Unfortunately, as noted in the initial predictions for 2027 legislative expectations it appears the ability of President Trump to execute an America-First economic policy is going to be targeted.  Incoming Democrat committee leaders are intending to write laws reversing President Trump’s tariff ability, starting with Canada.

The Wall Street Journal, a media outlet who have long been against U.S. protective tariffs, are outlining the Democrat plan. Considering the likelihood of a Presidential veto the democrat plan includes attaching legislation to the tariff authority repeal that will stimulate Republican support.

Congress can override a presidential veto with a two-thirds majority, or 290 votes in the House and 67 votes in the Senate given all members are voting. As of Thursday evening, Democrats had captured 253 House seats and 54 Senate seats.

This is where we evaluate internal leftist politics. Some democrats support tariffs, particularly in states where industrial manufacturing, auto plants, steel and aluminum are critical sectors to their economy.  However, caution here is advised as you may remember the ‘blue dog’ democrat coalition that was against Obamacare were eventually crushed by the weight of the socialist movement within the Democrat party.

(Via WSJ) – Democrats are eyeing President Trump’s trade war with Canada as the first target in a campaign to roll back his administration’s tariff agenda, according to the party’s senior trade lawmaker in the Senate.

“There is overwhelming support for repealing the tariffs on products from Canada,” said Sen. Ron Wyden (D., Ore.), the Ranking Member on the Senate Finance Committee, who added that he was “already talking” with colleagues about legislation to push against Trump’s second-term levies after he gains control of the committee in January.

(more…)

A tale of two economic models.

Today the ‌S&P Global Canada Manufacturing Purchasing Managers’ Index (PMI) fell to 49.6 in October from 51.5 in September.  A reading above a 50.0 is expanding; while anything below a 50.0 indicates contraction or lower manufacturing.

To assemble the PMI approximately 400 companies report, New Orders (30% weight), Production (25% weight), Employment (20% weight), Supplier Deliveries (15% weight) and Inventories (10% weight). Combined those metrics formulate the PMI index to highlight growth (expanded manufacturing), or contraction (declining manufacturing).

TORONTO, Nov 2 (Reuters) – Canada’s manufacturing sector contracted in October for the first time this year as tariffs and geopolitical uncertainty weighed on activity, and after inflation pressures intensified.

The ‌S&P Global Canada Manufacturing Purchasing Managers’ Index (PMI) fell to 49.6 last month from 51.5 in September, marking the first move below the 50 threshold since December. A reading below 50 indicates contraction in the sector.

(more…)

It is a factual datapoint that will not change.  A fully vested Free Trade Agreement with the European Union does not align with an FTA with the United States.  It’s a fact that doesn’t change no matter how much spin is applied.  The EU has structural rules and regulations (climate, energy, net zero, carbon trading) that create distance in any trade effort with the USA.

That said, much to the chagrin of Prime Minister Mark Carney and EU head Ursula Fond-of-Lyin, last Friday the major economies within the EU, specifically Germany, rejected any possibility of an “Associate Member” status for Canada.  Simultaneously, Canadian media realized a trade deal with Europe would subject Canada to carbon taxes that are larger and more economically intrusive than Trump’s tariffs.

Well, whaddyaknow…. This happens:

[SOURCE]

Go figure!

(more…)

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said Friday that if his government could not successfully negotiate a suitable trade pact with the Trump administration, he was prepared to wait for a new American president; one that Canadians would approve of.

Asked if that meant he would hold out for a new American president; the prime minister answered in the affirmative. “We’ll have to, if that’s what it takes,” Carney told POLITICO

Within the interview Carney also emphasizes the risks from AI (SI) and underlines how the AI frontier labs are requesting a slowdown and regulation upon them.  Carney says he agrees with the AI leaders on this issue and government regulation is a best approach.

In my opinion the reason Canada and the EU want AI slowed and regulated is simply because they are so far behind on their ability to generate their own models.  They have a self-interest to stop AI (SI) development in the USA.

The transcript for the interview below:

(0:00) Prime Minister, thanks for speaking with Politico today.

(0:02) Thanks for having me.

(0:03) You’ve just wrapped up the 21st Kennedy EU summit here in Montreal. Um, this is a milestone meeting. You’re eager to deepen transatlantic ties. Um, but there is, we know, some dispute about how to characterize and name the Canada EU relationship. How would you describe the relationship status with the EU in one word?

(more…)

Canada is in a really weird place and I’ve all but given up trying to understand it.  At a certain point you just have to accept that Prime Minister Mark Carney is operating on an agenda for that country that is disconnected from all traditional perspectives around national best interest.

For example, the Canadian trade relationship with the single state of Texas, USA, is larger than the total Canadian trade relationship with the European Union, yet Carney is spending an inordinate amount of time chasing a trade deal with the EU that is never going to amount to anything.  Seriously, it’s a literal dead-end.

First, there’s not a scintilla of alignment between the USMCA (Canada says CUSMA) and the European Union.  There’s two entirely different sets of economic baselines, standards, rules and regulations between trading with the United States and trading with the EU.  If Canada wants a trade relationship with the USA, they have to give up trying to structure their economy to align with the EU; both systems are entirely different.

Canada cannot have a comprehensive Free Trade Agreement with the EU that contains structural regulations on the flow of goods that substantively restricts Canadian products from entering the USA.  The same issue exists with China.

Now, if Canada wants to separate from the North American trade agreement, then by all means – go for the deal with the EU and/or China.  However, as long as Canada wants to retain their USA dependencies and benefits, there’s no mechanism that permits an FTA of substance with Europe or China.  Mark Carney cannot have it both ways.

Secondly, do you remember when CTH noted the second quarter GDP for Canada appeared to be entirely manipulated by the movement of Dutch Central Bank gold from Ottawa to London.  People laughed at me for noticing the timing and the mysterious (completely unexplained) gain in economic output in the second quarter.  Q4 2025 was flat, Q1 2026 was negative, then mysteriously Q2 had a bounce – and, well, now Q3 is showing a return to flatline or negative.

OTTAWA—Canada’s economy cooled in the latest quarter after activity unexpectedly stalled two months running and early data points to a slight contraction in September.

Gross domestic product was essentially unchanged in August from the month before at 2.372 trillion Canadian dollars, the equivalent of US$1.695 trillion, Statistics Canada said on Friday.  That was softer than the 0.2% expansion expected by economists following a similarly flat result in July.

The national data agency’s advance data indicates output edged down 0.1% in September.

(more…)

Promethean Action PAC’s Susan Kokinda gives her update and perspective on the Canada-U.K effort to interfere in the U.S. midterm election.

Susan Kokinda opens with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney celebrating Brazil’s election, von der Leyen’s partnership “thriving” and Carney’s “flourishing”, set against Volkswagen’s plan to cut 100,000 jobs, Canada’s lost manufacturing jobs, and Audi’s first U.S. plant, announced with President Trump in Perry, Georgia, with Rep. Rich McCormick on what it means for Georgia and a look at GDP growth in the United States, the euro area and Canada.

The episode then turns to the U.S. Embassy in Canada’s October 21 fact sheet on Canadian activities in U.S. politics: Carney’s and Minister Mélanie Joly’s denials, Joly on meeting “so many governors and potential presidential candidates”, tariffs aimed at “political pressure”, and the anti-tariff billboards. It sets that beside Chatham House’s August 27 paper for Prime Minister Andy Burnham’s government, which urges London to court members of Congress, state legislatures, potential presidential candidates and industry leaders, and looks at the British pedigree of Canada’s trade team and Chatham House director Bronwen Maddox on the members of Congress who came through Chatham House. It closes with the voters: the Parti Québécois win in Quebec and the Conservative majority in British Columbia that President Trump congratulated, the AfD’s wins in two German states, and the President’s “France: Now and Then”.

.

(more…)

Texas-based ConocoPhillips announced last year they were restructuring their labor force and anticipated a 20-25% reduction in overall workers.

Now, given the nature of energy policy impacts to private industry, where do you think a major oil-gas company would first consider cutting jobs.  Common sense would tell you, the first regions to be reviewed would be those regions hostile to the exploitation of the product the corporation brings to market.

Thus, reductions in workforce and operational capacity are not only determined by contract leasing, but also by the regulatory environment that surrounds the business. Add the political hostility to the business sector at issue and you end up with a self-fulfilling prophecy.  Advance anti-oil/gas policy and you get less oil/gas business investment.

Oct 26 (Reuters) – ConocoPhillips has informed its staff of a reduction ​to its workforce in Canada, a ‌spokesperson for the oil and gas producer said on Monday. The reduction includes employees and ​contractors and is set to take ​place on Tuesday, the spokesperson added.

However, the ⁠Houston, Texas-based company did not disclose ​how many jobs were affected. ConocoPhillips has ​about 9,900 employees globally, according to its 2025 annual report.

“We routinely review our organization to align ​with our long-term strategy, operate safely ​and efficiently, and remain well-positioned for future opportunities,” the ‌spokesperson ⁠said. (more)

While there are many ideological factors involved in the ‘western’ political opposition to the Russian Federation as a nation, I am of the opinion that one of the significant facets is the scale and scope of Russia’s oil/gas development.

(more…)

British Columbia Premier David Eby is one of the leading Canadian antagonists who quickly aligned with Mark Carney in an effort to gain power.  The province was essentially split 50/50, and so David Eby developed a quick plan.

Riding the “Elbow’s Up” wave promoted by most Canadian leadership, Eby announced a strategic snap election in September.  His plan was to ride the anti-Trump wave and gain power.  However, between the announcement in September and the election last night something shifted.  Canadian munchkins began noticing the fraud behind Wizard Carney’s loud but shallow policy.  Week by week as the Canadian economy began slipping, a change started.

Then came Lorne Doerkson, a pragmatic and patriotic ‘Conservative’ challenger.  Doerkson is conservative in the most Canadian sense. He’s a friendly fellow with tones and a generally affable constitution akin to Mike Huckabee circa 2012.  That is to say Doerkson was the perfect ‘non-scary’ candidate to pull in a lot of support.

As a consequence, Premier Eby’s snap election gamble backfired, and he ended up handing the B.C. Conservative Party a majority government.  Lorne Doerkson’s party has gained roughly 64 of the province’s 93 ridings (districts), Eby collapsed to 17. {source}  Doerkson will now lead British Columbia’s first Conservative government in nearly 100 years.  Shortly after the results became evident, David Eby announced he would step down as B.C. NDP leader.

I’m not going to extrapolate too much into this outcome against the backdrop of a U.S. midterm sentiment; however, it would be foolish not to notice the hidden vote base that turned out for Lorne Doerkson.

There is a pragmatic center who fully understands what can be expected from left-wing political policy.

(more…)

The aspect that is laughable is not that Canadian government officials constantly try to interfere and manipulate U.S. elections, the laughable part is that their Prime Minister would deny it in the face of overwhelming evidence.

Canada routinely attempts to interfere in U.S. politics while hiding behind their own position of pearl-clutching sovereignty.  Even as Mark Carney was speaking today, former Deputy Prime Minister, and current Canadian special representative to Ukraine, Chrystia Freeland is currently on a promotional tour for her book about influencing U.S. elections and opposing Donald Trump.

Former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and current PM Mark Carney frequently meet with Democrat leadership in congress to strategize ways to influence election outcomes.  In fact, Mark Carney hired American Maia Johnson, a Democrat operative and former campaign organizer for Hillary Clinton to be his current Chief of Staff in Canada.

With the midterm elections soon upon us, the U.S. Consulate to Canada officially told Canadian officials to stop trying to influence the election [SEE HERE] citing a dozen examples of Canadian govt officials purposefully outlining their intent to manipulate U.S. politics.  Against that warning, Prime Minister Carney was asked about it.  His response is typically Canadian. WATCH:

U.S Consulate: “The Canadian government brushes off concerns about potential interference in U.S. elections, even as its ministers and premiers openly describe plans to influence American politics in official documents and public appearances.” (more)

(more…)

Two fundamental issues that Canadian politicians and media keep hidden from Canadians. First, in the 2025 U.S. Supreme Court decision last year about tariffs, the court outlined that the executive branch can constitutionally ban trade with another country. Second, the U.S. can exit the USMCA with a six-month notification.

There is an awful lot of pretending and gaslighting within this general discussion segment; purposefully advanced to keep the Canadian people in the dark. However, that said, Canada’s chief trade negotiator to the United States, Janice Charette does admit that tariff free access to the U.S market is lost forever.

Janice Charette is participating in a discussion at the Toronto Global Forum, where she is questioned by Brian Tobin, vice chair of the BMO Financial Group about the trade relationship with the United States and the opinion that many Canadian officials have espoused that Canada just needs to outlast President Donald Trump.

Charette informs the audience that regardless of who is the U.S. President, tariffs will likely remain in place permanently because the amount of revenue being generated to the U.S. Treasury is too great for any President or congress to stop. PROMPTED – WATCH:

While almost all of her analysis is flawed, skewed and seriously underestimates the nature of the dynamic that Canada is facing, what Janice Charette outlines about how Donald Trump has shifted the national revenue model using global tariffs to offset national expenditures (her baseline) is accurate.

Beyond her statement it is worth pausing for a moment and using Charette’s frame of reference to reconsider the post WWII European revenue model.  It was/is President Trump’s model in reverse.

The Marshal plan, was essentially one-way tariffs on American trade that provided one-way benefits (revenue) that permitted the EU to rebuild after the second world war.  To Charlette’s framework, how willing was the EU mindset to change this beneficial economic outcome?

Answer: The EU fought it (and is still fighting it), perceiving the elimination of that benefit as an existential threat to their economic power. The EU became reliant on the Marshal Plan.

(more…)