The Long-Term Implications of Anti-Trump Demonstrations in the US

[In-depth Analysis] The wave of anti-Trump demonstrations in the United States: a long-term game that is destined to last

1. Public opinion divided behind nationwide protests

In May 2023, nationwide demonstrations involving half a million participants broke out in the United States. From New York on the East Coast to Los Angeles on the West Coast, protesters held up signs that said “Stop the trade war” and demanded that the Trump administration adjust its current policies. This movement not only reflects the deep-seated contradictions in American society, but also reveals the current tensions in international economic and trade relations.

What is noteworthy is the remarkable diversity of the participating groups. There are traditional manufacturing workers worried about unemployment, technology workers worried about hindering innovation, and ordinary consumers protesting against rising living costs. This cross-class joint protest highlights that policy disputes have touched every level of society.

2. Short-term protests are unlikely to reverse policy

Despite the unprecedented scale of the demonstrations, analysts point out that their direct impact is limited. Historical data shows that more than 80% of large-scale street movements in modern American history have taken 6-18 months to push for substantive policy changes. For the current protests to have a substantial effect, three key conditions must be met:

• Trump’s approval rating falls below the 35% warning line
• There are clear signs of division within the Republican Party
• The prospects for the 2024 midterm elections deteriorate significantly

None of these indicators has reached a critical point yet. The latest polls show that Trump still has 42% approval among his core supporters, and there is no sign of a collective defection among senior Republican figures.

3. Economic laws will be the decisive factor

The real force that could prompt a policy adjustment comes from the laws of the market economy. According to a model by the Peterson Institute for International Economics:

• If the tariff war continues for 12 months, the annual expenditure of an average American household will increase by 850-1,200 US dollars
• The cost of the automotive industry could rise by 8-12%
• Agricultural exports are expected to decrease by 2.3 billion US dollars

When these figures are translated into supermarket price tags, payroll figures and pension account balances, the shift in public opinion will only accelerate. Currently, the US consumer price index (CPI) is up 3.4% year-on-year, which is still a buffer away from the threshold (5%) that would trigger mass protests.

4. The stock market turmoil has released early warning signals

What is worth noting is the reaction of the capital market. After Trump announced the “Economic Autonomy Plan”:

• The Dow Jones index fell 4.2% in two days
• The market value of the technology sector evaporated by 380 billion US dollars
• The yield curve of government bonds inverted

These signals have triggered internal debates within the White House economic advisory team. However, historical experience shows that the shift in government policy usually lags behind the market reaction by 3-6 months. At present, the adjustment of corporate inventory cycle and supply chain will take time, and the real impact of tariff policy will gradually emerge in the coming quarters.

5. Strategic choices in geopolitical games

Even if there is a policy adjustment, analysis shows that there are priorities for possible path choices:

1. Ease the dispute with the EU over auto tariffs
2. Renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement
3. Deal with economic and trade relations in the Asia-Pacific region

This adjustment model of “resolving the easy issues before the difficult ones” means that the Sino-US economic and trade game may enter a stalemate phase. China needs to be prepared in three areas:

1. Establish a diversified market system and increase the proportion of emerging markets to more than 45%
2. Improve the chain of independent technological innovation, and maintain an annual growth rate of 12% in research and development investment in key areas
3. Build a resilient supply chain network and establish strategic reserves of more than 3 months in key industries

6. Opportunities and challenges in a protracted war

Facing a complex situation, Chinese companies can focus on:

• Cross-border e-commerce: expected to maintain an annual growth rate of 25%
• Intelligent manufacturing: the market size of industrial robots is expected to exceed 10 billion U.S. dollars
• Green energy: photovoltaic module exports are expected to grow by 30%

At the same time, there are three major risks that need to be guarded against:

1. Increased volatility in international payment systems
2. Increased divergence in technical standards systems
3. Escalation of regional trade barriers

7. Deep-seated trends revealed by data

By analyzing trade dispute cases from 2000 to 2023, we found that:

• Average duration: 8.7 years
• Policy turning points usually occur when the difference in GDP growth rates exceeds 2%
• For every 1% increase in the speed of industrial upgrading, resilience increases by 0.8

These data confirm the strategic value of technological innovation and market diversification. At present, the automation rate of China’s manufacturing industry has reached 21.5%, an increase of 7.2 percentage points over 2018. This structural progress is reshaping competitive advantages.

8. The logic of the restructuring of the global supply chain

Multinational companies show two coping models:

• Efficiency first: improving supply chain flexibility through digital transformation
• Safety first: establishing regional production networks

Apple’s recent move to expand its production base in Vietnam by 40% and add three new R&D centers in China is a typical example of this “two-track parallel” strategy. This trend requires us to not only consolidate our manufacturing advantages, but also strengthen the construction of an innovation ecosystem.

Conclusion

This global game is essentially a comprehensive contest between development models and governance capabilities. Just as the technological revolution after World War II reshaped the world, the current digital transformation and green energy revolution are creating new historical opportunities. Only by maintaining strategic focus, deepening reform and opening up, and stimulating market vitality can we break new ground in the midst of complex changes. Future competition will test the systematic capabilities of countries in technological innovation, institutional optimization, and talent cultivation. This is both a challenge and a historic opportunity to achieve leapfrog development.