US citizens go to the polls on Tuesday in what may be the most important election since 1945, anywhere in the world. At stake is whether the post-war order, underpinned by a liberal democratic West led by the United States, will continue.
Capital markets are poised for sharp movements, whichever way the election goes. The script is written, and has been clearly transcribed by banks and other analysts. RBC, for example, predicts a 3%-4% rally in the S&P 500 index if Hillary Clinton wins; a 10%-12% fall if Donald Trump does.
The Vix, emerging market equities and bonds, Mexican peso, yen, gold and Swiss and Japanese rates all know what’s expected of them too.
Reality, of course, rarely follows the script. If there is a close or contested result, in particular, there could be chaos. That is quite likely, as Clinton could well win by a narrow margin and Trump and some of his supporters have no respect for the system.
But even once the turmoil of the first few weeks has settled down, the analysts’ tale, in which asset prices settle back to being driven by economic fundamentals, themselves little changed, is likely to prove fanciful.
Commentary in recent days has focused on the checks and balances in the US system. A US president’s hands are tied if Congress is hostile, and in recent years Congress has shown itself implacably partisan.
It is a sad reflection of the state of US governance that this paralysis is now a source of comfort to many — especially in the financial world. “Relax,” they reassure themselves. “The president can’t do much without Congress. The status quo is safe.”
They are half right. The chances of a President Clinton having a working majority in both houses of Congress are virtually nil. Financial interests, like the investors that have told RBC they “are particularly concerned about the prospect of an unchecked, progressive government”, have little to fear. Republican obstructionism will ensure Clinton can do little to tackle the social and economic problems Republican voters are angry about.
Many capital market professionals believe that if Trump wins, Congress would also restrain him. This is much less sure.
Though some senior Republican figures have distanced themselves from Trump, their slowness and reluctance to do so show that they will still stifle their qualms to support their party. Trump is a juggernaut and, strengthened by an election victory, would have little difficulty getting his way.
What that way would be, precisely, is a mystery. But the general direction is clear. Trump is pro-growth, but anti-trade, so would probably cut taxes and binge on deficit spending. He loves picking fights and bullying people, but seems to have a curious respect for other big hitters, such as Russia.
Russia and the other superpower, China, are remarkably relaxed about the prospect of having Trump to deal with. Though the foreign policy of both has crystallised around attempts to extend their power in their immediate vicinity, to the detriment of their neighbours and challenging US authority, they do not seem worried that Trump will "make America great again."
On the contrary, this is their chance. A US president who changes his tune constantly, has little care for human rights and thrives by setting Us against Them is perfect for them.
The task of herding the fractious flock of free countries is hard enough for the most diplomatically gifted of US presidents, and would be far beyond Trump, even if he saw the need to preserve a western alliance.
More likely, a Trump victory today would come to be remembered as the end of the US hegemony that began in 1918. Curiously, the British stint as top dog also lasted about 100 years, from 1815 to 1914.
The shift to a multi-polar world, inevitable in an age when two countries have over 1bn people, would be greatly accelerated. Everyone hopes this can happen without major wars, though it never has before.
But even if territorial conflict, over land and sea, can be avoided, the new world structure would soon be tested in many ways.
One of the first will be action against climate change. As the world’s eyes are trained on Florida and Ohio, nations are meeting in Marrakesh over the next fortnight for COP 22.
The first climate summit since the Paris Agreement came into force has to set the agenda for how it will be implemented, and for the increases in ambition in 2018 that are vital if catastrophic global warming is to be avoided.
The US election is likely to determine whether the country remains a constructive player on the world stage when it comes to the climate, or becomes a renegade.
If Trump wins and decides to row back on even the mild measures President Obama has taken to green up the economy, the world will need new leaders to pick up the torch. Will China, India or the EU be up to the task?
The answer to that question will tell you whether — in the sense of physical as well as human geography — the world we know can persist or not.