Rather than hand money to “rich companies,” Trump said, the better move was to impose tariffs “so high that they will come and build their chip companies for nothing.” (Notably, despite his rebuke, Trump stopped short of addressing what he would actually do about the CHIPS Act if he wins, and his campaign didn’t respond to DFD’s questions asking if he’d roll it back.)

In that way, a visit to a factory was a rare moment of presidential debate over how America will grow its high-tech economy and guard against China: by continuing President Joe Biden’s industrial strategy, or by using Trump’s preferred approach of tariff hikes and income tax cuts.

In a campaign, a big topic like the future quickly boils down to the narrow question of how it helps you win the election. And there, the CHIPS Act is a strategist’s dream. Its jobs promises could — in theory — speak to core constituencies like union workers. The Biden administration has already approved preliminary grants to projects in several swing states, including Arizona, Pennsylvania, Georgia, North Carolina and Michigan.

Accordingly, Harris and her surrogates just used a whole news cycle slamming Trump for threatening to “kill” the CHIPS Act.

Arizona in particular is key, where Intel and TSMC are negotiating multi-billion dollar awards for building and expanding several chipmaking plants. Those plans, if they come to fruition, will create thousands of jobs.

Arizona’s Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly, a major backer of the CHIPS Act and frequent Harris campaign surrogate, accused the former president of launching a “direct assault on the Arizona economy.” Kelly later warned on CNN, “if you’re working in the semiconductor industry … you might be out of a job because of Donald Trump.”

This first appeared in Digital Future Daily, POLITICO’s afternoon newsletter about how tech and power are shaping our world. Subscribe here.

Tech observers questioned why Trump would open himself to attack days before the vote. “You make that point in your first speech,” Rob Atkinson, president of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation think tank, told DFD. “From an electoral college perspective, it’s a self-inflicted error. He gets nothing from it and allows Harris to say, ‘I’m the one who’s doing this, and I’m going to protect it.’”

Democratic strategists are pushing Harris to focus more on the economy, and she’s planning to make it an emphasis in the final stretch, including her closing speech tonight in Washington. Matt Corridoni, a DNC spokesperson, told DFD Trump “is threatening to defund and dismantle thousands of manufacturing jobs.”

Plenty of economists and trade analysts have panned Trump’s ever-expanding tariff plans, saying they would inflate prices for consumers. Willy Shih, a Harvard University economist and advisor on the CHIPS Act speaking in his personal capacity, told DFD tariffs on chips would lead to retaliation from other countries and create uncertainty in the U.S. tech market. “Businesses depend on predictability. They depend on if you say you’re going to do something, or you pass a law that’s going to do something, to not have the next administration come rescind it right away,” Shih said.

Regardless of how the policy plays out, Harris may already have missed the opportunity to sell voters on a big, expensive achievement of the Biden-Harris administration.

“I’m skeptical that Harris will get many undecided votes by touting the CHIPS Act. Projects are beset with delays, and so far not many new workers have been hired,” said Gary Hufbauer, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics and former top Treasury official.

Harris’ visit to Michigan was her first to a manufacturing site benefitting from CHIPS funding since she became the nominee. Even the company that Harris visited Monday, Hemlock Semiconductor, got an 11th-hour deal, with the Commerce Department proposing to give it $325 million just last week.

Trump’s stance on CHIPS Act funding could matter for more than just politics.

No money from the law’s biggest incentive has actually gone out yet, despite the Commerce Department giving preliminary approval to 20 grants and finalizing a deal with one company. (The administration has said it’s working quickly to implement the law while being responsible with taxpayer dollars.)

“If I were them between now and January 20,” Atkinson said, of the administration. “Just get that money out there. Because who knows what Trump could do.”