Liberal (Minority/Majority) Government 2025 - ???

[PPCLI Guy]

It will be interesting to see the full details of what makes up this deal.

Vance has a word on it:

Carney tried to ‘out-tough’ Trump in trade negotiations, Vance says

Who fucking cares what that fuckwit "thinks"? He is simply parroting talking points, and sucking up to Trump. He is capable of complex thought, but chooses to act as a ventriloquist dummy....

 

[PPCLI Guy]

The HUB has a POV.

Summary: This is a discussion on The Hub (Roger and Sean Speer) about the emerging Canada-US trade deal, reportedly set to be announced imminently as of Friday, August 21, 2026.


Key takeaways:

• Terms of the deal: Leaks suggest a new baseline ~15% tariff on key sectors (autos, steel), roughly matching what the EU and Japan already accepted — down from 25% on autos, with an exemption on US parts. Softwood lumber tariffs may drop but not disappear; dairy quota concessions and "harmonization" with US digital/tech regulations are also expected.
• This is not a return to free trade. Both hosts argue NAFTA-style tariff-free trade is definitively over; we're entering an era of "managed trade" where the US demands market access without reciprocal concessions, banking on the sheer size of the US market as leverage.
• Auto sector concerns: A drop from 25% to 15% (rather than to zero) is seen as insufficient to stop capital and manufacturing — especially Japanese automakers in Ontario — from continuing to shift toward the US, especially given US tax/depreciation advantages under the "one big beautiful bill."
• Political fallout: Provincial premiers (notably Quebec's and Manitoba's) are pushing back, partly because they weren't briefed on deal details. There's added friction from JD Vance's leaked remarks mocking PM Carney for claiming a "win" while actually making concessions.
• Why now? Speer offers two theories: (1) Canada may be racing to avoid being locked out by Mexico's more advanced bilateral negotiations with the US, and (2) Trump's 50% tariff threat may have forced Canada's hand after a strategy of "ragging the puck" (stalling) failed.
• Broader framing: Both hosts frame this as the end of American-led globalization/free-trade idealism, driven partly by US fiscal pressure (federal debt just passed $40 trillion) and a shift to zero-sum trade psychology likely to persist across future administrations. They describe the deal as a "short sharp shock" Canada will need to absorb and move past.

My thoughts:

1. The fact that free trade deals such as NAFTA are in the past is a point that Speer has been making for two years now - turns out he is right
2. 15% is in the same range as EU and Japan. We need to understand that, from the perspective of Trump if not Americans, we just are not that special anymore
3. The plan to wait Trump out was a good one. He accelerated the timelines because reasons.....midterms? jealousy of Carney? Animus? Capriciousness? Hard to have a rational discussion and negotiation with a seemingly non-rational actor
4. This may be the art of the practicable and politically palatable vice the possible. Pundits (including in here) have a tendency to focus on the latter
5. Given all of that this may be the most practicable and palatable deal possible given the timelines, the bad-faith dealing from the US, and the Canadian incoherence that comes with our federal system and allocation of powers.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Any reason why Vance’s comment about PP aren’t included here?

What role is Poilievre playing in negotiation with the US?