Clinton, the Democratic nominee, would launch her presidency with a focus on jobs and immigration. She says she would push Congress to approve a $275 billion infrastructure plan, look to bolster clean-energy manufacturing and ramp up trade enforcement.
She has repeatedly promised to immediately pursue comprehensive immigration reform, including a path to citizenship for immigrants who currently reside in the country illegally.
Trump would start by reversing a bundle of executive orders issued by President Obama, including ones that have shielded some unauthorized immigrants from deportation. He would push a variety of measures through Congress, including his plan to cut taxes and also his plan to spur up to $1 trillion in infrastructure spending.
Perhaps most aggressively, he would change the United States' long-standing stance toward international trade, formally signaling his desire to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement with Canada and Mexico, labeling China a currency manipulator and preparing to levy tariffs on China, Mexico and other American trading partners.
In an election where other issues have often crowded out policy, it's worth revisiting the candidates' stances on these and other issues, before you cast your vote.
On immigration, the candidates have taken diametrically opposed stances.
Trump announced his campaign for the presidency last year by casting Mexican immigrants as criminals. "They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime," Trump said at the time. "They're rapists, and some, I assume, are good people."
He has said that all immigrants in the country illegally must be deported — an estimated 10.9 million people. In a speech on immigration in September, he suggested that his first priority would be deporting undocumented immigrants who arrested for other crimes. He has spoken favorably of President Obama's deportation policies. The administration has removed at least 2.4 million immigrants since Obama took office.
Trump has also planned to build a wall along the Mexican border, and in that speech he made clear that he was not speaking metaphorically. "On day one, we will begin working on an impenetrable, physical, tall, powerful, beautiful southern border wall," he said, adding that the wall would be supplemented by towers, sensors and additional manpower.
Trump has also called for barring any Muslim who is not a U.S. citizen from entering the United States. Additionally, he called for a "vetting procedure" for potential immigrants to ensure that they share American values in his speech in September.
Clinton, in stark contrast, advocates for allowing those in the country illegally to eventually become citizens.
"I don't want to rip families apart. I don't want to be sending parents away from children," Clinton said in her final debate with Trump. "Bringing undocumented immigrants out from the shadows — putting them into the formal economy — will be good, because then employers can't exploit them and undercut Americans' wages."
She has also called for expanding Obama's executive actions, which granted a temporary reprieve from deportation to children brought here illegally as children and to undocumented immigrants who are the parents of U.S. citizens. The courts, however, have stymied Obama's most recent executive action on immigration, so it is unclear whether Clinton would be able to pursue this policy if elected.
Clinton and Trump also take opposite approaches to taxes. Trump would substantially reduce taxes, mostly for wealthy Americans. Clinton, by contrast, would modestly increase taxes on corporations and the rich.
Trump would reduce marginal rates on ordinary income — a change that would primarily benefit affluent families, who would pay a maximum marginal rate of just 33 percent, compared to 39.6 percent in the current system. Trump would also eliminate the estate tax, which is currently paid by the wealthiest families, and instead tax any gains on investments when the investor dies.
According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, 51 percent of the savings from Trump's tax relief would eventually go to the richest 1 percent of American households. His plan would reduce taxes for the typical household in this group by $317,000 a year.
Clinton, for her part, would increase taxes on the rich, imposing a new 4 percent surcharge on annual incomes above $5 million and a minimum tax of 30 percent on incomes above $2 million. She would expand the estate tax.
Clinton would increase taxes on certain kinds of investments, and she would modestly increase taxes for corporations while offering new breaks to small businesses.
On the whole, taxes for most ordinarily families would change little if at all under Clinton's plan. She would increase taxes for the average family in the richest 1 percent of households by about $118,000 a year, according to the Tax Policy Center.
Trump has argued that his proposals would be a major stimulus for the U.S. economy. The center, however, warns that if Trump simply funded the government's operations by borrowing more money instead of through collecting taxes, the increase in the national debt could have negative economic consequences in the long term.
The candidates' fiscal policies could also mean a big difference in the finances of families with children.
Clinton has made helping families financially an important theme of her campaign, and she recently called for expanding the tax credit for children. Under her proposal, the tax credit would be doubled to a maximum of $2,000 for children under 5 years of age, and poor families would be able to claim a larger share of the credit despite their limited earnings.
The former secretary of state has also called for a public paid-leave program. Every worker would be able to take 12 weeks of paid family leave and 12 weeks of paid medical leave under her plan. During that time, workers would be compensated by the government at two thirds of their wages.
Clinton has also said she plans on limiting child-care expenses to 10 percent of any family's income, though she has not put forward a specific proposal for doing so.
Trump is the first Republican presidential candidate to put forward proposals on child care. His plans would primarily benefit more affluent families rather than those with less income.
He would allow families to save for child care in special accounts that would be sheltered from taxes. He would also allow biological mothers to apply for unemployment insurance in order to receive up to six weeks of maternity leave.
Trump plans to allow families to deduct their child-care expenses from their taxes. This proposal would benefit families that itemize their deductions, who tend to be richer, federal data show.
At the same time, Trump would also eliminate personal exemptions — a provision of the tax code that allows households to pay less based on the number of people in the family — and the head-of-household status, which gives single parents a break on their taxes. The result is that families with multiple children or single parents would not benefit as much from Trump's other proposals, and some would even wind up paying more.
4) Health care
Trump has said he will repeal the Affordable Care Act, Obama's health-care reform. Yet the New York businessman has said little about the system he envisions putting in its place. Nonpartisan analysts project that as many as 25 million people could lose health insurance if the law is repealed.
Clinton, on the other hand, would expand the reform, also known as Obamacare, by increasing the financial help people can receive from the government to buy health insurance.
She would also provide a new tax credit that households could use to cover excessive out-of-pocket costs. This credit would be worth about $500 for families in the middle class, depending on their expenses, and somewhat less for richer and poorer families.
One area of partial agreement between the two candidates concerns international trade. Both Clinton and Trump oppose the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the Obama administration's controversial trade deal.
Trump would go further, however. He has also pledged to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement, and he has threatened to impose punitive tariffs on goods from China and Mexico. The additional taxes would increase costs for U.S. consumers, but Trump argues that doing so would increase wages and create more opportunities for workers in domestic manufacturing.
Most economists are apprehensive about the possibility that Trump could win election and impose tariffs on imports. Mark Zandi, who is the chief economist at the private research firm Moody's Analytics and who is supporting Clinton, projects that Trump's economic policies would create an extended recession, increasing the rate of unemployment to 7.4 percent.
6) The environment
Donald Trump has often described global warming as a "hoax." If elected, he could make immediate changes to U.S. environmental policy.
Trump has said he would withdraw from the Paris Agreement, the international accord on national responsibilities to reduce carbon-dioxide emissions. He has also written that he would review the Environmental Protection Agency's finding that carbon dioxide is a dangerous pollutant, and he could delay or potentially abandon the rules the Obama administration is putting into effect to control greenhouse gases.
Additionally, Trump would open federal lands to fossil-fuel extraction, according to a campaign document.
Clinton would largely continue Obama's policies with regard to energy. She has also called for eliminating subsidies for the fossil fuel industry and for expanding tax credits to encourage new development in places where coal mines have closed or laid off workers.
7) Foreign policy
Trump advocates a broad retrenchment in U.S. involvement in foreign affairs. He would ask allied countries to contribute more to ensuring global security. He argues that the members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization pay too little toward ensuring their common defense and has called for a rapprochement with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
He has called for an aggressive military campaign against the Islamic State and has proposed deploying as many as 30,000 U.S. ground troops in Iraq and Syria.
Clinton has rejected the idea of once again committing large numbers of American ground troops to the region, but she has also called for enforcing a no-fly zone in Syria.
Clinton supports the nuclear accord with Iran, which her Republican rival has denounced.