Neither Trump nor Harris really gave us much detail about how they will fix the economy in the debate

Neither candidate provided much clarity on their economic policies, causing disappointment among some business leaders.

Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump sparred for 90 minutes last night, but many business leaders were left questioning the details of their economic plans. Though the debate opened with a discussion about the economy, the conversation quickly devolved into platitudes, boasts, and personal jabs.

Industry leaders told B-17 that they hoped to hear the candidates discuss crypto guidelines, regulation, and key appointments on Tuesday night, but little was said about any of those topics. Beyond that, neither candidate offered much clarity on taxation or trade policy.

“What I’ve heard is universal disappointment that there wasn’t more on economic policy,” Ernie Tedeschi, the Director of Economics at the Yale Budget Lab, told B-17. He wishes that moderators had allotted more time to the economy and asked pointed follow-up questions, rather than broad queries about their overall plans.

“What we really need is either a debate or a whole section of a debate devoted to economic issues,” Tedeschi said.

Moderators did open Tuesday’s debate by asking about the economy, calling it the “number one issue” for many voters.” When asked whether Americans are better off than they were four years ago, Harris began by talking about her middle class upbringing and her plan to create an “Opportunity Economy.”

She then went on to discuss the cost of housing and childcare, her plans to provide a tax deduction to small businesses, and Trump’s proposed tariffs. Trump responded, attacking Harris for inflation and saying that he “created one of the greatest economies in the history of our country.” He then redirected the conversation to immigration.

The two continued to talk in broad strokes about their economic aspirations until the conversation pivoted to reproductive rights. Despite the widespread belief that Harris won the debate, both candidates’ economic haziness rang hollow to many business leaders.

In an email to clients Wednesday morning, Paul Donovan, the chief global economist for UBS Global Wealth Management, called the event “a debate of social media memes more than in-depth policy analysis,” the New York Times reported.

“If you’re in the tech industry, what did you learn? Nothing,” Mark Penn, Stagwell CEO and former Clinton advisor who now works with Republicans, told Fortune magazine.

Tedeschi told B-17 that we need clarity about Trump’s proposed tariffs, which are the “most consequential and radical thing that he’s proposed.”

“His proposals on tariffs seem to change in specifics from speech to speech, but they’re all clearly quite large in magnitude. And so I think pinning him down on exactly what he is thinking and what that would mean for everyday Americans and businesses,” Tedeschi said.

When it comes to Harris’ policies, he said that we need to know more about her proposed price gouging for groceries and whether she’ll tax unrealized capital gains.

“What does that mean?” Tedeschi asked of the price gouging plan. “There’s a whole range of things that could mean that could be the difference between good economics and bad economics.”

He was also surprised that the candidates did not once discuss Federal Reserve and appointments to key agencies, like the Federal Trade Commission.

Others in the business and tech industries were more satisfied. Only 15 minutes after the debate started, Aaron Levie, CEO of Box, said that Harris “is doing a great job at reinforcing the pro business message and policies” in a post on X, formerly known as Twitter.

Chris Larsen, the billionaire co-founder of blockchain payments company Ripple, told B-17 that Harris was “spectacular.”

“She hit the key economic message in broadly describing an opportunity economy that emphasized small business (what every start up is). Crypto supporters need to understand they’re only one in thousands of business branches that could have been addressed and there’s just no time in a 90 mi debate for that level of detail. Notably Trump didn’t talk crypto either,” he said. Larsen has signed a letter of prominent former and current CEOs endorsing Harris.

Bradley Tusk, a Democratic strategist and the co-founder and managing partner of Tusk Venture Partners, said that while “of course [Harris] can always provide more policy ideas and details,” her dominance was clear.

“There’s nothing more that Harris could have done to demonstrate that she is smart, reasonable, informed and poised,” he said.