I'm curious how losing tens of thousands of jobs, losing the agricultural sector, losing in export numbers and embarrassing the nation internationally in exchange for... pretty much no gains... translates into a "position of strength".
If Trump had any say, it would not be him begging for negotiations and truce.
China was well prepared, just not in the way you want it to be. You would prefer them to go out there and take stabs at the US economy with the intent of bringing it down with no regards for casualties they will take doing so, but the priority of the government is to defend domestic livelihoods, which it has been exceptionally successful at.
If China had been aggressive, it would have hurt it's standing. Because it refrained from unfair conduct and only replied "by the book", it was able to sway Italy into BRI and make EU sign large deals. Chinese companies have also benefited from honesty instead of relying on government backed cheating. That's why Huawei rose while Apple sank.
By going "all out" like sanctioning America, kidnapping American citizens, dumping US debt, using Russia as resource backing proxy etc, China could likely kill the US economy. But after "defeating" America, no one would ever fully trust China again. The rest of the world will think "If they can do so against America, they can do so against us one day too". And many Chinese citizens who have work connected to America would have their lives ruined.
The rational decision is to entrench the economy, mow down every attack and incur unacceptable losses to the enemy. Then slowly advance while offering ceasefire, like the real soldiers in the 1962 war did. That is the best way to win a conflict in the long term.
