In just one week, the relationship between US President Trump and the worlds richest man, Elon Musk, has undergone a stunning reversal from allies in the White House to sworn enemies on social media. The dispute, which began with policy differences, quickly escalated into a public war of words full of personal attacks and business threats within 48 hours, causing market shock.
Musk made a public statement on his X platform, strongly opposing Trumps Big and Beautiful bill, calling it a disgusting, ugly move. He asserted that if the bill passes, it will destroy the United States finances. Trump called the billionaire crazy and threatened to cancel his companys federal contracts. Musk fought back by retiring the vital Dragon spacecraft that supports the International Space Station. Teslas stock price plummeted.
Related reading: Trump and Musk have a century-long quarrel, and the president kills his favorite person first when he comes ashore
From policy cooperation at the beginning, to political alliances, and finally to a complete break, the breakdown of the relationship between Trump and Musk was a multiple conflict between political capital and commercial interests, personal power and public image, green future and traditional conservatism. It was ultimately ignited by a bill, which ran through the collapse of trust, resource games and power struggles, and completely destroyed this short political honeymoon that was once known as the winners alliance.
Although the century-class quarrel between Trump and Musk has entered a full showdown stage, there are still people in Washington and Silicon Valley trying to save this broken political and business alliance. After all, a president with hundreds of millions of votes and a technology giant who controls space, AI and social platforms, their conflict not only tears apart the Republican camp, but also shakes the future direction of capital markets and technology policies. The question is who can mediate between Trumps extreme will and Musks paranoid fanaticism? Who has enough political credit, business wisdom or personal resources to persuade instead of adding fuel to the fire? Now, all eyes are on those who may become peacemakers.
Who can build a bridge between Trump and Musk?
Bill Ackman, the billionaire founder of Pershing Square, was the first to say that Trump and Musk should put the national interest first. He said on X, I support @realDonaldTrump and @elonmusk. They should shake hands and make peace for the benefit of our great country. Together, we will be stronger than fighting alone.
Musk later commented on the post, Youre not wrong. $TSLA rose 3% overnight after Musk responded and said he and Trump should be peaceful and work together.
So far, no more important figures have publicly taken sides or tried to mediate this rare rift, not only because the situation is still fermenting, but also because the high political stakes make most people choose to remain silent.
In contrast, the voices from the business and technology circles are more likely to be seen as expressions of positions rather than declarations of factional war. Silicon Valley investor, entrepreneur and thinker, AngelList co-founder Naval Ravikant directly stated: Elons position is based on principle, and Trumps position is based on reality. The technology industry cannot do without the Republican Party at present, and the Republican Party cannot do without the technology industry in the future. Stop cutting taxes, cut some redundant spending, and pass the bill.
But the real question is - who can build a bridge between Trump and Musk? At this moment when everyone is cautious, every name on the list is meaningful:
1. Kevin McCarthy: Former Speaker of the House of Representatives, has a good relationship with Musk and has supported technology companies in legislation.
2. Peter Thiel: A core figure of Silicon Valley conservatives, he has complex relationships with both Trump and Musk and may exert influence behind the scenes.
3. Lindsey Graham and Marco Rubio: Senior senators. If they come forward to mediate, it may imply unity within the party.
4. Marc Andreessen: Venture capitalist who once supported Trump and Musk and has a significant influence on technology policy.
5. David Sacks: He has a close personal relationship with Musk and is also a centrist donor to the Republican Party. He serves as a technology adviser to the Trump administration, responsible for artificial intelligence and cryptocurrency policies.
These people may have political bargaining chips or close relations with both parties, but they have not yet taken action.
What does the crypto community think of this quarrel of the century?
@defi_Boo
As a monarch, Trump uses language as a power of manipulation and is good at the art of possibility. Going back on ones words is one of the characteristics of using this power. From Machiavellis perspective, honesty never brings any benefits to the monarch. Machiavellis point of view is that one of the most important abilities of a monarch is to always be able to create an illusion that makes people believe in him.
As an entrepreneur, Musk believes that creating a transparent and authentic environment is his organizational mission. He wants to push the entire team to expose themselves to the most authentic problems so that they can solve them in a timely and effective manner.
The behavior patterns and problem-solving talents of these two people are very different. If they can coordinate well, they will be a perfect match. Musk is a great general, like Antony, with first-class ability to solve problems and see the essence of things; Trump is Caesar, who shapes his personal image and uses people who can be used together to quickly rise to power. JD is Octavian who picked up the leak.
@Devon_Eriksen_
These people simply cannot understand each other.
Elon Musk is too blunt. He speaks his mind with little regard for how others will react. He makes a habit of airing disagreements in public rather than resolving them privately, often alienating allies as a result.
Because he is a science and engineering male engineer and he leads a group of science and engineering male engineers, and to lead such a team, you must be 100% real and transparent.
Donald Trump, on the other hand, is too worldly. He says what he thinks, not what he really thinks, but what is best for his agenda. He also alienates allies, but because he demands unconditional support and never reveals his strategic intentions to them.
Because he is a New York real estate developer who wins through negotiations and takes advantage of information asymmetry, this requires him to be 100% calculating and 100% opaque.
Here’s how it went:
Musk has worked very hard, and at great personal risk, to get ahead of the curve in balancing the federal budget. He truly believes that excessive federal spending is an existential threat to the country.
And Trump sees the fiscal savings as a political asset.
Because he lacks leverage in Congress, he has traded this fiscal space for other outcomes that he values more, such as border control, the judicial system and other issues - issues that he also believes are existential threats to the country.
He may indeed have a medium- to long-term plan for balancing the budget, but the frustrating thing is that he won’t share those plans with his team.
In fact, Trump could have coordinated with Musk privately in advance, but he either took it for granted that Musk should be loyal (treating allies as subordinates) or he simply could not convince Musk.
Musk could have chosen to express his dissatisfaction privately, but he was either too angry to communicate at the time, or he tried to communicate but was unable to reach a consensus.
Trump doesnt know how to deal with straight science and engineering men. They want the truth, not to read the air to understand the hidden meaning. They refuse to guess the hidden meaning, they only accept direct and frank communication.
Musk also doesn’t know how to deal with “Machiavellians,” who use language as a tool of power and look down on those who insist on telling the truth, believing it to be naive.
Both are used to being leaders and are used to others adapting to their communication style.
Therefore, they both lack patience and ability to understand each others language system.
But the reality is: an out-of-control federal budget and a massive federal bureaucracy are indeed twin existential threats to the United States and must be addressed as a priority.
Trump’s assessment of “political possibilities” may be reasonable, but Musk’s sense of urgency should not be underestimated.
It is extremely narrow-minded to capitalize on the extraordinary abilities of people on the autism spectrum without any consideration for their special needs.
Of course, the science and engineering guy can be stubborn sometimes, even if he is not the richest and most successful person in the world.
A few more points worth noting:
The Democratic Party has remained completely silent on this. Because strictly speaking, there is no Democratic Party anymore. They have no real intellectuals, only hired mouthpieces who are paid to speak.
The so-called response will only appear after the completely natural, grassroots public relations committee has held a meeting and then a natural grassroots check is written to these natural grassroots opinion leaders.
There is also a possibility that it is the judgment of nothing will happen - after all, Musk often remains silent after he gets angry, while Trump can call you the Anti-Christ today and still work with you tomorrow.
