Jamie Dimon for president? The banking CEO would be a welcome alternative for many voters

In fact, while some of these CEOs have compelling cross-sector leadership qualities and might govern well, Dimon has developed a transcendent national image as the systemic stabilizer of JPMorgan in the 21^st century. 

Dimon made headlines on Friday after a wide-ranging interview with CNBC’s Morgan Brennan at the Reagan National Economic Forum. The JPMorgan CEO has long been known for his provocative candor, but Dimon decided to ratchet it up a notch for the inaugural event, perhaps inspired by the memory of America’s revered 40th president, covering everything from public policy and foreign affairs to financial markets and public office. An emboldened Dimon proceeded to administer a sobering dose of realism about the fragility of U.S. democracy and its capitalist system, as well as the potential policy solutions and sacrifices necessary to actually make America great again.

Much of the media attention has focused on his astute warning of “the enemy within” being the biggest threat to the U.S. However, it was the banking chief’s response to Brennan’s last question that conspicuously lingered. Asked “What would be the scenario that you would entertain to consider public service?” Dimon humbly quipped, “If I thought I could really win, which I don’t think I could.” While the question has been asked and shrugged off many times by Dimon, interview listeners were left hopefully wondering if he could really win.

A proven leader through success and setbacks

Let’s first contrast his business success with the failure of Donald Trump as CEO. Trump played the role of a business tycoon, but Dimon authentically is one. Despite starting his career with half a billion dollars from his dad, Trump has suffered from a more spotted track record in business, which includes four bankruptcies and an enterprise circling the drain many times, until he began monetizing the presidency.

As a businessman and financier, Dimon, instead, is in rarefied air. The venerable but underperforming JPMorgan Chase bought Bank One—hemorrhaging after a merger with First Chicago—largely to get Dimon. Even then, in 2006, the first author ran an in-person survey of the leaders of the Financial Services Industry Association as to whom they most admired, and Jamie Dimon came out as their No. 1 choice. 

Two decades later, JPMorgan stock has risen almost 1,100% since Dimon took the helm in December 2005. As a benchmark for comparison, the SPDR S&P 500 ETF—which tracks the performance of the S&P 500—is about half that. The more relevant S&P Bank ETF (KBE) is nearly flat, up approximately 2.5% over the same two decades.

In 1998, Dimon played a significant role, with peers, in catalyzing the collective actions of 14 major banks and brokerages and the New York Federal Reserve to stabilize the financial system with a $3.6 billion capital infusion to support the imploding Long Term Capital fund, which threatened dangerous ripple effects on capital markets. That fund, ironically, had been created a few years earlier by Nobel Prize winners.

Such fortitude through adversity was again shown through his turnaround triumph at Chicago’s Bank One a few years later. Similarly, at a Yale CEO Summit in the June of 2007, Dimon presciently warned, “Many risky assets are underpriced and will soon, categorically, across-the-board, be repriced.” Eschewing the simplistic fast-recovery reassurances offered by the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve, he insisted that the collapse of the subprime market would spread beyond real estate to include many derivative financial products, which were inaccurately graded by credit rating agencies, allowing for dangerous hedge fund leveraging. He said that he and his team were going to spend the summer unraveling JPMorgan Chase’s exposure to such risk, adding that laments about needed regulation were “parochial.”

But the speculation regarding Dimon is not for another finance job or even the Treasury secretary. As Dimon said last November after Trump’s post-election staffing did not include him in the cabinet, “I’ve not had a boss [other than his board] in 25 years and I am not ready to start now.”

So, what would his policy views be as president?

Dimon is a long-time Democrat, like Trump was, but unlike Trump, he shows no signs of switching parties for opportunity. He is a self-described moderate in the most traditional sense. Dimon has consistently espoused a political philosophy of social consciousness with fiscal prudence. The ever-pragmatic executive will promote policies embracing smaller, more efficient government, sensible regulations, and speedy permitting processes, then pivot to cutting special tax breaks, (including carried interest), doubling the earned income tax credit, investing in public education, defending voting rights, and championing the cultural and economic importance of cities.

Dimon’s strengths for public office 

Dimon has articulated a desperate need for the U.S. to strengthen its defense capabilities while recognizing that strong international security alliances and economic partnerships have been key to the nation’s success. While Dimon has been critical of the Trump administration’s approach to implementing its tariff policy, he acknowledges the need to rebalance some trade relationships and rebuild supply lines, at home and abroad with allies, for goods that could pertain to U.S. national security. 

To him, China has become a powerful peer that should be respectfully but forcefully engaged, not estranged, in the global economy. With Russia, there is no question who the U.S. should be supporting. In his 2023 annual letter, Dimon cut straight to the point: “Staying on the sidelines during battles of autocracy and democracy, between dictatorship and freedom, is simply not an option for America today. Ukraine is the front line of democracy.”

His balance of realism and optimism is a much-needed reset amid a Republican Party that has submissively redefined itself around the MAGA movement and a Democratic Party that has been captured by detached populist policies from the likes of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Bernie Sanders. For example, amid contested debates around DEI, instead of capitulating to political or social pressures, Dimon aptly guided JPMorgan Chase through the polarization by maintaining and communicating its long-held corporate policy as one that ensures equal opportunity, not equal outcomes. 

The bank under his watch has pioneered investments to promote equal opportunity in urban communities across America, most notably in Detroit. Over a decade-plus, JPMorgan Chase has effectively invested more than $200 million into neighborhood revitalization, affordable housing, skills training, small-business growth, and financial literacy as the city emerged from bankruptcy. There was no political or personal motivation for investing in the “Motor City” other than helping the historic city in a time of need. That act of goodwill was echoed by Goldman Sachs, Walmart, Target, and many other corporations that sponsored cities in similar ways.

Dimon’s ability to lead through crucial moments that will affect a diverse stakeholder base as large as JPMorgan Chase’s is a rare trait that has defined his career trajectory. He possesses an appealing combination of resilience, confidence, and sharp intellect, with humility and a propensity for listening. He does not insist upon grandiosity and the servile obedience Trump demands of his cabinet’s “Dear Leader” chorus of homage.

At one of our CEO summits a decade ago, he opened his comments by sharing his experience of being fired at Citigroup by his boss, Sandy Weill, in part because he was critical of the performance of Weill’s daughter, who was on his team but soon left. Dimon’s reconciliation with Weill was at Dimon’s own initiative. He then saluted his colleagues:

“JPMorgan Chase—there’s been a lot of suffering to build this thing. I still travel the world, and they still know David Rockefeller and Dennis Weatherstone. We’ve been doing business with Saudi Aramco for 75 years. What has been built here is unbelievable. This is the result of hundreds of thousands of people working for hundreds of years, way before I got here. My job is to just make this shine a little better than what came before.

I was standing at a session like this, and a woman was giving a talk saying, ‘Leadership, you always have to have one truth teller that will always tell you the truth, always, or else you will get in trouble.’ And I got up and said, if you have ten around you and only one is a truth teller, you should fire the other nine. You can’t survive in any business if that becomes the norm. Corporate headquarters becomes a place where the people feel like they’re the enemy. If I were ever going to write a book, it would be about the disease of corporate headquarters.”

The renowned banker has leaned on those qualities to lead the organization through multiple crises, including financial disasters, recessions, scandals, pandemics, and many political emergencies. He is willing to publicly admit mistakes, as he did with the London Whale trading debacle of 2012. Despite warning about the impending doom because of poor lending practices for subprime mortgages at banks in 2006 and 2007, Dimon did not go around telling everyone, “I told you so.” Instead, he quickly jumped into action, ready to support political leaders, regulators, his bank peers, financial markets, and the public. 

Similarly, in one notable exchange between House Banking chair Maxine Waters and major bank CEOs who benefited from TARP bailout money, she asked them if they increased credit availability to customers. Bank of America CEO Ken Lewis mocked the way she asked her question due to some wrong terminology—hence winning the battle but losing the war. When Dimon followed, he congratulated Waters on a good question, correcting her terminology for accuracy, and then said his own bank, if held to the standards she set, was not doing as well as it should.

Dimon’s natural desire to tell the truth, no matter the consequences, is another rare quality found only in the best leaders. He has condemned the financial industry when necessary, calling out the excesses of private capital and the inequality of the carried interest tax carveout, for instance. He has publicly expressed disapproval of political leaders from both parties, whether that be the folly of not engaging with the private sector or the misdirected efforts of establishing a strategic Bitcoin reserve. JPMorgan’s employees have not been spared criticism either. In a leaked audio recording gone viral, listeners can hear the chief executive berating those staff members whining about the bank’s return-to-office policy. 

Dimon’s challenges within the Democratic Party

While the Democrats have no shortage of policies, they are desperate for a unifying leader at the top. Many of the frontrunners are exemplary, but the case for Dimon outshines them all. Ocasio-Cortez and Sanders have been drawing huge crowds around the nation in their Fighting Oligarchy tour, filled by those outraged by the Trump administration’s domestic and international policies, prompting some to speculate about a 2028 presidential bid by one or both. However, their populist anti-business message electrifies a vocal but narrow base of the party, and their populism does not match the broader public sentiment. 

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries is the first African American to hold his post, and his chances to seize the House Speaker job have quelled speculation he might run for president. The eloquent congressman Ro Khanna has a bright future as a “pro-capitalist progressive,” intriguing many. Maryland Governor Wes Moore has inspired many by his strong performance and forceful rhetoric. However, both are still early in their respective leadership positions, especially compared to Dimon. California Governor Gavin Newsom would present a formidable opponent with his long tenure at the helm of the Golden State, but he’s had hiccups, such as mismanaging the government response to COVID-19 and the wildfire disasters.

Perhaps Dimon could preempt such rivals by enlisting them for cabinet roles or as running mates or by complementing his business leadership with other distinguished public officials, such as Governor Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan or former police chief and congresswoman Val Demings of Florida, as partners to share the ticket. Regardless, none of the expected candidates seems to inspire voters. A new CNN/Gallup poll shows general low public regard for Democratic political leaders, with only 16% seeing the Democrats as the party with strong leaders, while 40% see Republicans as the party of strong leaders. Similarly, 36% of the American public sees Republicans as the party able to get things done while Democrats are seen as effective by only 19%. This suggests a business leader with a strong track record would be a welcomed fresh alternative to Democratic voters. 

Of course, there may be practical reasons for Dimon to decide against a presidential bid in 2028, but even the best candidates with years of political experience carefully consider running for higher office. It is, after all, called “public service” for a reason. The costs, though, are far outweighed by the benefits that the banking executive would bring to Washington, D.C. 

Some may say, if Dimon lost an election, he risks prematurely concluding his soaring career on a downbeat note. But he is not unfamiliar with leading a comeback. In 1998, Dimon was fired from Citigroup, but instead of ignoring the issue, he often openly discusses how that moment developed his personal and professional resilience. Look where it led him. 

Others may say Democratic socialists or populists who label themselves as self-styled “progressives” will never accept him. That might not be all bad. Progressives have opportunistically derailed the Democratic Party with 1930s cliches, falsely conflating oligarchs and corrupt individuals with the average businessperson and wrongly focusing the 2024 presidential campaign on corporate greed as the source of inflation when there simply were not soaring profits as alleged. Grocery stores then and now were lucky to get a 1% to 2% profit margin, lower than almost any major nonprofit in the nation. Inflation was due to lingering post-pandemic supply chain snags, bird flu killing a third of the nation’s egg-laying hens, and Fed rate hikes that put mortgages out of reach for many. 

Progressives may also complain about Dimon’s criticism of some financial regulatory bodies, such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), the brainchild of Senator Elizabeth Warren. While its checkered performance had some successes, it also missed many big problems, like the collapse of regional banks and the massive scandal at Wells Fargo. Dimon has argued that some regulations are redundant or harmful, with the CFPB overstepping its authority, colliding with 11 other financial regulatory agencies, and increasing opportunities for consumer data privacy breaches and fraud. 

While he has called for agency consolidation, he is not opposed to needed financial regulation and has called knee-jerk anti-regulation critics “parochial” at industry gripe fests, and he’s suggested sharply reducing regulation would create great risks for capital markets. Similarly, last week, he derided as “greedy” those self-interested financiers who wanted to protect their carried interest gains from taxation and mocked the calls for strategic Bitcoin reserve stockpiling, calling for a stockpiling of the nation’s military weapons instead.

Inexperience with campaigning may be another critique cast against Dimon. He has never run for public office, arduously stumping cross-country to court the favor of key constituencies and powerful figures. Yet that could be a strength, not a weakness, as he would not be beholden to anyone. His campaign could be free to focus on the merits of the issues with a fresh track record that voters can more easily assess on their own.

Would-be critics may say he frequently accuses the government of excess bureaucracy, like President Trump and Elon Musk. However, so does most of the voting public. President Bill Clinton oversaw a government efficiency initiative more than two decades ago that was more responsible and effective than the vindictive, reckless, and ineffective dismantling under the current administration. 

Some critics will correctly point out that Dimon failed to be in the vanguard of CEOs who spoke out against Trump’s various abuses of office in his first term. In August 2017, Dimon was not among the group of CEOs—including from Merck, Walmart, AT&T, UPS, PepsiCo, Cisco, IBM, GM, BlackRock, and Campbell Soup—who led the stampede of exits from Trump’s business advisory councils, but he was in surgery at the time. Similarly, Dimon did not join the wave of CEOs who boldly spoke out in unison following Trump’s efforts to undermine the 2020 presidential election. That collective voice was the first set of civic leaders to confirm the truth of the certified results and helped defuse the constitutional crisis Trump attempted to create. We helped to catalyze these initiatives, and Dimon’s absence was a disappointment to many. 

However, Dimon never spoke out against such effective collective action by the CEO community nor supported Trump’s illegal power assertions. Furthermore, some argue that by keeping his powder dry, he preserved his authority to openly challenge other ineffective, controversial Trump policies regarding trade, tariffs, diplomacy, and national security. He recently admonished Trump that standing on the sidelines of Ukraine’s battle for self-defense against the Russian invasion was not an option with Europe and many democratic sovereign nations endangered. He warned that the president’s attack on allies was driving them toward China, saying the “America First” policy may end up as “America alone.”

Finally, political pundits may say he essentially endorsed Trump in January 2024 at Davos, referencing an interview on CNBC’s Squawk Box. Live on air, Dimon praised the then-former president, saying: “[Trump] was kind of right about NATO…immigration…grew the economy quite well…tax reform worked…he was right about some of China…that’s why they voted for him.” Dimon later defended his comments, acknowledging he should have been more careful about his words while reiterating 74 million people did vote for Trump in 2020. 

A party of patriotism and celebrating success

It may seem foreign in politics to praise the achievements of the other party, but Dimon is not, and would not be, a contemporary politician, nor does he trade insults with adversaries, as he respects rivals. Decrying the politics of vilification, he would likely govern on a bipartisan basis in the best interest of America. Dimon offers the Democratic Party a chance to recapture Reagan and Bush Democrats, and even some Republicans.

Democrats need to learn what Donald Trump realized in 2016. That is, Americans do not hate business success but admire it as long as it is not won through cheating the system. Rather than resenting success as Marx predicted, Americans—as Thorsten Veblen’s “Theory of the Leisure Class” laid out in 1899—seek to emulate the successful. Trump ignites that desire for success and the belief in a fluid American class structure. Dimon could be just the leader to restore domestic faith in responsible capitalism, global partnerships, and balanced trade. Given recent candidate profiles, perhaps the lingering question is whether Dimon, now 69 years old, is too young to run.

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.

Read more:

• Jamie Dimon says ‘don’t put a good foot forward, put the truth forward’ and reveals what would get him into public service
• Jamie Dimon says Trump’s presidential pressure on the Fed is nothing new—but impact is limited
• Jamie Dimon is more worried about America’s ‘enemy within’ than China: ‘We have to get our act together and we have to do it very quickly’
• Jamie Dimon warns of ‘considerable turbulence’ and calls for quick resolution to tariffs in his annual JP Morgan shareholder letter