Would likely election winner Hillary Clinton be better for the US economy than her predecessor Barack Obama?

Molly Kiniry, a consultant at the Legatum Institute, says Yes.

On their first day in office, US Presidents are handed the nuclear launch codes, but not a magic wand for the economy. Their commercial role is largely about projecting confidence and building trust.

The US economy is inextricably linked to global markets, which are unwilling to bear political risk – and Hillary Clinton is an exceptionally low-risk proposition. As markets dissociate themselves from policy outcomes and focus increasingly on political posturing, Clinton’s history of cosy relationships with business will soothe nerves rubbed raw by global populism.

Unlike Obama, she has demonstrated no moral qualms about, and no fundamental mistrust of, the profit motive. Her speeches to global banks and Wikileaked emails are a better indication of her views on free trade and free markets than her recent, Sanders-tinged rhetoric.

What Clinton lacks in moral fibre, she makes up for in pragmatism. Today, that means winning an election. On 20 January, it will mean repairing eight years of bad faith between Wall Street and the White House.

Alicia Barrett, American outreach officer at the Institute of Economic Affairs, says No.

The case could be made that, in the Democratic primary of 2008, Clinton would have been better for the economy than Obama, and that her knowledge of the financial sector could have been helpful immediately post-crash.

However, eight years on, Clinton has unashamedly moved left of Obama, advocating her own staggering $275bn stimulus package (as if America’s $20 trillion debt wasn’t enough). Healthcare premiums, thanks to the Affordable Care Act, are set to rise next year by an average of 25 per cent – but Hillary’s response is to one-up President Obama’s bad policy by creating a public option, eliminating competition and choice for patients.

Where Obama has sought to promote economic growth, most notably through free trade deals, Clinton has chosen to rescind her support with the intent of capturing Bernie Sanders voters. Americans are misguided if they think a Clinton presidency would be “four more years of Obama”. Economically, it would be significantly worse.