When the hand of power reaches for the Central Bank's printing machine: a betting game without winners officially begins.

Trump's statement "The candidate for the Federal Reserve Chairman has been decided" was like a bomb, splitting the global market into two camps: one side cheers that this is the dawn of the end of Powell's "rate hike slaughter", while the other side roars that this is a blatant trampling of Central Bank independence — but no matter who is right or wrong, the ones who always pay the bill are us investors.

How absurd is the current situation? The Bank of Japan is tightening the "liquidity noose" around global arbitrage funds with interest rate hikes, while in the U.S., the highest authority is directly intervening in central bank personnel matters. If Trump appoints a "rate cut maniac," the U.S. stock market might soar on the fantasy of easing in the short term, but once the foundation of U.S. dollar credit loosens, this revelry will ultimately turn into a "dance on the Titanic"; if the chosen candidate suddenly adopts a hawkish stance, the already precarious risk assets will fall directly into the dual meat grinder of "liquidity + tightening."

Survival Guide for a Plunge: Going Against the Trend is the Right Way

Unpopular strategies are often the most effective, especially in this kind of terrible weather:

**First move, don't rush to bottom fish, first bet on "expectation misalignment"**: As soon as Trump's candidate is exposed in advance, immediately reverse the market consensus—assets that everyone is frantically buying for hedging (gold, US bonds) may plummet due to a sudden policy shift, while those trampled high-volatility tech stocks and crypto assets might make a comeback due to "rate cuts for survival."

**Second strategy, use chaos to hedge against chaos**: Stop trying to guess the direction of price movements, just go straight to "volatility tools" - the more torn apart the market is, the crazier the volatility, and the returns from these products are much more stable, a thousand times safer than betting on a single asset.

**The third move, discard the rhetoric of "long-termism"**: In a sudden market surge, any "value investment" is a trap. The holding period is compressed to less than 24 hours, and the profit comes from the quick money of policy sentiment, not from the slow money of the assets themselves.

This game of power and capital tearing each other apart has never had a standard answer— the only way to survive is not to expect to predict consensus, but to directly embrace the tearing itself.