No question that less regulation is generally pro-growth (at least in the short term - how it will impact in the longer term depends on the regulation. Poor regulation - either govt or quasi, meaning rating agencies, allowed an explosion of off balance sheet debt in the early 00s. That was not pro-growth. Sometimes with regs it's about quality, not quantity), and at least the corporate tax cut was pro-growth IMO. Offsetting that are two very important things - tariffs, which as we have said, the WSJ claimed several months ago already shaved 1% off GDP (not that the WSJ is definitive, but tariffs are anti-growth, at least short term). More importantly - business and markets hate uncertainty above all. Trump is the greatest purveyor of uncertainty one could hope for in a president. In London, he indicated he'd like to leave the trade war alone until after the election, suggesting more tariffs to come. Then when he got back, he said the talks are going beautifully.

You know the net effect of those things? Not to mention other factors that have nothing to do with politics and are probably not clear to us now? I haven't been to an alternate universe where Hill was elected and I was able to see her policies and how economic growth responded. Honestly, saying that is no different from saying "Thanks Trump" in a month when job numbers disappoint, and we've had a few of those.