A Trump victory is inflationary, and a Harris victory is deflationary. 

I’ve lived on the border of Illinois and Wisconsin and have seen the effects of each state’s policies on my businesses.  Good luck getting your furnace guy to install a new water heater while he’s there in certain parts of Illinois.  There are regulations for that.  Also, he’s licensed, but you’ll need a permit to replace that water heater.  For the most part, in Wisconsin, if you’re licensed, you can install it without a permit.

That’s the symbolic microcosm of what’s happening on a national scale.  Our country will tilt more towards an Illinois-like system vs a Wisconsin one. 

Also, Trump’s previous presidency saw significant tax cuts and deregulation.  Examples are the $2000 child tax credit and private health insurance competition with the ACA.  The ACA monstrosity is a blessing for those with pre-existing conditions but still a rip-off for those with “higher” incomes above the 400% poverty line with no subsidy.   Additionally, the Cato Institute found that, “The flow of new regulations was much smaller than under the previous two administrations,” and, “The Trump administration has been somewhat effective in working with Congress on legislative acts of deregulation.”

My Econ 101 professor would say these are expansionary policies, as such fiscal and de-regulatory measures boost economic activity in the Classical Model.

A Harris victory would most likely target spending in areas such as the tape-worm healthcare machine and social redistributions.  This would be deflationary if it adds to the deficit while not helping the middle producers of the economy.   Additionally, a Harris administration would have a higher probability of adding economically deleterious regulations and mandates.

So a Trump Presidency would be more inflationary due to expansive fiscal policies and deregulation. Conversely, a Harris win would likely be deflationary if her policies focus on targeted spending to non-producers with increased regulation.