From everything I've seen, the deal was in works for months before. So no relevance to the situation in US pretty much.
US is a regional hegemon. Losing Korea and Vietnam (and ROC before that) means they don't have hegemony in the most populous/rich/productive area in the world, so how can you then be global hegemon? It would be like calling Russia a regional hegemon if it lost in Ukraine and Chechnya.
A global hegemon would be a nation from where you wake up in a bed, in an apartment made from materials branded from that country. You prepare breakfast, which you can only get delivered thanks to the transport/logistics manufactured by that country. You open your phone, using the apps and AI from that country. You drive to your job in a car designed there, wearing clothes branded there, bought on a chain/web shop belonging to that country. At your job, you work at a PC where all components can only exclusively be sourced from the hegemon.
And this nation must also be the largest economy in the world with uncontested interests globally and with theoretical power to defeat all other countries together.
The above does not describe US in any point past or current. Although US has achieved part of the criteria, much more so in the 80s than today, most of the characteristics of a global hegemon have never been met by America.
