The case for Clinton: solid economic policy, free trade and stability

An online poll of Intelligent Insurer’s readers has indicated that 63 percent felt Hillary Clinton would have been the best choice as US president for the global re/insurance industry.

The poll, conducted in the 24 hours in the run up to the election result in the US, showed that, in contrast, only 35 percent felt Donald Trump would be good for the industry; 4 percent wanted neither candidate.

While there is little point dwelling on what might have been for those re/insurance executives who wanted Clinton, it is perhaps worth reflecting on the reasons they gave for believing that.

The general consensus was that Clinton was the safer bet: more likely to stabilize global affairs, manage the economy and generally maintain the status quo – many respondents stressed that, in contrast, they genuinely feared what Trump may do.

“She has the experience, the professionalism, she doesn't flip-flop like Trump does (on every issue) and disparage the country or the citizens of it. She knows we have major problems, and she's the one capable of addressing them. She also has major international knowledge and experience,” one respondent said.

While some of the other respondents noted her rational decision making, ability to manage foreign affairs, her more informed view on global economic strategy and lack of bias on the basis of race and sex, many also wanted to talk about Trump, which perhaps says a lot about this election.

“Trump would be an overall disaster for the global economy. As such, the increasingly globalized insurance industry would be taken down with it,” one noted.

After today’s result, only time will tell…