SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
December, 11 2025, 02:30pm EDT
Contact:
Jimmy Wyderko: jwyderko@economicliberties.us
U.S. Trade Deficit Up, Manufacturing Jobs Down by 49,000, Other Manufacturing Growth Measures Mixed in First Nine Months of 2025
Data Show Gap Between Trump Trade and Manufacturing Goals Versus Outcomes
Rethink Trade today published an infographic webpage compiling trade and manufacturing data that show in the first nine months of his second term, President Trump’s actions on trade have not accomplished his promises to quickly balance trade and revitalize U.S. manufacturing.
Candidate Donald Trump rode the working-class vote back into the White House with promises that tariffs would rebalance U.S. trade and rebuild American manufacturing. His presidential trade policy announcements since, including the April 2 “Liberation Day” tariffs, reiterated his goal was boosting American manufacturing and industrial jobs and reducing the U.S. trade deficit.
With delayed U.S. government third quarter trade data just posted, we can report the nine-month 2025 trade data show a significant increase in the U.S. trade deficit compared to the first nine months of 2024. The United States also lost 49,000 manufacturing jobs since Trump’s return to office. However, other measures of manufacturing activity present a more nuanced picture: In the first half of 2025 it was all in decline, and some measures remain negative, but others—particularly in the third quarter—point to strengthening conditions.
“The nine-month data show outcomes that are the opposite of President Trump’s promises to cut the trade deficit and create more American manufacturing jobs while indicators are mixed regarding the goal of revitalizing American manufacturing,” said Lori Wallach, Director of the Rethink Trade program at the American Economic Liberties Project. “So far, Trump’s trade deals seem to prioritize the demands of Big Tech, Big Oil, Big Pharma, and other usual beneficiaries of decades of failed U.S. trade policy instead of fixing the root causes of our huge trade deficit to help American manufacturing workers and firms as he promised.”
Key indicators:
- Manufacturing employment is down 49,000 jobs between February 2025 and September 2025.
- U.S. global goods and services trade deficit was 14%—$95.2 billion—larger in first nine months of 2025 than first nine months of 2024.
- U.S. trade deficit in manufactured goods was $131.3 billion higher in first nine months of 2025 than first nine months of 2024.
- U.S. manufacturers’ durable goods shipments were up by $19.3 billion in first nine months of 2025 compared to first nine months of 2024.
- U.S. manufacturers’ nondefense capital goods shipments excluding aircraft were down by $5.7 billion in first nine months of 2025 compared to first nine months of 2024.
- The U.S. manufacturing Purchasing Managers Index issued by the Institute of Supply Management Report on Business has declined since January.
- U.S. construction spending in manufacturing is down $121.2 billion comparing first eight months of 2024 to first eight months of 2025. (The nine-month data is not yet available after a government shutdown delay.)
See the webpage with trade and manufacturing data in full here.
Rethink Trade is a program of the American Economic Liberties Project.
The American Economic Liberties Project works to ensure America's system of commerce is structured to advance, rather than undermine, economic liberty, fair commerce, and a secure, inclusive democracy. Economic Liberties believes true economic liberty means entrepreneurs and businesses large and small succeed on the merits of their ideas and hard work; commerce empowers consumers, workers, farmers, and engineers instead of subjecting them to discrimination and abuse from financiers and monopolists; foreign trade arrangements support domestic security and democracy; and wealth is broadly distributed to support equitable political power.
LATEST NEWS
'The Power of Christ Compels You!' CodePink Priest Goes Full Exorcist on Kristi Noem at House Hearing
"How dare she sit there and talk about 'threats to our homeland' when she's the one using OUR tax dollars to terrorize our communities," said another protester.
Dec 11, 2025
A protester dressed as a priest confronted US Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem about the Trump administration's violent crackdown on immigrants during a Thursday hearing held by the House of Representatives' Committee on Homeland Security.
The US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) chief has often spoken about her Christian faith—she said just two days ago on a government social media account that "I have relied on God and placed my faith in Him throughout my career in public service."
During the Republican-led committee's hearing on "Worldwide Threats to the Homeland," a man in black and red religious attire began shouting about recent raids and other actions by DHS, including two department agencies: Customs and Border Protection, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
"Stop ICE raids! The power of Christ compels you!" the man shouted. "End deportations! The power of Christ compels you! Love thy neighbor! The power of Christ compels you!"
As police removed that man from the room, another protester stood and shouted similar messages: "Stop ICE! Get ICE off our streets! Stop terrorizing our communities!"
The second man—who displayed a sign that read, "No ICE, No Troops," and noted an affiliation with the peace group CodePink—was also swiftly forced from the room by police.
In a statement from CodePink, Bita Iuliano, another activist who attended the hearing, took aim at Noem: "How dare she sit there and talk about 'threats to our homeland' when she's the one using OUR tax dollars to terrorize our communities. If she really wants to protect our homeland, which by the way is stolen land, she should stop asking for more and more of our tax dollars for a department that is making our neighbors afraid to leave their homes."
"ICE should be abolished, and that money should be used to fund what our communities actually need—healthcare, schools, housing, the fight against climate change, to name a few," Iuliano argued, also calling out Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
"Noem, along with Hegseth, Rubio, and the rest of the war criminal crew, are the ones terrorizing our communities, from our streets here to Palestine, Venezuela, and all over the world," she said. "They are the ones making it unsafe, and they're using our dollars to do it. All we have are our voices, and we're going to make sure we're heard."
Various faith leaders have also spoken out against the Trump administration's attacks on immigrants, including Pope Leo XIV, whose hometown of Chicago has been a key target of DHS action since President Donald Trump returned to power in January.
Pointing to Christian scripture, the first-ever American pontiff said in early November: "How did you receive the foreigner, did you receive him and welcome him, or not? I think there is a deep reflection that needs to be made about what is happening."
Pope Leo also advocated for allowing religious leaders to access people who have been detained, saying that "many times they've been separated from their families. No one knows what's happening, but their own spiritual needs should be attended to."
Shortly after that, more than 200 US Catholic bishops released a rare joint statement last month stressing that "human dignity and national security are not in conflict" and calling for "meaningful reform of our nation's immigration laws and procedures."
The pope then urged "all people in the United States to listen" to the bishops and said that while "every country has a right to determine who and how and when people enter," the way immigrants are being treated in the US "is extremely disrespectful."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Autopsy Says Corporate Capture, Support for Genocide Were Key Factors in Democrats' 2024 Disaster
"Harris and the Democratic Party leadership prioritized the agendas of corporate donors and gambled on a centrist path, while largely abandoning working-class, young, and progressive voters."
Dec 11, 2025
As the Democratic establishment slow-walks its own assessment of what went wrong in last year's elections, an outside autopsy released Thursday argues the party's failure to sufficiently appeal to and mobilize working-class voters as well as its complicity in Israel's genocide in Gaza were key factors behind the failure to prevent President Donald Trump from securing a second White House term.
The report, authored by journalist Christopher D. Cook and published by the progressive advocacy group RootsAction, argues there were five primary reasons for former Vice President Kamala Harris' loss to Trump:
- Harris' loss of nearly 7 million voters who backed Joe Biden in 2020;
- Biden's refusal to exit the top of the ticket until just months before the election;
- The Democratic Party's decision to prioritize courting so-called moderate Republicans and corporate donors over organizing working-class voters;
- Support for Israel's genocidal assault on Gaza; and
- The loss of young-voter support.
Cook acknowledges that certain "external factors" impacted the 2024 contest beyond the Democratic Party or the Harris campaign's control, including "immense special-interest spending to manipulate voters’ information and perceptions on social media platforms" such as Elon Musk's X and racism and sexism, which "certainly disadvantaged" the former vice president.
But ultimately, Harris' campaign and the leadership of the Democratic Party "bear responsibility for Trump’s return to the White House," the report says.
"This was a preventable disaster, but Harris and the Democratic Party leadership prioritized the agendas of corporate donors and gambled on a centrist path, while largely abandoning working-class, young, and progressive voters," Cook said in a statement.
The report places significant emphasis on the Harris campaign's fateful decision to openly appeal to Republican voters in the hope that some would abandon Trump—a strategy that Hillary Clinton pursued during her 2016 presidential bid, to disastrous effect.
Cook points to the Harris campaign's embrace of former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) as the most galling example of this strategy.
"Harris and Cheney—a Republican who had become a pariah in her own party—campaigned for several days together," the report observes. "On the campaign trail, they repeatedly hit high-minded themes about the threat that Donald Trump posed to American democracy, while scarcely speaking to voters’ more urgent concerns about the state of the economy."
The campaign's gamble that it could appeal to potential GOP swing voters while keeping the Democratic base intact "proved to be a huge mistake," the report says, arguing the approach muddied "Democrats’ message about economic inequality" while "consuming valuable campaign resources that should have been spent on a more robust base turnout operation."
The report cites a "glaring instance" in the critical battleground state of Pennsylvania, which Trump ended up winning by fewer than two percentage points:
As the New York Times reported, Harris campaign staffers in Pennsylvania were so concerned about poor outreach to Black and Latino voters in crucial areas of Philadelphia, they met secretly at a donut shop and formed a “rogue” voter turnout operation to reach these core Democratic constituents. In this clandestine operation, hastily conceived in the waning days of the campaign, members of Harris’s team set out to knock on the doors of as many Black and Latino voters as possible in a desperate dash to shore up Harris’ numbers among what should have been core constituencies.
The Harris campaign also received guidance and support from corporate interests and prominent billionaires, which Cook names as a "likely factor for why more working-class voters walked away from the Democrats."
"Due to these corporate influences, including from billionaire Mark Cuban and others, the Harris campaign avoided any bold policy proposals confronting corporate power, instead adopting 'marginal pro-business tweaks to the status quo that both her corporate and progressive allies agreed never coalesced into a clear economic argument,'" Cook wrote, citing the Times.
On Gaza, the postmortem notes that Harris "offered no substantive changes from Biden’s unpopular policies backing Israel," fueling a sharp drop-off in support among Arab Americans and young voters.
"Extensive polling suggests that Biden, and later Harris, could have inspired and mobilized these voters by campaigning on policies such as cancelling student debt, expanding healthcare access, curbing support for Israel’s siege of Gaza, and boldly promoting economic populist policies," the report says, pointing to the success of progressive ballot measures even in red states where Harris struggled.
In coming elections, the report concludes, Democrats must learn from their recent failures and embrace highly popular "economic populist policies"—from Medicare for All to higher corporate taxes to a long-overdue federal minimum wage hike—to build a lasting working-class coalition.
"The Democratic Party must show voters that it has a spine and can stand up to corporate and big-money interests," the report says.
Keep ReadingShow Less
‘Total Amateur Hour’: FBI Official Says Antifa Is #1 Threat in US—But Can’t Say Where, Who, or What It Is
"Just a complete admission here that the entire ‘antifa’ threat narrative is totally manufactured by this administration," said one critic.
Dec 11, 2025
A top FBI official struggled on Thursday to answer basic questions about antifa, a loosely organized collective of anti-fascist activists that he labeled the top terrorist threat facing the US.
Michael Glasheen, operations director of the FBI's National Security Branch, testified before the US House Committee on Homeland Security that antifa was "the most immediate violent threat" facing Americans today when it comes to domestic terrorism.
But when Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), ranking member of the Homeland Security Committee, asked Glasheen for specifics about this purportedly dire threat, he mostly came up empty.
"So where is antifa headquarters?" Thompson asked him.
Glasheen paused for several seconds and then said, "What we're doing right now with the organization..." before Thompson interrupted him.
"Where in the United States does antifa exist?" asked Thompson.
"We are building out the infrastructure right now," Glasheen replied.
"So what does that mean?" asked a bewildered Thompson. "I'm just, we're trying to get information. You said antifa is a terrorist organization. Tell us, as a committee, how did you come to that? Whether they exist, how many members do they have in the United States as of right now?"
"Well, that's very fluid," Glasheen said. "It's ongoing for us to understand that... no different from al-Qaeda and ISIS."
Thompson again interrupted and tried to make Glasheen answer his original question.
"If you said antifa is the No. 1 domestic terrorist organization operating in the United States," he said, "I just need to know where they are, how many people. I don't want a name, I don't want anything like that. Just, how many people have you identified, with the FBI, that antifa is made of?"
"Well, the investigations are active..." Glasheen said.
Thompson then became incredulous.
"Sir, you wouldn't come to this committee and say something you can't prove," he said. "I know you wouldn't do that. But you did."
GLASHEEN: Antifa is our primary concern right now. That's the most immediate violent threat we're facing
BENNIE THOMPSON: Where is antifa headquartered?
GLASHEEN: ... ... ... we are building out the infrastructure right now
THOMPSON: What does that mean? pic.twitter.com/FBzRJ5dCBj
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) December 11, 2025
Many observers were stunned that Glasheen appeared to know so little about what he proclaimed to be the top domestic terrorist threat facing the US.
"Total amateur hour in US law enforcement," remarked Democracy Docket news editor Matthew Kupfer, "where the No. 1 terror threat is an organization that does not formally exist and a career FBI official is dancing around before a congressional committee trying to make the Trump strategy sound legit."
Zeteo editor-in-chief Mehdi Hasan argued that Glasheen's testimony was proof that the administration was simply concocting domestic terrorism threats with zero basis in reality.
"Wow," Hasan marveled. "Just a complete admission here that the entire ‘antifa’ threat narrative is totally manufactured by this administration."
Fred Wellman, a Democratic congressional candidate in Missouri, wondered how many actual dangerous criminals are running free while the FBI focuses on taking down an organization that it apparently knows nothing about.
"This would be comical if there wasn’t real world impact from this idiocy," Wellman wrote. "We have real crimes and real threats and they are chasing a fake 'organization' for politics."
Democrats on the House Homeland Security Committee also piled on Glasheen, citing his testimony as evidence that the Trump administration is completely unserious about law enforcement.
"If your 'top threat' has no headquarters, no organization, and no definition then it’s not a top threat," they posted on social media. "The Trump administration is ignoring real threats, and the American people see right through it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular