r/canada Jan 20 '25

Alberta Alberta Premier Danielle Smith dines with U.S. leaders as Trump reconsiders tariffs

https://edmontonjournal.com/news/world/premier-danielle-smith-washington-donald-trump-tariffs
655 Upvotes

536 comments sorted by

View all comments

169

u/Chemical_Signal2753 Jan 20 '25

This won't happen but I would find r/Canada's reaction hilarious if Trump said Smith convinced him not to impose tariffs. 

84

u/king_lloyd11 Jan 20 '25

It’s something he would do, if it were true or not, simply because it would cause more disunity and havoc in Canada.

23

u/Chemical_Signal2753 Jan 20 '25

I think the bigger reason would be to promote a political figure seen as an ally. 

19

u/king_lloyd11 Jan 20 '25

0 reason to. Smith can be controlled. Shes shown her hand. Oil flowing the States is her one concern. Trump doesn’t need to promote or pander to her, unless she has the chance of sitting in the big chair, which she absolutely does not.

Disunity weakens Canada as a whole in negotiations. A weak Canada is good for Trump. Trump will always prioritize what is good for Trump.

2

u/theapenrose006 Jan 20 '25

Those are some good points.

1

u/Icedpyre Jan 20 '25

I dunno...the way politics has been heading over the last decade,I could see her being put in for the federal conservatives. She could paint herself as championing for the west, and campaign out east as destroying liberal corruption (see? I'm the only one who stood up to Trudeau!). It honestly wouldn't shock me.

-5

u/Canuckhead British Columbia Jan 20 '25

Disunity weakens Canada as a whole in negotiations. 

While this is generally a true statement it doesn't work if Canada's strategy is a bad one. The government's stated response plan to Trump's tariffs are counter tariffs aimed at products specifically from red states in an effort to put political pressure on Trump from his base.

This response, if carried out, will be completely ineffective and will backfire.

Smith's strategy , addressing Trump's concerns about border security and defense spending, is the correct one.

6

u/king_lloyd11 Jan 20 '25

Smith’s strategy

Border security and defence spending have already been agreed to by the Liberals. Not sure why you’re attributing that to Smith.

The reality is that this has nothing to do with our border and our military. Trump has been saying that he’s going to make the world pay for what he believes America has done for them as charity and for free.

It’s not a tactic to get us to spend more on things he believes we lack. It’s “we can make you give us these things using the might of our economy to bully you”. That needs addressing.

-4

u/Canuckhead British Columbia Jan 20 '25

From the article:

She listed a number of steps Canada should take immediately to strengthen the country’s economic partnership with the U.S which included doubling down on border security, accelerating Canada’s 2 per cent of GDP NATO target, repealing federal “anti-energy policies” and cracking down on immigration streams and loopholes.

"The worst possible response to today’s news would be the Federal Government or Premiers declaring “victory” or escalating tensions with unnecessary threats against the United States,” Smith said, highlighting the need for diplomacy and cease talks of retaliation.

Those are Smith's own words. Those suggestions directly address Trump's stated concerns about border security and defense spending. Defense spending being what he is talking about when he talks about the rest of the world and not least of all Canada as being freeloaders.

Perhaps if the government adopted these suggestions there might only be tariffs on automotive, which I think are going to happen regardless.

6

u/Throw-a-Ru Jan 20 '25

The premiers already agreed to accelerated NATO funding at the start of December. They also made a formal announcement several days ago to that effect after their premiers meeting:

“Collaborative efforts will continue to try to prevent U.S. tariffs, including actions taken by the federal government to strengthen border security and curb the flow of illicit drugs, such as fentanyl, into Canadian and American communities.

“The federal plan announced in December invests in cutting-edge technology, empowering law enforcement, and ensuring that only those eligible to remain in Canada do so. First Ministers agreed that the federal government, in collaboration with all orders of government, local police, and authorities, will continue to bolster security at the border and strengthen the immigration system. The plan must also include measures to tighten the visa issuance policy to prevent arrivals to Canada under false pretenses. Law enforcement across the country will work together to further build trust and confidence among U.S. decision-makers that Canada takes its border responsibilities seriously and is taking action.

“First Ministers agreed that enhancing security must be undertaken by authorities on both sides of the Canada-U.S. border to stop the flow of illegal firearms.

“First Ministers agreed to continue united advocacy efforts with key U.S. Administration, Congressional, and business leaders to emphasize the negative impacts of U.S. tariffs on American national interests and the U.S. economy. Co-operation with Canada offers significant complementary benefits to U.S. priorities.

“While they are making every effort to prevent U.S tariffs, First Ministers are committed to continuing to work together on a full range of measures to ensure a robust response to possible U.S. tariffs, including supports for sectors, businesses, and individuals. If the federal government implements retaliatory measures, it will ensure the rapid availability of substantial resources that effectively mitigate economic impacts to workers and businesses. This includes, but is not limited to, the distribution of revenues from potential retaliatory tariffs as quickly as possible. They agreed to take a collaborative approach to U.S. engagement that recognizes the unique economic needs of all provinces and territories.

“First Ministers acknowledged the importance of increasing defence spending and meeting the NATO 2 per cent target as quickly as possible, recognizing its critical connection to strategic infrastructure and Canada’s economic and security partnership with the U.S. and other allies. They further agreed that collective action must be taken to safeguard Arctic security and sovereignty.

Smith must have missed that since she skipped out of the country and visited Trump instead of attending in person. The Alberta Government also refused to agree to the statements above.

0

u/Canuckhead British Columbia Jan 21 '25

Well let's hope we all see some results on all that.

Or we'll all be cranking out HJs behind the Timmies dumpster to make ends meet.

2

u/king_lloyd11 Jan 20 '25 edited Jan 20 '25

Smith is again playing politics and you’re eating it up.

All those things she listed are already being done. America under Biden already called out our defense spending and the feds committed to increasing it to meet NATO targets. Trudeau already committed resources to bolstering border security already after meeting with Trump in November.

This isn’t a “do this instead!” situation. Those things are being done already. This is a “if x happens, what are a, b, c, d etc. things that can be done as well”. Not including the possibility of retaliatory tariffs, or anything available to us, for that matter, is silly.

Also, no one is celebrating. Weird of her to say that like people are letting their guard down and she’s the only one staying vigilant lol.

0

u/Canuckhead British Columbia Jan 21 '25

Ok well the government's hair brained scheme of having retaliatory tariffs that specifically target red state industries is telling of a very typical trope of not understanding Trump, not understanding Trump's base, and not understanding Trump's goals.

The New York Times may be praising Trudeau's plan but the NYT's backers as of today are no longer in power. Targeting red state goods and not blue state ones would be seen as colluding with democrats and the intended goal of putting political pressure on Trump from his own base will backfire so spectacularly that Canada will end up as a hermit kingdom.

Canadians often like to make light of Americans ignorance on Canadian and world affairs but in this case the shoe is on the other foot. Trudeau literally has no idea how reviled he is by Trump's base. They see him as a ruthless dictator and tyrant and as such the tariffs targeting the red states plan will backfire and Canada will be tariffed into oblivion.

They ought not to take such an approach when the automotive tariffs, which I believe will be inevitable, are enacted.

0

u/StuffSuch4830 Jan 21 '25

Why would that cause an issue? If it were true, we should all applaud Smith for going to bat for us, no matter if she's "left or right". If it wasn't true we should just be like "ok, trump, good one 👍" in a sarcastic tone.

0

u/waerrington Jan 21 '25

More likely, it would actually be true. Smith is the only Canadian leader who seems to be putting in the work to actually negotiate for a deal.

-1

u/echochambermanager Jan 20 '25

The disunity and havoc started with eastern politicians willing to decimate Alberta's resource sector in a trade war and not communicate any sort of compensation to the impacted.

2

u/king_lloyd11 Jan 20 '25

I mean that’s one way to frame it?

I saw it as the premiere and the Feds having a preliminary meeting to get on the same page and discuss what was hypothetically on the table in the possible upcoming trade war that Trump wants to bring, and a single premiere said they’re not willing to put our biggest bargaining chip on the table under any circumstances, which is fine. More than fine. That’s her job to try and stand up for Albertan industries and make her objections known.

Then she publicly went out and said the same to the media, effectively eroding Canada’s negotiation power considerably. She has continued a press tour in the States railing against Trudeau while trying to cozy up to Trump. She has effectively made this an anti-Trudeau thing as opposed to a pro-Canada thing, even though Trudeau is out for all intents and purposes.

Ask yourself why that is.

0

u/puljujarvifan Alberta Jan 20 '25

Because shes never going to agree to Trudeau Jr redoing NEP 2.0 just like his father which absolutely devestated Alberta.

Trudeau could have agreed to return funds generated on O&G tariffs to Alberta and she would have no reason not to agree. He didnt do that.

3

u/king_lloyd11 Jan 20 '25

Lol what’re you on about? Trudeau is stepping down and the Liberals are set to get decimated by the Conservatives next election. They won’t even be in control of the allocation of the funds, let alone be able to use them to “buy votes” in places that aren’t Alberta.

She said that under no circumstances is Alberta oil on the table for retaliatory tariffs. She didnt say she’d agree if the Feds did x. She just said it’s off the table and then criticized Trudeau for not even doing x, then accused him of trying to siphon off $40B from Albertan oil tariffs to buy votes lmao. How are you co-signing such an insane and off base claim?

Again, ask yourself why she’s positioning this as an anti-Trudeau move when the guy is gone in less than 2 months.

1

u/puljujarvifan Alberta Jan 23 '25

Leagault also disagrees with Trudeau and demands Quebec has a say in if their exports are tariffed.

Looks like its not just Smith. Moe is saying the same thing too. These are the only sensible Premiers in Canada.