seen the flood gates of essentially a very few, very wealthy people being able to influence politics in a dramatic way. there s also a foreign policy component here. the rich donors might have foreign policy priorities as it relates to israel or can you imagine around brexit or nato, depending what their particular interests are. you get a u.s. foreign policy where you have to wonder what is actually guiding it. there was a time when we would we had this practice that politics stopped at the water s edge. then we went through a period where it didn t stop at the water s edge anymore. and then people quit saying that all together. now apparently we have to be concerned that one individual in nevada, very potentially no matter what you think about the policy decision, at the end of the day, no matter what that person thinks, they should probably not have that outside influence over the foreign policy of the united states. maya?
to continue to have any leverage without contributing to the rebuilding of that country? it s a very difficult situation to have, especially if you re dealing with civilian contractors and advisers, not to put some skin in the game, in the term, in the way of funneling resources to help rebuild. one of the things we know about president trump is that he s very money price tag conscious. look at what he s done with the u.n. and with nato. one of the first things he s worried about are the other nations putting their money on the table? why do we have to pay so much? let s talk about the prices here. here s what s to look for in just a few weeks, president trump is going to deliver his first state of the union. you don t do this by tweets. usually, a state of the union has a foreign policy component to it. let s see if he boils down these tweets into some kind of policy that could give guidance to the
this conversation in 2017? what should democrats actually want because there are a lot of people who since election day, lot of democrats, people that didn t like donald trump were waiting for his impending failure. as he seems to get closer to bringing that on, there are a lot of people have to think carefully about the fact that we don t really want entire impending failure because if all sorts of people leave the president s side and he gets to surround himself with the steven millers and sebastian gorkas and bannons of the world, the world might be a less safe place. no, i agree with malcolm. i think when it comes to the foreign policy component of folks in the white house, yeah, i think it is important for mcmaster and others to be there, to really protect our country as much as they can. but i think to your question about democrats, i think the majority of americans disagree with everything that donald trump is doing with policy. you ve seen that with the repeal
paying jobs in the united states. if we can tear down these barriers. we re going to need more good paying jobs in the united states. foreign policy component to this and it was something strongly supported by hillary clinton when she was secretary of state. do you hope that a president clinton would follow through on a policy that she was very much part of creating? i think this is a key part of the rebalancing toward asia strategy. it s one of most concrete m manifestations of that policy. our partners want us to be
write the new rules of international trade and commerce. so there s a very strong foreign policy component to this and the pivot to asia was, of course, something strongly supported by hillary clinton when she was secretary of state. do you hope that a president clinton would follow through on a policy that she was very much part of creating? well, i think this is a key part of the rebalancing towards asia strategy. it s one of the most concrete manifestations of that policy. and it underscores that the united states is a pacific power, that we re going to be involved in the region and that our partners in the region weech want us to be emembedded with them, economically and strat teejically. the logic of that will continue to hold going forward. could china see this as a kind of containment strategy the united states is ganging up with all its allies and trying in some way to shut china out? tpp s not directed against any country including china.