How did Trump’s election win affect Trudeau’s prospects?

Former Deputy Prime Minister Freeland resigned in part over discontent with the way Trudeau had responded to Trump’s proposed tariffs on Canadian goods. And that discontent with the way Trudeau was dealing with the incoming Trump administration extends to a lot of Canadians, regardless of their political stripes.

The Canadian economy isn’t in good shape, and a 25% tariff – as envisioned by Trump – would be disastrous. Canadians are looking for someone who can negotiate with Trump from a position of strength, and that doesn’t appear to be Trudeau. In fact, faced with being trolled and humiliated by Trump – for instance, being referred to as a “governor” rather the leader of a nation – Trudeau has faced criticism for his weak response.

He symbolizes a growing sense in Canada that the country is seen by policymakers in Washington as weak.

While Trudeau reportedly laughed off a suggestion at Mar-a-Lago that Canada become the “51st state,” back home the remark was seen as a test – would Trudeau stand up for Canada or not?

In this sense, Trump’s election provided a challenge to Trudeau but also an opportunity to stand up to Washington – something that would have won him favor among anti-American Canadian nationalists. Instead, he is perceived to have cowered before Trump, further damaging his reputation at home.

 

He won't buy Greenland he will just use a old US government way of getting new land.Send the the US 7th cavalry and massacring the local inhabitants and give it to homesteader's.

 

Trudeau taps out: How Trump’s taunts and tariff threats added to domestic woes confronting Canada’s long-standing PM
Published: January 6, 2025 8.36pm EST
After weeks of speculation over his future, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced his intention to resign on Jan. 6, 2025.

His departure will bring an end to a decade of power for the progressive politician and once-darling of the liberal left. It follows infighting in his own party and a slump in Trudeau’s popularity to the point where he trails the leading opposition candidate by over 20 percentage points. But it can’t escape notice that the resignation comes just weeks ahead of a Trump administration – and after a barrage of personal slights and threats of punishing tariffs directed at Canada by the incoming Republican president.

The Conversation turned to Patrick James, an expert on Canadian-U.S. relations and Dean’s Professor Emeritus at USC Dornsife, to explain why Trudeau chose now to bow out – and what role Trump played in his departure.

Why did Trudeau resign?
The first thing to note is that Trudeau’s resignation is no real surprise to anyone following Canadian politics – the only real surprise is the timing.

At its heart, this is a personal political decision; the reality is Trudeau’s party was doomed in the next election – which is due to take place before the end of October 2025.

Barring any wild changes between now and the vote, the chances of Trudeau’s Liberal Party winning are as dead as a doornail. The opposition Conservative Party, also known as the Tories, are up in the polls by some 24 points.

The Tory leader, Pierre Poilievre, has done a reasonably good job at moderating his image from that of a hard right-winger – narrowing any chance Trudeau had of capturing enough of the center he needed.

My best guess is that, faced with this imminent defeat, Trudeau believes getting out now will insulate him and make it more likely that he can return to front-line Canadian politics further down the line, after a period of time in the wilderness.

Is such a return likely?
While in the U.S. figuratively dead presidents rarely come back to life – with Grover Cleveland and Trump the only ones to return after a reelection loss – in Canada, there is a bit more of a tradition of political resurrection.

This stretches back to the country’s first prime minister, John A. MacDonald, who resigned in 1873 amid scandal only to be reelected five years later. William Mackenzie King served three nonconsecutive terms as prime minister in the first half of the 20th century. And Trudeau’s father, Pierre Trudeau, came back after losing the 1979 election to serve a fourth and final term in 1980.

But I feel with Justin Trudeau it is different. At this moment in time, his parliamentary career looks beyond rehabilitation. He is deeply unpopular and has enraged many of his loyal lieutenants – with the resignation of longtime ally and Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland in December adding to the pressure on Trudeau to resign.

And while inflation – a scourge of left, right and center incumbents the world over – no doubt played a role in Trudeau’s declining popularity, other factors are at play, too. Canadians generally feel that given the cards he was dealt, Trudeau still played a bad hand. Under Trudeau, immigration to Canada increased massively – and many blame this for a housing affordability crisis.

More generally, it seems like Trudeau, despite being the relatively young political age of 53, is out of step with politics at this precise moment in time. Trudeau, much like his father before him, is very much associated with identity politics, focusing on the perceived needs of certain groups over others.

And while the merits of identity politics can be argued, what is certainly true is that it isn’t particularly popular anywhere in the world right now. Indeed, right-of-center populists such as Trump have been able to make great political capital in painting opponents as identity politicians.

How did Trump’s election win affect Trudeau’s prospects?
Former Deputy Prime Minister Freeland resigned in part over discontent with the way Trudeau had responded to Trump’s proposed tariffs on Canadian goods. And that discontent with the way Trudeau was dealing with the incoming Trump administration extends to a lot of Canadians, regardless of their political stripes.

The Canadian economy isn’t in good shape, and a 25% tariff – as envisioned by Trump – would be disastrous. Canadians are looking for someone who can negotiate with Trump from a position of strength, and that doesn’t appear to be Trudeau. In fact, faced with being trolled and humiliated by Trump – for instance, being referred to as a “governor” rather the leader of a nation – Trudeau has faced criticism for his weak response.

He symbolizes a growing sense in Canada that the country is seen by policymakers in Washington as weak.

While Trudeau reportedly laughed off a suggestion at Mar-a-Lago that Canada become the “51st state,” back home the remark was seen as a test – would Trudeau stand up for Canada or not?

In this sense, Trump’s election provided a challenge to Trudeau but also an opportunity to stand up to Washington – something that would have won him favor among anti-American Canadian nationalists. Instead, he is perceived to have cowered before Trump, further damaging his reputation at home.


What will Trudeau’s legacy be in regard to US-Canada relations?
I believe he got caught up in a dynamic that has seen a growing perception in the U.S. – as espoused by the incoming president – that Canada is freeloading militarily off its southern neighbor. President Joe Biden is more aligned politically with Trudeau, but, certainly under Trump’s first term, the Canadian prime minister was seen by Washington as one of the NATO leaders not paying a fair share for the military alliance.

Partly as a result, Canada under Trudeau has dropped down the list of trusted allies – especially among Republicans. If you asked Americans to name Washington’s most trusted ally, the United Kingdom or Israel would likely beat out Canada. Trump’s statements since being reelected suggest that he sees Canada as less an ally and as more of an irrelevance. Comments regarding the buying of Greenland point at Trump’s desire to run roughshod over the desire of other nations in order to be more active in the Arctic – something that should have raised alarms in Canada.

So, in short, you can characterize Trudeau’s relationship with the U.S. as OK under Biden, bad under Trump’s first administration and – potentially – irrelevant under Trump II.

What happens next in Canadian politics?
I see one of two things happening.

The most likely scenario is that the Conservatives will win an election that could take place any time between March and October. Current polling suggests they are on course of winningover 50% of the vote. If that happens, we can expect a Canadian government much more aligned with that of the incoming U.S. administration – with a more centralist foreign policy and border reforms that will tighten immigration controls.

And the timing may provide an opportunity for Trudeau’s successor to start afresh with Trump and forge a relationship that is either stronger or, alternatively, to reassert a degree of Canadian resistance to Trump.

The second scenario is what I call “the French oddity.” Just like in France’s last election in which the two main anti-right parties entered a noncompetition deal to thwart the far-right National Rally, we could see the Liberal Party and the socialist New Democratic Party try something similar in an attempt to blunt Tory gains. But that is a long shot and still won’t increase the chances of Trudeau returning.

As for the Liberal Party post-Trudeau, it is difficult to see who will want to lead it into a near-certain election defeat. But I believe the most likely outcome will be the party will try to tack to a more centralist, economically conservative agenda. It would truly mark the end of the Trudeau era.

Author

1. Patrick James
   Dornsife Dean’s Professor of International Relations, USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences
   
   Not a bad take for an American. Are you going to be a new member here Patrick?
   @sirius1902
   
   

 

I really hate the ridicule and laughter that people are doing, and crediting Trump for this. I find it appalling. It's embarrassing. We used to be a nation people looked up to. That changed 8 years ago.

 

Actually, I never wanted to see Canada as the 51st state - way too many stupid leftards. Someone floated what I think is an excellent idea: that the U.S. and Canada form a co-op similar to the EU - sovereignty stays intact, perhaps (but not mandatory) a shared monetary unit, but it would facilitate the U.S. and Canada becoming a single world force and allow each to take the best from the other in return for what they give.

 

Trump Presser: Why We Should Not be Subsidizing Canada to the Tune of $200 Billion
| 4:40 PM on January 07, 2025
By Jennifer Oliver O'Connell

How thrilled am I to have President-elect Donald J. Trump going back to the Oval Office? Extremely, and I bet every legitimate political reporter is. Sadly, as we have discovered over four years of Biden-Harris, legitimate political reporters are few and far between. If you are a legitimate political reporter/analyst/commentator, what you want from any politician, but especially your president, is to be given information and insight that you can analyze, comment, and report on without a super-sized serving of stage management, spin, and regurgitated lies.

Trump's Tuesday morning press conference from Mar-a-Lago gave us a bunch of information and much to analyze and comment upon. We saw Trump at rest but on point and rarin' to go. However, the talking points Trump gives up front are never the best part. The best part is when he takes reporters' questions and answers extemporaneously, off the cuff, and gives the most detailed information and insight into his thinking. You want to really know his agenda or what he is mulling over? It is always articulated there.

After Trump had already spoken for just over an hour, he took questions. For 22 minutes, he waxed eloquently. He had a few minutes of help from Businessman Steve Witkoff, who Trump called his "negotiator" in the Middle East. The rest of the time was all him. Trump discussed J6 and potential pardons, the Panama Canal, Greenland, Russia and Ukraine, and Elon Musk. After all that wealth of information, one reporter decided to challenge Trump about whether he would use military might against Canada.

REPORTER: Are you serious about making Canada the 51st state of the United States[..]. The leader of the Conservative Party of Canada said, 'Under no circumstances will Canada ever be the 51st state.' He stated that there is no way it would happen.

TRUMP: It's all right. Maybe he won't win, but maybe he will.

This reporter could have taken Kira Davis' sound advice above and allowed Trump to finish, but he wanted to prove a point, so he inserted another question.

REPORTER: You are considering military force to acquire Panama and Greenland, are you also considering military force to annex and acquire Canada?

Typical activist journalist, assuming Republicans and Trump only want to use military might when there is more than one way to skin a cat. Trump unleashed his sharp knowledge and wit on this reporter, and he, along with the American and the Canadian people, learned some things.

TRUMP: No. Economic force. Because Canada and the United States, that would really be something. You get rid of that artificially drawn line, and you take a look at what that looks like. And it would also be much better for national security. Don't forget, we basically protect Canada. But here's the problem with Canada: So many friends up there, I love the Canadian people, they're great. But, we're spending hundreds of billions a year to protect it. We're spending hundreds of billions a year to take care of Canada. We lose in trade deficits, we're losing massive... we don't need their cars. You know, they make 20 percent of our cars. We don't need that, I'd rather make them in Detroit. We don't need the cars. We don't need their lumber. We have massive fields of lumber, we don't need their lumber. We have to unrestrict them, because stupid people put restrictions on, but I can do that with an executive order. We don't need anything they have. We don't need their dairy products, we have more than they have. We don't need anything. So why are we losing 200 billion dollars a year and more to protect Canada?

This makes sense. Not just common sense but economic sense. And Trump is right: Certain states (looking at you, California) could be exploiting lumber and dairy products if they weren't so busy destroying the lumber through their lack of forest clearing and the resultant wildfires, and destroying the farmers' ability to produce dairy products because of "climate change."

Trump then referenced the soon-to-be-retired Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's visit to Mar-a-Lago and made it clear that the economic relationship with Canada is more to their advantage than it is to ours.

And I said that to, as I called him Governor Trudeau, I said, listen what would happen if we didn't subsidize you, if we didn't.. because we give them a lot of money. We help them, as an example, we're buying icebreakers. And Canada wants to join us in the buying of icebreakers. I said, you know, we don't really want to have a partner in the buying of icebreakers. We don't need a partner.

It was unclear whether the reporter said something about Canada having a right or that Trump was right. But Trump being the master deal maker that he is, he clearly explained what was at stake and what he planned to do for America...first.

No, no right. Nope. No right. Here's what we have: We have a right now to help them with their financial difficulties, because we owe 36 trillion dollars too. We're going to start knocking it out pretty fast, but we're going to be able to do it because of energy and other things too.

The reporter just couldn't keep it quiet and interrupted, but Trump deepened his point, breaking it down for him like he was a three-year-old.

No, no, no. No right. No no, no right. But why are we supporting a country 200 billion-plus a year, our military is at their disposal, all of these other things. They should be a state.

That's what I told Trudeau when he came down. I said, what would happen if we didn't do it? He said, "Canada would dissolve, Canada wouldn't be able to function." If we didn't take their 20 percent of our car market. You know we... again, they send us hundreds of thousand of cars. They make a lot of money with that. They send us a lot of other things we don't need.

We don't need their cars, and we don't need the other products. We don't need their milk. We got a lot of milk. We got a lot of everything. And we don't need any of it. So, I said to him, "Well, why are we doing it?" He said, "I don't really know." He was unable to answer the question.

Boom. If anything illustrates that Trudeau was a useless head of state, his inability to answer this basic question does. Trump, in his economic brilliance, was not lacking in this regard.

But I can answer it: We're doing it because of habit. And we're doing it because we like our neighbors, and we've been good neighbors. But we can't do it forever and it's a tremendous amount of money. And, why should we have a 200 billion dollar deficit and add on to that many many other things that we give them in terms of subsidy. And I said, that's okay to have if you're a state. But if you're another country, we don't want to have it. We're not going to have it with the European Union either. The European Union, we have a trade deficit of 350 billion dollars. They don't take our cars. They don't take our farm product. They don't take anything. And, so, we're not going to have it with them either.


This is why Americans trusted another Trump presidency instead of more of the same (and worse) with a Kamala Harris presidency. Being able to provide actual answers, not to mention credible ones, about our economic prospects and future is one major reason. Trump made clear why we need to take these economic steps in order to not only deal with the country's 36 trillion dollar deficit, but to maintain a strong nation for our children.

Here's the full, unscripted moment. Three minutes and 30 seconds worth. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris would have melted down after a minute, if they were even able to make it that far.

 

This is awsome Justin is done and any Conservative that now cowtows to Trump will have their head handed to them by voters.
A twofer.

 

OMG the war has begun with Canada continuously bombing the USA!

 

Yes the world's best fire fighting and rescue aircraft built in Canada. In Europe we have older versions of this aircraft the CL215 But have a brand new version on order .The US are converting old airliners which have to land at a airfield to get more water The CL 215 or the new CL415/515 can just fly low over a lake scoop the water and drop another load on to the fire.The USA will be at the back of the queue if they what them behind Europe.