By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Despite White House claims of imminent success, President Trump’s “90 deals in 90 days” trade initiative yielded zero results, mirroring a broader pattern of unfulfilled promises. Numerous assertions portraying Trump as a master dealmaker, repeated by administration officials and media personalities, directly contradict his lack of significant legislative achievements. This persistent myth of Trump’s negotiating prowess ignores his consistent failure to broker major deals, even on issues he prioritized. Ultimately, his record reveals a stark disconnect between self-proclaimed abilities and actual outcomes.
Read the original article here
Trump’s self-declared reputation as a world-class dealmaker is a persistent myth, and a rather bizarre one at that. The assertion that he’s skilled at negotiating simply doesn’t hold water, especially when considering his track record. It’s not just a recent phenomenon; evidence suggesting otherwise has been readily available for years, yet the belief persists.
The claim that Trump excels at deal-making is primarily self-proclaimed. He constantly trumpets his supposed prowess in this area, yet any objective examination of his career reveals a pattern of bankruptcies and broken promises. He has never provided concrete examples of successful negotiations to support his self-assessment, and instead resorts to vague boasts. Instead of specifics, his supporters are often left with anger and a change of subject whenever pressed for details.
His infamous book, “The Art of the Deal,” further exemplifies this discrepancy. The book itself, while purportedly outlining his negotiating strategies, was essentially a ghostwritten self-promotion piece that hardly demonstrates any substantive deal-making skills. The title itself feels ironic given his consistent financial failures and propensity for defaulting on debts. The numerous business failures, including the bankruptcies of multiple casinos, speak volumes. He frequently justifies these failures by claiming that refusing to pay debts is a hallmark of shrewd business practices, a rather cynical outlook at best.
The consistency of his failures is remarkable, almost a testament to a lack of skill rather than a demonstration of unconventional brilliance. He’s consistent in one thing: his inability to effectively conclude profitable business dealings. The sheer scale of his power and influence is equally astonishing given his glaring lack of acumen in the very area he claims to dominate.
This delusion of grandeur extends beyond his personal business dealings into the realm of international relations. He continually claimed to be orchestrating major deals with foreign leaders, presenting them as desperate for his participation. However, these claims consistently lacked tangible evidence. The promised breakthroughs never materialized, leaving behind only empty promises and a trail of broken agreements. His negotiating tactics seemed to rely more on bullying and intimidation than on genuine diplomatic skill. This aggressive style, often involving threats and name-calling, is hardly the hallmark of a skilled negotiator.
The persistent belief in his deal-making abilities is largely attributed to the unwavering loyalty of his supporters. These followers seem remarkably adept at accepting his claims at face value, regardless of any contradicting evidence. It speaks to a willingness to ignore facts in favor of unwavering faith in a charismatic leader. This devotion isn’t solely based on economic motivations, as some suggest; it’s rooted in a deeper, shared ideology often characterized by resentment and hostility towards specific groups. The economic arguments seem to be secondary to a shared sense of grievance and a desire for authoritarian leadership.
Another layer to this enduring myth is the perception of wealth equating to success. The widespread belief that financial success inherently translates into competence in all areas is a significant factor. It’s a common misconception that wealth equals skill, and this assumption is deeply ingrained in American society. Critiquing Trump’s lack of negotiation skills, therefore, requires confronting the myth of the meritocratic American dream, where hard work inevitably leads to success.
In reality, his “deals” seem to be characterized by self-serving manipulation and an utter disregard for the well-being of others. His interactions, whether in business or politics, consistently indicate a pattern of prioritizing personal gain over collective benefit. This behavior, far from demonstrating a masterful negotiator, instead reveals a con artist exploiting the vulnerabilities of others.
The enduring myth of Trump’s deal-making skills is more a reflection of the psychology of his supporters and the underlying beliefs about success in American society than it is a testament to his actual abilities. His failure as a businessman and his ineffective diplomatic strategies are clear for all to see, yet the myth persists, highlighting the complexities of belief, political allegiance, and the enduring power of self-promotion. He might be a master of self-promotion, but he certainly isn’t a master dealmaker. The evidence overwhelmingly points to a very different narrative.