Ontario Premiere Doug Ford has just cancelled its ($100m) contract with StarLink, and has banned all US companies from bidding on about $30 billion in procurement and $200 billion infrastructure and supply contracts with the province.
Sure. Trade wars are easy. Just like those in the Middle East.
Ontario’s GDP is on par with Ohio’s. Seriously, it’s a footnote in terms of its economic consequence.
Starlink had nearly 12 billion in revenue for 2025 and you want to fret over a $100 million?
Detroit and Maine may not think so. Asymmetric tactic, given that both states have Senate elections this year.
https://www.wsj.com/business/autos/detroit-needs-canada-more-than-the-rest-of-the-u-s-does-82643b92
Detroit Needs Canada More Than the Rest of the U.S. Does
[Detroit]’s carmakers in particular could see some of their most profitable products walloped if Trump follows through on a [threat to double tariffs] on cars and auto parts from Canada to 50% from 25%.[Stellantis] assembles the Chrysler brand’s [popular Pacifica minivan] just across the border in Windsor, [Ontario]. [General Motors] produces pickup trucks at a factory in Oshawa, [Ontario]. Ford is set to begin making F-Series Super Duty trucks later this year at a plant near Toronto in Oakville, in addition to at a factory in Kentucky. And Ford and GM each produce engines in Canada for trucks and SUVs sold in the U.S.
More to the point:
Analysts noted that the tariffs targeted products made in states with hotly contested congressional elections, including processed cheese from Wisconsin, seafood from Maine, and washers and dryers from Kentucky, where [General Electric](https://www.wsj.com/market-data/quotes/GE) has a major operation.
Even the longest journey starts with a single step. Ask Bud Light, or Target, or the grape growers, or maybe the government of South Africa how boycotts work, even when they start small.
What would Ontario’s next step be in terms of retaliation against Starlink? It’s a tempest in a teapot. I’m no fan of the current tariff tactics but it needs to be viewed in the context of its actual impact. Further, it’s entirely possible this all gets rolled back at some point.
That was my immediate thought after this was announced - that this may have just cost the admin control of the Senate.
Why does it have to be against Starlink? Ukraine targeted military installations. Then later it moved to Russian refineries. Then later it moved to Wildberries. You apply pressure where you can, the Starlink contract just happened to be easy.
Sure. Once Trump changes his mind again, which happens with the frequency of changing a baby’s diapers.
It’s only 1/3 of Canada’s GDP. There’s another 2/3, much of which consumes automobiles, machinery, mineral oils, electronics, plastics, and other things as are commonly traded between nations. Doug Ford only speaks for one of Canada’s provinces, and I’ll bet at least a few of the other nine have similar feelings about Trump’s words and actions against their country.
Personally I would like to see them cut off oil flows for a couple weeks, although that would be hard since they have no place else to send it. They are working on that though; they’ve tripled their pipeline capacity to the West Coast to sell more to China, and there’s talking of doubling that again with a parallel pipeline.
Quick point of clarification:
A “footnote” is all that is needed.
Slotkin beat Rodgers by about 30,000 votes, or 0.3% in 2024. Trump beat Harris by roughly 80k votes, or 1.4%.
Brown leads in Ohio already but this might help him more secure a win.
If this action changes the mind of just 1% of likely voters, it will have marked a significant accomplishment.
Absolutely true, he is petty, vain and someone that lacks a moral compass. It’s become the standard for politicians and system that is increasing attracting psychopathic narcissists. A reminder as to why our forefathers wanted limited govt.
I know. I own stock in one of the Canadian producers. It of course conflicts with Carney’s Green agenda, so we’ll see what they do. I’m not happy with tariffs and I don’t like the destruction it is doing to our relationship with our friend’s to the north. But, Canada has been an economic mess for awhile and has had a series of feckless leaders. This current mess just exacerbates the problem.
The political fall out is another matter. In many ways, this is a repeat of the midterms after the 2016 presidential race. Trump doesn’t really care about any of those consequences. He’s been more than happy to primary strong Republicans that have disagreed with his positions. Rightly so, this administration was supposed to be focused on keeping us out of conflict and helping with affordability. They have failed in that regard and should suffer the consequences. The problem is the public is nearly equally unhappy with the Democratic party, which is a mess in terms of candidate quality. Collins and Rogers are both carefully framing their campaigns to distance themselves from the current administration. We’ll see what happens.
But how will the candidates actually campaign on the issue? Will they say “I will give our trade partners what they want” … even if it isn’t particularly good for some other US-based businesses.
Not sure what you are saying here. Are you saying that the Canada “boycott” on US will work or that the US “boycott” on Canada will work? And if one and not the other, or not both, why?
I’m not sure they need to. UAW workers will understand that the tariffs are bad for Detroit (Ford especially), just as spirits producers in Kentucky now understand that they have lost around $150 million in sales because of the US actions. We import more aluminum from Canada than we produce, so I suspect workers at factories which use it (airplanes, toaster ovens, whatever) may be affected. Likewise cheese producers in Wisconsin, electronics, foodstuffs, motorcycles, and the rest - I’m sure they will be acutely aware of the effects; I don’t think the politicians will need to remind them. (They will, of course, but not need to say much except: “because of that guy.”)
The boycott has become quite political in Canada. “51st State”, “You don’t matter”, “Lake America”, “remove French packaging” and so on - these are all things Canadians hear loudly - certainly more loudly than “Canada’s been ripping us off for years” which comes as news (and not necessarily believed) to Americans.
I use the Bourbon example: Canada didn’t really need to tariff it to cause a massive boycott, it happened organically. Now add in the prices that WILL increase and I think you will see a change in consumer behavior there over and above the “hurt feelings.” (It’s also true that this will cause pain, but will not be fatal to most US enterprises, simply because Canada’s economy is 1/12th our size.)
But pain is pain, and it’s amplified by righteous indignation. Yes, I think this will be asymmetric, and we get the worse of it. Will it be enough to swing elections? Some, I’ll bet. Farmers in Wisconsin, autoworkers in Michigan, steelworkers in Ohio. It’s bound to have some effect, I think.
Responding to myself here:
Another of Canada’s Premieres is calling for Canada to cancel the contract to buy F-35s from us. Around $88 billion worth over the contract lifetime.
A year into a government review of the purchase of as many as 88 F-35s, one premier says buying American warplanes makes no sense in the face of President Trump’s latest tariffs.
This time its the Premiere of British Colombia:
The premier of British Columbia has an additional suggestion for Canada’s prime minister, Mark Carney, in dealing with U.S. tariffs: stop plans to buy as many as 88 American-made F-35 fighter jets.Not long after Canada said that it would [retaliate against] President Trump’s sweeping 50 percent tariff on hundreds of Canadian exports with tariffs of its own, Premier David Eby questioned why Canada would pursue supplying its military with the warplanes.
Make it stop! I can’t stand all the winning!
Given the relative sizes of the two economies wouldn’t Canada suffer more? For example, you mentioned bourbon.
The bans turned out to be one of the more headline-grabbing results of the trade war. They were also effective at inflicting economic pain: Imports of US alcohol to Canada fell by 81%, from about $718 million to $137 million, from March 2025 through February 2026, compared with the preceding year…
Now, Canadian makers, which are far more dependent on the US market than their American counterparts are on the Canadian market, face Trump’s new 50% tariffs…
Canadian spirit makers rely more heavily on exports to the US than American makers do on exports to Canada. Before the bans, Canada accounted for about 10% of US spirits exports. But 93% of all of Canada’s spirits exports by value went to the US, according to Spirits Canada.
DB2
Fairly easy answer: “I will negotiate in good faith with trade partners and when we have a deal, I won’t capriciously break it.”
Reminder, Trump negotiated the last trade deal with Canada, calling it, "the best and most important trade deal ever made by the U.S.A."
Likely, because Canadians are fairly united against America on this issue - they are likely willing to suffer more pain due to such.
We clearly are not. Many feel that America is in the wrong and would be more than happy (rightly or wrongly) for us to lose on this issue.
Very likely. But that does not change the calculous.
Who is suffering more right now, Iran or the USA? Clearly Iran. Who appears to hold an inordinate amount of power over the outcome? Also Iran.
Canada is very likely willing to suffer more pain than we are (and will likely do so) and still find a political solution that they find advantageous.
I was one of the smallest boys in my age cohort in junior and senior high school. I took joy in defying bullies; even though I always lost in the resultant fisticuffs and wrastling, I was perceived as a dangerous person to cross…. I have always enjoyed and respected Canadians, and Mexicans have received me with open arms as a decent American with whom to share a continent.
The USA’s Prez and supporters must learn that power does not come from bluster, and that democratic governance *depends * on reasoned durable sharing of respect.
SIGH.
Still playing the “We’re bigger, so you lose” theory, eh?
We sell them machinery and pickup trucks The sell us oil and electricity.
Ima guess one of those is more crucial than the other.
