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.

The manufacturing jobs that the U.S. lost in the preceding decades did not move on to China – they no longer exist. There is no way to bring back these jobs as machines can do them better, and cheaper, than any American worker. The solution to our present dilemma certainly isn’t a manufacturing revival, but it may be a 20-hour workweek.

The campaign roils with entertaining tactics and distractions as voters shrug off elite candidates and embrace mavericks. There is no perfect presidential candidate or perfect president, and after weighing their advantages and disadvantages, the less disadvantaged should be chosen.

Mainland buzz about the Republican frontrunner is less about Trump than it is a reaction to US attitudes about China, and his “fans” are really sending a coded message.

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 rise of “angry Republicans” crystallizes the polarization of rich and poor in the United States over the past few decades, and ironically they have found a champion in a famous billionaire. Other symptoms, such as systemic political decay and dysfunctional government, also drive populist sentiments that are rising fast in American politics among both liberals and conservatives.

Trump’s comments about disadvantageous global trade deals with China could be considered stylistic simplifications—unlikely to be translated into policies—of the position that the U.S. government has sacrificed the interests of the majority, in order to maintain what can only be described as a global “empire.” A Trump presidency could actually usher in more peaceful China-U.S. relations.

Trump’s comments about disadvantageous global trade deals with China could be considered stylistic simplifications—unlikely to be translated into policies—of the position that the U.S. government has sacrificed the interests of the majority, in order to maintain what can only be described as a global “empire.” A Trump presidency could actually usher in more peaceful China-U.S. relations.