Trump recently sent a strong signal regarding the Fed Chair nomination: anyone who doesn't cut rates according to his wishes shouldn't expect to sit in that chair. Behind this statement lies a struggle for power and policy.

His core demand is straightforward— the new Fed Chair must decisively cut rates when he deems appropriate. Trump is confused and even angry about the current market phenomena: why do stock prices fall when good news is announced? In his view, positive economic data should boost stock prices, not trigger fears of rate hikes.

Ironically, right after Trump made this statement, the market responded loudly. Data released on Tuesday showed that the third quarter GDP growth rate reached 4.3% annualized, undoubtedly good news. What was the result? The S&P 500 not only didn't fall but rose for four consecutive days, hitting a new all-time high. Reality slapped him in the face.

This "good news turning into bad news" phenomenon has actually existed in financial markets for decades. Professionals generally see it as a rational market reaction—strong economic data often signals higher inflation and the possibility of rate hikes. But Trump clearly doesn't accept this logic; he is determined to redefine the rules of the game using political influence.

According to the latest news, Trump has narrowed the pool of Fed Chair candidates to 3-4 people, and is likely to announce the final nomination in the coming weeks. His urgency to push for rate cuts is not complicated— to ease voters' anxiety over rising living costs. He has repeatedly publicly stated that he hopes interest rates can be lowered to around 1%.

This time, Trump directly linked his rate cut demand to the Fed Chair candidate selection, effectively conducting a "loyalty test" for the candidates. According to his logic, aligning with his policy stance can secure the nomination; otherwise, they are out. This unconventional exercise of power vividly demonstrates how political realism can profoundly influence financial decision-making.