On Tuesday during the elections in the United States, Eye Radio asked its Facebook followers to weigh in on whose Presidency between that of Hillary Clinton and of Donald Trump, would have a better working relations or policy for South Sudan.

The post, which reached over 4,000 views, received about a hundred comments.

Out of 100 respondents on Eye Radio Facebook page, 13 followers preferred an administration led by Hillary Clinton to that of Donald Trump.

56 of our Facebook followers say a Donald Trump administration would be good for South Sudan.

6 commentators for Trump generally favored an administration of the Republicans rather than that of the Democratic Party.

Some of the comments believe an administration dominated by the Republican would have a favorable policy towards South Sudan, citing the role the Republicans played in pushing for the signing of the CPA in 2005, under the administration of President George W. Bush.

However, analysts believe a succession of sustained policy by Democratic and Republican administration contributed to the signing of the CPA and the independence of South Sudan.

Our Eye Radio Facebook page opinion polls suggest that 5 views were neither in favor of Hillary or Trump.

Their comments general viewed an administration of any of the candidate may have a lesser impact on the challenges facing South Sudan currently.

However, for the majority respondents who believe in better relations between South Sudan and the United States under Trump or Republican administration, they shared past history with the Republican Party, and the laid back role played personally by President Obama in dealing with South Sudan.

Some of their views include this one from a Trump support, Wol Kang, who says Republicans may have a favorable policy compared to Hillary’s administration which would have followed the foot print of Obama.

“In my opinion, Donald Trump is a radical and would not favor any ruling class in any country. It would hard for any government to work with his administration but he would exert pressure for better governance,” Dictoor Alier Peter commented.

However, one of those who supported Hillary Clinton, Thomas Leime, wrote that; “Trump is too controversial in politics and some of his manifestations demonstrate his naivety in managing world affairs. Therefore, l personally put it on Hillary.”

Another supporter for Hillary, Thomas Andu said: “Trump knows nothing about Sudan and South Sudan but Clinton visited South Sudan while she was Secretary of State, and this he hoped would have given an opportunity to do more for South Sudan.”

But how is the US policy determined against a country –like South Sudan. We will get to know this in the near future.

But for now, the U.S. Constitution gives much of the foreign policy decision-making to the presidency, but the Senate has a role in ratifying treaties, and the Supreme Court interprets treaties when cases are presented to it.

Foreign policy determines how America conducts relations with other countries. It is designed to further certain goals.

It seeks to assure America’s security and defense. It seeks the power to protect and project America’s national interests around the world.

American National interest shapes foreign policy and covers a wide range of political, economic, military, ideological, and humanitarian concerns.

And America’s foreign policy has changed over time reflecting the change in its national interest