Donald Trump once promised he’d achieve more in his first 100 days than any president in history. CMOs know that feeling: new job, fresh mandate, pressure dialled up to max. You’ve got three months – maybe – to earn the confidence of your board, your team, and your market. You need clarity, agility, empathy. You need to understand your audience.

Now, four months since Trump took up office, I find myself spiralling down a slightly unhinged (but oddly revealing) thought experiment: what if Donald Trump were a chief marketing officer? Would any brand tolerate his approach, beyond that famous first quarter?

Sure, comparing a politician to a CMO might sound like satire – and to be fair, it is – but the parallels are surprisingly hard to ignore. Especially when you remember that back in 2016/17, headlines described Trump as a “marketing genius” and praised his branding instincts. He wasn’t just seen as a political disruptor; he was treated as a case study in bold, populist positioning. Yeah, I’m going to call it and say the comparison isn’t entirely fanciful. Actually, it’s overdue.

If Trump were a marketing leader, he wouldn’t just be controversial. He’d be commercially unsustainable.

Both are public-facing figureheads. Both set the tone, shape the narrative, and hold enormous responsibility for engagement, be that with voters or consumers. Just as the President must unify a nation behind a vision, a CMO must unify a market around a brand. Both must understand sentiment, lead with a mix of persuasion, data, and intuition, navigate controversy, and defend brand integrity. And if one or the other loses the public’s trust – or worse, actively divides their base – the consequences are real.

To be clear: this piece isn’t an attack on Trump’s voters or his values across the board. There are legitimate policy debates and serious supporters across a wide spectrum. But through a marketing lens – judging purely on leadership effectiveness and audience connection – the picture is difficult to defend. IMHO, Trump has committed three marketing 101 errors.

Start with the ‘4Cs’: What to do in your first 100 days in role

1. Misreading the audience

In marketing, you live and die by your ability to understand and connect with your audience. Recent polling by NBC shows that while 45% of young men approve of Trump’s job performance, only 24% of young women do – a staggering 21-point gender gap.

For a modern marketer, that’s not just a red flag. That’s a strategic failure. No credible CMO would look at a collapsed segment of next-generation consumers, especially one as influential as young women, and carry on business as usual. Even brands with a male-skewed core know better than to alienate a large percentage of the cultural mainstream.

This isn’t about being liked. It’s about being in tune with where culture is heading – and knowing which bridges you really shouldn’t burn.

2. Branding by blunt force

Trump’s style is bold and brash, qualities that, yes, some see as refreshingly direct. But when it comes to real brand building, subtlety and storytelling are king. Truly effective marketing leaders understand emotional nuance. They foster belonging, not division. They understand that cultural leadership isn’t just about being loud – it’s about being trusted.

Trump’s brand is built on defiance and dominance. In a political arena, that may appeal to some. In a brand context? It’s the equivalent of launching a product by mocking your competitors’ customers. It grabs attention, but erodes equity.

3. DE&I: A business mandate, not a culture war

Diversity, equity and inclusion are not fringe concerns. They are central to brand health and future growth. I’ve talked endlessly in this column about the proven value. Bottom line: CMOs (should) know that inclusive brands grow faster, resonate more deeply, and attract better talent.

Trump’s stance, however, is evidently oppositional to those values. It may energise certain political segments, but if he were truly a ‘marketing genius’, would he go down that route? No – because it’s an approach that limits reach, dulls resonance, and exposes brands to reputational risk. Brand longevity is what you’re ultimately after as a CMO, and undoing DE&I progress is not a move for the long haul.

Political parties have got to do more to engage female voters

Lessons to learn

OK, it’s just a thought experiment, but it’s not without lessons.

Yes, Trump’s a political figure, not a CMO, and the rules of engagement do differ. But the exercise still matters, because it reminds us that modern leadership requires something more than bravado. It requires emotional intelligence. Listening. Adaptability. And the humility to evolve with your audience.

If Trump were a marketing leader, he wouldn’t just be controversial. He’d be commercially unsustainable.

Whether you’re marketing trainers, software or a social movement, you can’t afford to alienate, among others, a whole swathe of culturally influential young women. Not just because it’s bad optics. Because it’s bad business.

And no board worth its salt would keep you past day 37.

By now, they’d have smiled politely, thanked you for your service, and calmly seen you to the lift with a lukewarm cup of tea, a novelty stress ball from the stationery cupboard, and a press release that says everything while saying absolutely nothing: your own Truss-esque ‘lettuce’ moment, as it were. Because in marketing, as in politics, if you can’t read the room, you probably shouldn’t be in it.