Chris Martinez, a 28-year-old maintenance technician from Arizona, has been forced to make major adjustments to his life as he navigates President Donald Trump's economy, and the affordability crisis has hit him hard.

Martinez told the International Business Times that he "had to return one of his vehicles to his lender" after fuel prices climbed so high that he needed to cut costs. He had hoped his vote for Trump would mean a better economy.

"He's doing nothing for us, to benefit us," Martinez told the Associated Press. "And it kind of sucks because I got duped and I feel like a dummy."

Gas prices keep rising despite Trump's new "deal" with Russia to buy enough diesel to cover roughly half of an average day's consumption in the United States. Fuel prices are set by global commodity markets, refining costs, distribution, and other external factors, such as a blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. Diesel, the fuel at the center of that purchase, powers much of the country's freight trucking, agriculture, and construction equipment — meaning fuel costs flow directly into the budgets of workers who drive for a living.

For workers like Martinez, who rely on their vehicles for their jobs, a price spike can squeeze an already difficult economy. Fuel and groceries are recurring expenses, so when both climb, trade-offs such as returning a vehicle or switching to a cheaper supermarket are often the first adjustments households make. He also said he has switched to shopping at a discount supermarket.

An AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll published on 1 October, cited by the IBT, found that 65 percent of US adults believed higher-than-us prices were the result of Trump's policies. Another 69 percent said his handling of the cost of living had been worse than expected. With economic trust a central question heading into the midterm elections, the findings offer a snapshot of how pocketbook pressure is shaping voter sentiment.

Jose Montalvo, a 47-year-old trucker, voiced similar frustration with the president: "I blame him for the fuel side of things."

During his first term, Trump inherited an improving economy after a horrific economic crash, and his policies were not dramatic. He recorded slightly fewer job gains in his first two years than former President Barack Obama did in his last two years. Trump pushed through tax cuts, but the big promises of what they would deliver never materialized. Some economists attributed part of the stronger job growth in 2018 to a temporary stimulus alongside "a strong global economy," as Politifact explained.

It all collapsed with the pandemic, and Trump suffered a net loss of approximately 2.7 million jobs. The years that followed centered on another president working to clean up the mess. The economy slowly improved, factories were rebuilt, and the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022 helped expand American semiconductor production.

That legislation gave Trump ongoing construction activity and future openings he could point to as economic successes. Manufacturing construction spending rose about 212 percent during Biden's four years, partly fueled by the CHIPS Act, and an industry economist told FactCheck.org that manufacturing construction spending in 2025 was "largely due" to that legislation.

Now it is falling apart again under Trump second term. This time around, however, Martinez and others like him appear to recognize the source of their suffering. How the Russia diesel purchase interacts with those global market forces, and whether voters like Martinez keep shifting their assessments, is likely to remain a focal point in the months ahead.

Source: Alternet