Drones have radically changed land warfare, with the Russia/Ukraine war being a prime example. Their use in sea combat hasn't been proven out to the same extent, solely because there has been no wide-scale naval conflicts in the last couple of decades, but the use of drones by the Ukranians in the Black Sea against Russian ships has effectively destroyed the Russian presence there. Weapon platform drones are capable of deployments over 1000 miles (1600 km), and can be launched from a frigate or cutter with a helipad deck. What's more, such drones typically are cooler and have much more diffuse radar and lidar signatures even than ballistic missiles, and can be deployed from a C4 cargo plane well away from a field of conflict.
The kind of battleship that Trump is proposing, on the other hand, has an effective range of perhaps 60 miles (100 km) would need to be so heavily armored as to be barely seaworthy, and frankly would be a sitting duck to a drone attack. Moreover, battleships only made sense when they were fighting other battleships, but with the rise of naval air power following WWII, most countries stopped building them because they made no sense strategically even in a support role.
= new reply since forum marked as read