruption. On balance, his performance leans toward incompetence due to critical failures in preparedness, leadership, and truthfulness, though successes like Operation Warp Speed mitigate a fully negative assessment.

Overall Conclusion

In January 2025, Trump was handed a growing economy and a healthy stock market—GDP at 2.8%, unemployment at 4.0%, and the S&P 500 near 6,000—one of the strongest in modern history, outpacing his 2017 inheritance and the fragile state he left in 2021. His oft-repeated claim, “Well, we were handed a terrible economy, as you know,” rings hollow for 2025 and even 2017, both of which were robust handovers. His first-term COVID-19 response showed competence in vaccine development and economic support but was marred by incompetent delays, mismanagement, and a pattern of misleading statements and lies, leaving a recovering but weakened economy in 2021. The 2025 handover’s strength exposes the “terrible economy” narrative as a big lie, highlighting a stark contrast to his first term’s end and underscoring both his achievements and shortcomings.