In Europe, Asia, and South America, preferences for either Clinton or Trump differ based on the candidates’ views on trade, the economy, and foreign policy doctrine. Though Clinton is the preferred candidate in most areas, whoever the next U.S. president is will face significant challenges on several continents.

Hillary Clinton is expected to be more belligerent than Obama in dealing with Beijing. But the U.S. cannot expect confrontational or coercive tactics to succeed. Doing so could damage further cooperation between the two countries and drive Beijing closer to North Korea. Instead, the U.S. should aim to take a more diplomatic approach to their relationship with Beijing.

The critical U.S. presidential election between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton not only matters for China-U.S. relations, but also reflects how a new and potent form of isolationism is on the rise globally. Deep economic and cultural fissures are developing between those who can take advantage of globalization and those who lack the resources and skills to do so.

Rather than focusing on the nominees’ rhetoric, Professor Timothy Webster explores their actions vis-à-vis China and the international economy during their respective careers. Whoever wins in November, the next administration will likely enact a China policy stressing economic engagement, person-to-person interaction, and cooperation on a wide range of global challenges — despite fundamental disagreements with China about a number of issues.

The rise in populism and nationalism could well undermine Clinton's dream to be America’s first woman president, but in this surprising year those forces provide no guarantees for Trump, either.

Chinese media is already weighing in on the implications of a race between Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Donald Trump. Clinton presents to Chinese politicians an undeniably superior alternative to Trump’s loose cannon: a known entity with predictable behavior who will maintain the current tenor of bilateral diplomatic dialogue.

In the past, Clinton has openly rebuffed the notion of a “China threat” and the “zero-sum game theory” regarding China-US relations, saying instead that the two countries should jointly rise up against challenges as two people in the same boat. More recently she has been more critical of China, but it is in China’s best interest to continue to reach out in a positive way to any US leader.

The U.S. vice president’s formal announcement that he will not run, and a lack of any other mainstream challenge, means the former secretary of state’s path to the presidency has suddenly been made smoother.

Hilary Clinton’s established perspective on U.S.-China relations as the face of the “Pivot to Asia,” does not bod well for the bilateral relationship, writes Ben Reynolds. The existing Clinton ties with the Center for New America Security (CNAS), a hawkish, pro-interventionist think tank, further the claim that U.S. militaristic hegemony will continue to be the foreign policy toward China.

Clinton’s ongoing visit to the Asia-Pacific brings nothing new. It’s just another round of furtherance of the so-called “Asia pivot” strategy, which, along with smart power, will be the two legacies left by this most diligent Secretary of Sate in the US history, since she will quit her job whether Obama is president or not the next year.