this post was submitted on 03 Feb 2025
585 points (98.8% liked)

World News

40328 readers
4063 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Ontario Premier Doug Ford announced he is canceling a $100M contract with Elon Musk’s Starlink and banning U.S. firms from provincial contracts in retaliation for Donald Trump’s tariffs on Canada.

Ford warned that American companies could lose “tens of billions” in revenues.

Canada and Mexico have imposed counter-tariffs, while Ontario also plans to remove American liquor brands from stores.

Trump responded by suggesting Canada should become the U.S.’s 51st state to avoid tariffs, arguing Canada’s trade surplus makes it economically dependent on the U.S.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 57 points 2 days ago (3 children)

It's more effective to target his supporters though. If they block Kentucky Bourbon but still allow California wine then the right people will be angry and his opposition will be stronger.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I disagree. Placing the same restrictions on blue states also motivates them to speak up and rally against Trump. Plus, don't discount how many red voters exist in blue states. They are worth reaching as well.

[–] dogslayeggs 16 points 2 days ago (2 children)

The people in the blue states already do speak up and rally against Trump. It hasn't helped in the past and won't help in the future, partly because they don't have any power under the Electoral College, partly because it makes Trump voters double down, and partly because red states see it as a good thing to be doing something that makes blue states angry. They will happily harm themselves if it also harms liberals.

Your last point is true, though. There are more Trump voters in CA than there are in some large number of red states combined.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Your first paragraph is undercut by your second.

I didn't say blue voters. I said people in blue states. That means blue voters, red voters, independent voters, and non voters. I meant everyone in those blue states should feel the effects and speak up and out.

[–] dogslayeggs 1 points 2 days ago

And those voters would still vote for Trump. They will claim their hardships weren't due to Canada's tariffs but due to California having too high of taxes and not giving them enough water.

[–] jj4211 1 points 2 days ago

Many of the blue states send republicans to the house, and if those districts went the other way, we'd actually have a house that might actually be interested in holding Trump accountable.

[–] jj4211 4 points 2 days ago

Note that without California republican House members, the GOP wouldn't have a majority. Nevada despite being a 'Red State', contributes more democrat than republican representatives. If three red house races had went the other way, Trump would have had much more meaningful resistance.

The federal government ultimately has authority over the blue states, and as such Trump and American companies have access to their resources and/or status.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (2 children)

It's not. They'll see it as more evidence of the globohomo hegemony punishing the poor, oppressed right and further cement their worldview.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago

It's not just trump though, people vote in local elections as well. You want Newsom to be strong and Kentucky conservatives to be weak.

[–] FelixCress 1 points 2 days ago

People are responsible for the consequences of their actions.