Some consumers have been weighed down by a “vibecession” for a while now — and those feelings might get worse, experts say.

A “vibecession” is the disconnect between consumer sentiment and economic data, said Kyla Scanlon, who coined the term in 2022. Scanlon is the author of “In This Economy? How Money and Markets Really Work.”

“It’s this idea that economic data is telling us one story and consumer sentiment is telling us another,” she tells CNBC.

Nearly half, 45%, of voters say they are financially worse off now than they were four years ago, and the highest rate since 2008, according to NBC Exit Poll data.

Yet economic metrics show the economy is booming. Inflation, while it’s still a burden for consumers, has slowed down significantly. While some warning signs have popped up in the job market, to some degree conditions are normalizing from the red-hot market of a few years ago.

“The economy is so extraordinarily personal, and people really hate inflation,” said Scanlon. “That’s what we saw in this presidential election.”

More from Personal Finance:
Presidential election prompts some Americans to ‘doom spend’
The next president could face a tax battle in 2025 — what it means for investors
Why voters ages 50 and up may decide the 2024 presidential election

Even if the economy stays on track, Americans will likely continue to feel a “vibecession,” experts say.

The vibes might actually get worse, depending on what policies President-elect Donald Trump enacts, said Jacob Channel, senior economist at LendingTree. High-rate tariffs on imported goods will likely wipe out progress made to reduce inflation.

“If Donald Trump as president enacts the economic policies that he proposed as a candidate, we’re not only going to have a vibecession, we’re going to have a real recession,” Channel said.

Inflation, or the rate at which prices for goods and service increase over time, has come down — which means prices are still rising, but at a slower pace. Prices overall remain high, said Brett House, economics professor at Columbia Business School.

“Americans’ lingering frustration with the economy and their personal circumstances appears rooted in the persistently high prices that remain post-pandemic,” he said. “This makes for daily sticker shocks when buying groceries, getting a burger, paying rent and filling up the car.”

The consumer price index, a gauge measuring the costs of goods and services in the U.S., grew to a seasonally adjusted 0.2% in September, putting the annual inflation rate at 2.4%, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

While the Federal Reserve is still concerned about inflation, “we’re seeing these signs of weakness in the labor market,” Scanlon said.

The quits rate was 3.1 million in September, a 1.9% decrease from a month before, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported. There’s also a slowdown in hiring. The economy only added 12,000 jobs in October, the BLS reported. That’s less than the forecast of 100,000 increase and lower than the 223,000 jobs added in September.

To be sure, “a lot of this is just simply normalization after the distortions that occurred after the COVID shutdowns,” said Mark Hamrick, senior economic analyst.

Additionally, the unemployment rate continues to hold steady at 4.1% and wage growth is up 4% from a year prior. “This suggests that the labor market remains firm despite signs of weakening,” J.P. Morgan noted.

The stock market rallied after the presidential election results. Just before close on Wednesday, the Dow Jones Industrial Average had surged more than 1,500 points to a record high. The S&P 500 also popped more than 2%, while the tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite jumped 2.9% — both to record highs.

U.S. bond yields also rose. The 10-year Treasury yield jumped 15 basis points on Wednesday closing to trade at 4.43%, hitting its highest level since July, as investors bet a Trump presidency would increase economic growth, along with fiscal spending.

The yield on the 2-year Treasury was up by 0.073 basis points to 4.276%, reaching its highest level since July 31.

That could be a warning sign, Scanlon said: “I don’t think the inflation story is over yet. That’s what the bond market is telling us.”

Depending on what policies are enacted under Trump’s second term, the inflation problem might get worse, experts say.

“When we see treasury yields rising [and] the possibility of another $7 [trillion] to $10 trillion added to federal debt, those are not anti-inflationary moves, nor are mass deportations,” Hamrick said.

Trump has proposed a 10% to 20% tariff on all imports across the board, as well as a rate between 60% and 100% for goods from China. Such moves “will be inflationary,” Scanlon said. On top of that, his fiscal plan could potentially add $7.75 trillion in spending through fiscal year 2035, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

“Who knows what will actually get passed from this fiscal plan, but massive tax cuts and tariffs … it’s expensive, and the bond market’s telling us that,” she said.

According to the National Bureau of Economic Research, a recession is “a significant decline in economic activity that is spread across the economy and lasts more than a few months.” The last time this occurred was in the onset of the pandemic in 2020.

However, it doesn’t necessarily take for these conditions to take place for consumers to feel negative about the economy. It can be “very difficult to square” what people are feeling in their everyday lives versus national averages and medians, experts say.

“There’s still going to be that continued disconnect between how people feel and what the economy is doing,” Scanlon said.

To that point, “the vibecession will endure,” Channel said.

And if consumers end up having to deal with extra costs associated with tariffs every time they go to the grocery store, “the vibes might actually start to get a whole heck of a lot worse,” Channel added.

President-elect Donald Trump won Tuesday’s presidential election partly by addressing Americans’ economic anxieties over higher prices.

Nearly half of all voters said they were worse off financially than they were four years ago, the highest level in any election since 2008, according to an NBC News exit poll.

But a cornerstone of Trump’s economic policy — sweeping new tariffs on imported goods — would likely exacerbate the very Biden-era inflation Trump lambasted on the campaign trail, according to economists.  

There’s still much uncertainty around how and when such tariffs might be implemented. If they were to take effect, they would likely raise prices for American consumers and disproportionately hurt lower earners, economists said.

The typical U.S. household would pay several thousand more dollars each year on clothing, furniture, appliances and other goods, estimates suggest.

“It’s bad for consumers,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s. “It’s a tax on consumers in the form of higher prices for imported goods.”

“It’s inflationary,” he added.

He and other economists predict the proposed tariffs would also lead to job loss and slower economic growth, on a net basis.

The Trump campaign didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment from CNBC on the impact of tariffs or their scope.

Tariffs have been around for centuries. However, their importance as a source of government revenue has declined, especially among wealthy nations, according to Monica Morlacco, an international trade expert and assistant professor of economics at the University of Southern California.

Now, the U.S. largely uses tariffs as a protectionist policy to shield certain industries from foreign competition, according to the Brookings Institution, a think tank.

More from Personal Finance:
Presidential election prompts Americans to ‘doom spend’
Next U.S. president could face a tax battle in 2025
How the ‘vibecession’ influences investors

Trump imposed some tariffs in his first term — on washing machines, solar panels, steel, aluminum and a range of Chinese goods, for example. The Biden administration kept many of those intact.

However, Trump’s proposals from the campaign trail are much broader, economists said.

He has floated a 10% or 20% universal tariff on all imports and a tariff of at least 60% on Chinese goods, for example. Last month, the president-elect suggested vehicles from Mexico have a tariff of 200% or more, and in September threatened to impose a similar amount on John Deere if the company were to shift some production from the U.S. to Mexico.

“To me, the most beautiful word in the dictionary is ‘tariff,'” Trump said at the Chicago Economic Club in October. “It’s my favorite word. It needs a public relations firm.”

A 20% worldwide tariff and a 60% levy on Chinese goods would raise costs by $3,000 in 2025 for the average U.S. household, according to an October analysis by the Tax Policy Center. Trump’s plan would reduce average after-tax incomes by almost 3%, according to the tax think tank.

Additionally, a 200% Mexico-vehicle tariff would increase household costs by an average $600, TPC said.

American consumers would lose $46 billion to $78 billion a year in spending power on apparel, toys, furniture, household appliances, footwear and travel goods, according to a National Retail Federation analysis published Monday.

“I feel pretty confident saying [tariffs] are a price-raising policy,” said Mike Pugliese, senior economist at Wells Fargo Economics. “The question is just the magnitude.”

The reason for these higher costs: Tariffs are paid by U.S. companies that import goods. The “vast majority” of that additional cost is passed on to American consumers, while only some of it is paid for by U.S. distributors and retailers or by foreign producers, said Zandi of Moody’s.

Philip Daniele, president and CEO of AutoZone, alluded to this dynamic in a recent earnings call.

“If we get tariffs, we will pass those tariff costs back to the consumer,” Daniele said in September.

The U.S. imported about $3.2 trillion of goods in 2022, for example, said Olivia Cross, a North America economist at Capital Economics. A back-of-the-envelope calculation suggests a 10% across-the-board tariff would be roughly equivalent to a $320 billion tax on consumers, Cross said.

Trump has proposed various tax breaks on the campaign trail. Additionally, tax cuts enacted by Trump in 2017 are due to expire next year, and tariff revenue may potentially be used to extend them, should Congress pass such legislation, economists said.

However, the typical U.S. household would still lose $2,600 a year from Trump’s tariff plan, even after accounting for an extension of the 2017 tax cuts, according to an analysis by the Peterson Institute for International Economics.

The U.S. economy would also likely suffer due to other tariff “cross currents,” Zandi said.

While U.S. companies that financially benefit from protectionist tariff policies may add jobs, the total economy would likely shed jobs on a net basis, Zandi said.

This is because countries on which the U.S. imposes tariffs would likely retaliate with their own tariffs on U.S. exports, hurting the bottom lines of domestic businesses that export goods, for example, Zandi said.

Higher prices for imported goods would likely also lead to lower consumer demand, weighing on business profits and perhaps leading to layoffs, he said.

In June, the Tax Foundation estimated Trump’s tariff plan would shrink U.S. employment by 684,000 full-time jobs and reduce its gross domestic product, a measure of economic output, by at least 0.8%.

Capital Economics expects the Trump administration would introduce tariffs — and a curb on immigration — in the second quarter of next year, the group said in a note Tuesday night. Together, those policies would cut Gross Domestic Product growth by about 1% from the second half of 2025 through the first half of 2026 and add 1 percentage point to inflation, it said.

Former President Donald Trump has defeated Vice President Kamala Harris to win the White House, which could broadly impact taxpayers — but the details remain unclear, according to policy experts.

Enacted by Trump in 2017, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, or TCJA, will be a key priority for the president-elect in 2025. The law brought sweeping changes, including lower tax brackets, higher standard deductions, a more generous child tax credit and bigger estate and gift tax exemption, among other provisions.

Those individual tax breaks will sunset after 2025 without action from Congress, which could trigger higher taxes for more than 60% of taxpayers, according to the Tax Foundation. However, Trump wants to fully extend expiring TCJA provisions.

Plus, most of Trump’s tax policy requires Congressional approval, which could be challenging, depending on control of the Senate and House of Representatives and support within the Republican party.

While Republicans secured a Senate majority, control of the House remains uncertain. If Democrats flip the House, we could see “more gridlock” in Congress, which could stall Trump’s agenda, Gleckman explained.

Tax negotiations could also be tough amid growing concerns about the federal budget deficit, according to Erica York, senior economist and research manager with the Tax Foundation’s Center for Federal Tax Policy. 

“The budget math is a lot harder this time around than it was back in 2017,” with higher interest rates and a bigger baseline budget deficit, she said. The deficit topped $1.8 trillion in fiscal 2024. 

Fully extending TCJA provisions could decrease federal revenue by $3.5 trillion to $4 trillion over the next decade, depending on the scoring model, according to the Tax Foundation.