美国政府要停摆，但作为总统的特朗普，也许等的就是这一天

Core Points - The U.S. government shutdown on October 1 marks the first in nearly seven years, affecting approximately 750,000 federal employees who are forced into unpaid leave [1] - Trump's approach to the shutdown is characterized as a strategic maneuver, using it to target political opponents and consolidate military loyalty [1][3] Group 1: Political Maneuvering - The shutdown is fundamentally a result of a budgetary standoff between the two parties, with Democrats demanding the withdrawal of the National Guard and respect for budget allocation rights [3] - Trump's actions prior to the shutdown, including signing a memorandum against leftist political violence and threatening Democratic donors, illustrate a calculated disruption of the political landscape [3][5] - The timeline of events, including the Fed's debt repayment and subsequent interest rate cut, suggests a deliberate intensification of fiscal pressure by Trump [5] Group 2: Military Control and Strategy - Trump's significant control over the military is evident through his appointment of hawkish figures and the removal of senior military leaders, reinforcing loyalty to the presidency [7][8] - The combination of military funding promises and threats has silenced military leadership during the shutdown, marking a rare occurrence in U.S. military history [8] Group 3: Budgetary Implications - The fragmented U.S. budget system has allowed Trump to exploit weaknesses, forcing Democrats to concede on military and healthcare issues [10] - The shutdown may set a precedent for future political strategies, transforming the perception of government shutdowns from a sign of presidential failure to a potential tool for political leverage [10][12] Group 4: Broader Consequences - The shutdown reflects deeper issues within American democracy, where power struggles overshadow public welfare, potentially leading to long-term damage to institutional trust and governance [12][13] - Trump's actions during the shutdown could pave the way for a more dangerous political precedent, where chaos becomes a means to achieve political goals [13]