The day of the U.S. Presidential Elections crucial date is here, it is crucial for the global and local business worlds. Of course, the Americans are waiting for it most of all but it is an indicative signal for others too. Which direction does the U.S. policy prefer and how will the problems of global economy and security develop?
A lot in economic issues may change, primarily in the relations between global areas of high industry and trade. However, it is possible that even the official partners of the United States are worried about the issue of defense and security.
Over the past three or about four years hardly anyone doubted that the Democratic Party will be able to retain power. Too much in the policy of Barack Obama attracted the Americans, primarily the notion of social security and non-interference in hotspots in different regions.
In addition, the issues relating to increase of taxes was considered sparingly, which was not prevalent, as well as spending on defense and security was reduced. The bid was on refraining from jeopardizing the economic order, and the United States did not limit the freedom of entrepreneurship.
Medicare had a big role in B. Obama’s policy. Unfortunately. At the same time, B. Obama’s foreign policy envisaged significant cut on the U.S. interference in international developments, and military intervention was limited altogether.
This was the counter-policy with regard to G. Bush’s practice, and possibly also the team of neo-conservatives. Nothing was left from neo-conservatives, the U.S. political and social circles welcomed such policy.
For example, I have had chances to talk to experts in leading think tanks of Washington and New York who are skeptical and even aggressive towards the development of NATO and especially enlargement and Euro-Atlantic partnership. However, these and other experts and politicians have recently seemed lost when threats occurred in Western Europe and the Near East.
The limitation in foreign policy have led B. Obama’s policy to bankruptcy and the reminder of what had been lost in international politics when the United States lost many partners in a real format. This problem has led to significant changes in foreign policy and significant changes in several regions, the threat of an opponent.
In fact, recently President Obama has stopped upholding his previous principles. America is more active but time and chances to gain new partners has been lost. In fact, this policy of limitation of foreign policy has led to Russia to take aggressive actions and more active behavior by enemies of America.
One needs to understand whether this limitation has led to emergence of such a phenomenon as the Islamic State. Most importantly, doubts have occurred in the Democratic Party which has led to nomination of such an ambitious politician as Hillary Clinton for the post of president.
The fact that a lot of Republicans support H. Clinton is evidence to two components: leaving aside the HR interests, the Republicans realized that in “madam’s” policy there is quite a lot of what they had been teaching so far. In other words, the Democratic Party has lost trust, electorate and supporters among many politicians and business people who are surprised that America may hide its head in the sand when so many conflicts and blunt aggression is going on.
Hillary Clinton had to overcome this lack of confidence and collect these lost votes which are not the working class and farmers but definite circles in the middle class. Besides, so far nobody has spoken about how Hillary Clinton is treated in Pentagon and by veterans and those people who have had any relation to the armed forces. However, these are reputable and influential people locally, especially in the provinces.
The fact that Barack Obama and his wife appeared on the pre-election arena is evidence that the Democratic Party is worried and understands the reasons why H. Clinton does not have a clear advantage. The American voters are dissatisfied with a lot, such as the fact that the Democratic candidate is a lady, and that she (pardon me) is not very young/ Besides, the attitude to the ex-president is not a factor of success either because many continue to dislike B. Clinton, for example, for his social policy.
It should be noted that the split and loss of the Republican Party has definitely pleased the American voters. The fact that the Republican Party has been abandoned by many famous politicians and man people in the middle class are rejoicing this who see this as cleansing in this party.
This circumstance has, to some extent, led to sympathies in “independent” Donald Trump which acts as “independent” but has won over quite a lot of noted Republicans. D. Trump’s team is as simple as his program, which does not exist, in fact.
His gestures towards Russia have apparently angered many people, therefore, in reality, D. Trump has nothing to do with Russian adventures. In conclusion to this propaganda D. Trump and his “vice-president” have attacked Russia though nothing special takes place at the moment. Most probably, this pseudo-pro-Russian stance has not brought anything to him in terms of rating.
Apparently, it should be noted that if there is a miracle, and D. Trump becomes president, he will have to form a team rapidly, i.e. administration of regionalists. At any rate, this administration will deal with foreign policy though some precious time has been wasted.
Here is the bid in case D. Trump wins. Most probably, the majority of politicians and experts dealing with the Republican Party, currently listing themselves in H. Clinton’s team and her supporters will prefer managerial positions in D. Trump’s administration.
It should be noted that some people from H. Clinton’s team have promised something effective disguised as a program but we see that nothing special has taken place. Most probably, her team is at a loss.
Nevertheless, she is a strong woman and has confidently carried on her behavior for several months. It is clear that the reconciler with Russia expecting a certain phenomenon had to understand that these are wrong hopes.