The selection of the new Fed chair has become a battleground of policy and power. Trump prefers to appoint someone with similar values, but this stance faces stiff resistance in Congress. Senator Thillis explicitly stated that he would not approve any nominations until certain investigations are completed, and he might even collaborate with Democrats to block the process. Meanwhile, the market and academia are questioning: will the independence of the central bank be compromised by the nominee?

The current lineup of candidates continues to reshuffle in this game. The initially favored Haskett, due to his close ties with Trump, has found himself in an awkward position, with his comments defending certain policies criticized by academia; Wosh, though recognized in political circles, remains controversial; compared to others, Waller, with his moderate distance from Trump, has gained more understanding in Congress, and his "neutrality" has become a unique advantage; Reed, while having interview opportunities, has a weaker presence.

Time has become another variable. Powell’s current term as chair will end in May, while his board tenure extends until 2028. Trump hopes he will fully leave, but the progress of investigations could influence Powell’s decision—only if a certain candidate takes office might he voluntarily resign. Kudlow’s statement is very straightforward: if investigations are not withdrawn, the nomination process will be difficult to advance smoothly.

This tug-of-war over the independence of the central bank has already affected global financial markets. Confidence in the dollar, the direction of Fed policies, and sentiment in the crypto market—these factors are intertwined. Will Waller ultimately become Trump’s compromise choice? How will Powell’s decision to stay or leave reshape the Fed’s policy tone? These uncertainties will continue to influence market expectations.