There’s Little Demand for Corporate Criticism of Trump

Thawing relations between the Republican Party and corporate America accelerated following President Donald Trump’s victory last year, exemplified by the biggest tech executives’ attendance of his inauguration in January.

But despite their misgivings with Trump’s tariffs across the globe, businesses have largely been careful to keep any pushback behind closed doors given the commander-in-chief’s penchant for punishing his critics. 

And though Americans are clearly concerned about how the president’s trade policies will affect their own finances, our latest report on how the public wants corporations to engage in political issues suggests they’re not looking to big business to fill the role as fourth branch of government either.

While large shares of Americans think it’s OK for corporations to make statements on politically salient issues such as the economy, police support or the environment, far fewer want to see businesses directly take on Trump, even as their appetite for traditional political engagement has gone unchanged since he took office.

The Trump issue

On a range of issues we tested in April, roughly a quarter of Americans or less say companies should publicly oppose Trump’s policies — even when it comes to his tariff agenda, which as we’ve shown you before is unpopular.

Roughly a quarter of Americans (27%) said businesses should speak in opposition of Trump’s global trade policies, akin to the share who said the same of his approach to LGBTQ+ rights, illegal immigration or diversity, equity and inclusion. 

On the other end of the spectrum, roughly 2 in 5 Americans want businesses to speak in support of Trump on the economy, health care and energy, while roughly a third of consumers think they should speak up in favor of the president’s policies on illegal immigration, where he maintains a big political advantage, and even more (37%) want them to back his approach to legal immigration.

This gap between the shares of consumers who think it’s OK for brands to speak on political issues generally, even amid division about directly taking on Trump, isn’t for a lack of trust. Among the overall electorate, confidence in corporations and CEOs has increased — especially among Republicans, as their party holds a trifecta in Washington.

Traditional lobbying 

Beyond criticizing Trump, our ongoing research shows Americans’ views about the kinds of topics businesses should talk about has gone unchanged. And when it comes to Washington, Trump’s victory is also yet to sway how consumers want to see businesses engage with Washington policymakers.

Similar shares continue to agree that businesses should act to influence public policy (45%) and get legislation passed (42%). However, there was a bit of an uptick in the shares who agree corporations should act to get politicians elected, though more Americans than not still oppose this.

At the same time, our data shows that the base of consumers backing direct corporate political engagement has become less Democratic and more Republican. Since last April, the share of Republicans who said corporations should act to influence public policy increased from 32% to 39%, while the share of Democrats who agreed remained the same (at 32%). 

Democrats, on the other hand, have become less likely to say businesses should act to get politicians elected or legislation passed as Republicans became more likely than not to support such actions.

The bottom line 

At the end of the day, it isn’t necessarily news that voters are generally alright with businesses engaging to sway policy and aren’t so thrilled about them trying to tip the electoral scales (see years of Democratic-led pushback related to the 2010 Citizens United Supreme Court ruling). But the large shares of Americans without views on either matter underscore something we’ve seen a lot of in our years of tracking news consumption: Many voters don’t have a grasp on what exactly is happening in Washington. 

While the level of scrutiny Americans apply to their brands has not risen during the early stages of the second Trump presidency, there still is risk driven by the universe of consumer activists willing to throw their money around to make a point to brands. This group of consumers is predominantly populated with partisans and higher earners, which means any public move is likely to rock the boat with Americans prepared to hit companies where it hurts.

For businesses looking to sway public policy risk-free, this suggests the safest bet is to lean on trade associations and outside groups to shield their brand from Trump’s anger — or the other side of the aisle if Democrats start to activate in the coming months. 

In a similar vein, those working to influence public policy, public sentiment gives a great deal of latitude to businesses’ lobbying efforts given they mostly happen behind closed doors.