US 2016 Presidential Candidates

Hillary Clinton: Knows all the nuts and bolts of the government. The best person for continuity, not for any significant change.  She stood firm with a person who cheated on her and other women, probably not out of forgiving, but more for preserving her political assets that depend on the cheater.  It would be ironic for her to talk about dignity and women's rights.

Bernie Sanders: Try to address a real and significant issue: the 40-year decline of the middle class and the growing gap between the very rich and everyone else.  His approach: socialist style.  It is possible for his approach to reduce the income gap, but probably not to grow the middle class. American businesses may become less competitive under his approach, and this may result in the shrinkage of the middle class.

Donald Trump: Most likely person to bring significant change to the government.  Probably the best person in dealing with regimes that do not play by rules. Not sure whether he has any principles.  It appears that anything is acceptable as long as a business goal can be achieved.  He referred to the 1989 pro-democracy movement in Beijing as a riot.  I do not remember seeing any rioting before the PLA started the massacre.  On the contrary, I saw a human fence formed by students in front of the PLA guards at Xinhua Gate to avoid any possible physical contact between potentially angry crowds and the soldiers.  Unless peaceful hunger strikes are riots, I do not see how Trump can back his statement with facts.  Actually, the Chinese word for "riot" -暴乱 - is so far from the truth that the regime has stopped using it to refer to peaceful protests after using it initially.   Now I probably understand the primary reason for Trump to use harsh words on China - the regime outsmarts the US government in trade, which is certainly true because the regime does not play by rules. Perhaps everything is business for Trump.  Anything goes if the price is right.  The Chinese regime may shut the mouth of future president Trump by sending a contract to purchase a bunch of Boeing planes. They have been buying the recognition of their legitimacy desperately primarily from African and South American countries (e.g. Maduro of Venezuela, Mugabe of Zimbabwe). It looks like they may have a chance to achieve it in North America.  There is a strong link between human rights and American economic interests.  Highly innovative America wins if human rights, workers' welfare and rules of law are respected by every party in the trade.  Miss those college days in the 80s when the US was the shining city on the hill under President Reagan who did not mince his words on evil regimes, and a beacon inspiring hundreds of millions around the world to fight for the shared value of freedom.