So far, President Trump has acted much like he did in business, starting his initiatives with forceful opening shots. That’s a classic negotiating tactic, and his latest use of it appears to have come in his threat to cut federal funding to California should it declare itself a sanctuary state.

“If we have to, we’ll defund. We give tremendous amounts of money to California,” Trump told Fox News commentator Bill O’Reilly in an interview that aired on Sunday. “California in many ways is out of control, as you know. ... If they’re going to have sanctuary cities, we may have to do that. Certainly that would be a weapon,” he said. “Obviously, the voters agree or otherwise they wouldn’t have voted for me.”

Threatening to cut funding to the nation’s most populous state — and the one with the biggest economy — was Trump’s opening gambit, even though a president cannot unilaterally cut federal funding to a state. And a majority of voters didn’t vote for Trump, he won in the Electoral College. But facts haven’t stopped Trump from making other, similarly worded opening bids during his first weeks in office in an effort to set the terms of debate.

“Everything with him is a first offer to put his opponent on their back foot,” said Jeremy Carl, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University who has advised former Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., and Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas.

“No question it is a high-risk, high-reward strategy. It will work well in some places,” Carl said. “In other areas, (Secretary of State) Rex Tillerson is going to earn his paycheck.”

Over the past several days, Trump has tweeted about cutting federal funding to UC Berkeley, put Iran “on notice,” promised to “totally destroy” a 63-year-old tax law, and encouraged Senate Republicans to “go nuclear” to get Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch confirmed.

But analysts say what worked for Trump in business, doesn’t always translate to politics. That sort of “Art of the Deal” bravado could dangerously escalate tensions in international relations, where leaders often speak in diplomatically worded politesse to avoid conflict.

“It’s extremely dangerous, especially when it comes to Iran and China,” said Bruce Jentleson, a former senior foreign policy adviser to Al Gore who served in President Barack Obama’s State Department. “You keep doing this, and climbing the ladder of escalation, and then you’re in wars or conflicts you shouldn’t be in. I worry a lot about that.”

It’s not that deal-making is inherently bad or unusual.

“Deal-making works. The Louisiana Purchase was a deal. We’ve seen deal-making throughout American history,” said Steven Davidoff Solomon, the author of “Gods at War: Shotgun Takeovers, Government by Deal and the Private Equity Implosion” and a law professor at UC Berkeley.

But Trump’s Oval Office moves are unusual, because “what’s being done is governance by deal.” And with Trump’s blunt, rhetoric-shattering norms — and because he has been on the job less than a month — “we don’t know if it works yet,” Davidoff Solomon said.

Trump hasn’t shied from criticism of this style, telling the audience at the National Prayer Breakfast last week, “When you hear about the tough phone calls I’m having, don’t worry about it. ... We’re taken advantage of by every nation in the world, virtually. It’s not going to happen anymore.”

Here’s a look at some of Trump’s recent statements and what might happen.

On UC Berkeley: “If UC Berkeley does not allow free speech and practices violence on innocent people with a different point of view — NO FEDERAL FUNDS?” Trump tweeted last week after “black bloc” anarchists caused property damage to protest a scheduled appearance of right-wing commentator Milo Yiannopoulos.

Why he said it: It supports Trump’s campaign vow to restore “law and order.” Plus he won’t lose supporters by threatening a liberal university in a state he lost badly.

The impact on the next step: Just like Trump’s threat to cut funding to California, he can’t do it without the help of Congress. So unless he can persuade the GOP-led Congress to start slicing into the school’s research budget, the impact may not amount to much more than saber rattling.

On the Senate using the nuclear option to confirm his Supreme Court nominee: “If we end up with that gridlock, I would say, ‘If you can, Mitch (McConnell, Senate majority leader), go nuclear,’” Trump said. “Because that would be an absolute shame if a man of this quality was put up to that neglect.”

Why he said it : It gives McConnell and other Republicans political cover to pass Trump’s Supreme Court nominee by a simple majority — not the traditional 60-vote threshold — should the Gorsuch nomination veer into trouble. As Senate rules say, the GOP needs eight Democrats to vote with the 52-Republican majority to confirm a nominee.

The impact on the next step: The 60-vote hurdle is meant to ensure some bipartisan cooperation on something as important as a lifetime seat on the court. If it is repealed, the impact will be a major win for Republicans, enabling them to seat multiple Trump court nominees, solidifying a conservative majority for generations. However, Democrats would have the same advantage should they recapture the Senate under a Democratic president.

On Iran: In response to an Iranian test of a ballistic missile last week, the president tweeted: “Iran has been formally PUT ON NOTICE for firing a ballistic missile. Should have been thankful for the terrible deal the U.S. made with them!”

Why he said this: Trump has long called for ending the nuclear deal with Iran. the missile test gives him an opening to take the next step. Two days after this tweet, the U.S. issued sanctions against 25 Iranian companies and individuals — none would affect the current deal.

The impact on the next step: Trump may not like the deal, but it was cut in concert with the permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany. If the U.S. were to take military action without that coalition, the impact could be huge. The challenge in alluding to military action is either you have to deliver or look weak. Remember when Obama failed to back up his threat to Syria to not cross that red line? But the words “put on notice” don’t have a distinct meaning, so the president gives himself room to maneuver.

Joe Garofoli is The San Francisco Chronicle’s senior political writer. Email: jgarofoli@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @joegarofoli