Nearly 70% of Canadians think less of U.S. due to Trump tariffs: Ipsos
By: By Sean Boynton - Canada's Global News
BUZZ NOTE: There is a relevant news video embedded in this seed that I'm unable to open, but you can by clicking on the SEEDED CONTENT link just below this message, which will open the original source article. There are also a further two related news videos.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Nearly 70% of Canadians think less of U.S. due to Trump tariffs: Ipsos
U.S. President Donald Trump's tariff threats and talk about making Canada the 51st state have made Canadians angry — very angry.
A new poll by Ipsos for Global News found a whopping 68 per cent of Canadians surveyed think less of the United States as a country, after Trump threatened Canada's economy with 25 per cent tariffs that were meant to go into effect this week, before being paused.
Nearly half of all respondents, 46 per cent, said they strongly held that negative perception.
"What surprised me is the intensity of the responses," said Sean Simpson, senior vice president of Ipsos Public Affairs.
The high number of people voicing strong opinions, he said, means "this isn't some idea they have that they may or may not act on. This is something that they intend to follow through on. The feelings are visceral."
According to the poll, two-thirds of Canadians say they will be avoiding purchasing U.S.-made goods moving forward, as a "Buy Canadian" movement grows in response to Trump's economic threats.
A similar number said they would also avoid travel to the U.S., with 45 per cent saying they felt strongly about their decision.
Simpson said the anger toward the U.S. was strongest among respondents aged 55 and over who have a deeper historical understanding of the bilateral relationship, after watching past U.S. presidents work well with Canada.
"All of those conventions are laying in shambles at the feet of Donald Trump," he said. "And so older Canadians are saying, 'My gosh, what is going on here?'"
He pointed out that older Canadians are also more likely to be snowbirds that live in the U.S. part-time, making their decision to cancel travel south of the border notable.
The poll also spoke to the economic insecurity Trump's threats have created among Canadians. Nearly 60 per cent of those surveyed said their own personal financial situation would suffer due to Trump's actions.
Sixty per cent said they want the federal government to create a "major" subsidy program, similar to the ones launched during the COVID-19 pandemic, to support workers affected by U.S. tariffs and retaliatory actions from Canada.
Federal officials announced a process for impacted businesses to request "exceptional relief" before Trump and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau reached a deal on Monday that paused the tariffs for 30 days. That pause means the relief program, as well as retaliatory tariffs, were also put on hold.
While attitudes toward the U.S. were more clear, Canadians appear split on whether political leaders at home will be able to "manage" Trump. Just under half responded positively, while 38 per cent said they somewhat or strongly disagree.
That lack of resounding confidence reflects not just on Trudeau but also the Liberal leadership candidates vying to replace him — as well as Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre, whose party still leads in election opinion polls, but by a narrowing margin.
"At the moment, it seems that the ballot question is moving to who's best able to deal with Canadian-American relations," Darrell Bricker, CEO of Ipsos Public Affairs, told Global News.
Simpson noted that support for political leaders is higher in Ontario, where provincial Progressive Conservative Party Leader Doug Ford is running for re-election as premier. Ford has said his snap election call was to secure a stronger mandate to protect the province from Trump's tariff threats.
Political support is lowest in western provinces like Alberta, which Simpson said reflects the continued negative views there of the federal Liberal government.
"This is going to be a critical question for all of our leaders to establish themselves as the person who's best able to deal with Donald Trump, if anybody can," he said.
These are some of the findings of an Ipsos poll conducted between January 30 and February 3, 2025, on behalf of Global News. For this survey, a sample of 1,000 Canadians aged 18+ was interviewed online. Quotas and weighting were employed to ensure that the sample's composition reflects that of the Canadian population according to census parameters. The precision of Ipsos online polls is measured using a credibility interval. In this case, the poll is accurate to within ± 3.8 percentage points, 19 times out of 20, had all Canadians aged 18+ been polled. The credibility interval will be wider among subsets of the population. All sample surveys and polls may be subject to other sources of error, including, but not limited to coverage error, and measurement error.
The administrator of this group reserves the right, along with the site moderators, to moderate all and any postings to this group, including the right to enforce the ToS, the CoC, and also including anything that the administrator deems within his sole discretion to be offensive, including and not limited to off topic or 'no value' comments, with the power to delete in exercising those rights.
It would be best, therefore, to be civil in posting on this group.
By now it should be well known that I am unable to open certain sources, videos and pictures. If I cannot, I will ask that they be described and explained. If the poster refuses to comply, their comment will be deleted. Instagrams are banned.
Tags
Who is online
64 visitors
How to win friends and influence people? I have a feeling Trump has never read this book:
BTW I have read that book-- but FWIW I hope Canada remains an independent country (and friend of the United States).
I certainly hope so, and I'm pretty sure it will.
What is sad for me is that I used to love the USA - spent a lot of time there, many vacations, travelled through, across and up and down the land, attended many festivals, even owned for a while with my brother a golf condo in Florida. and now for a few reasons will never step foot there again.
A good friend of mine (originally from Virginia) married a guy who had a golf condo in Florida-- she moved in with him and still lives there.
Its in Boca.
(I've never been there, but it looks really nice from the photos she sent me).
Our next door neighbour in Toronto had an absolutely beautiful home with a pool in Boca. Ours was in the Hollybrook Golf and Country Club, Hallandale, just west of Hollywood.
I've only been to Florida a few times. Once was decades ago-- mostly Miami. In August-- didn't like the weather.
Then I was in a spa in Pompano Beach. went there intially because they were one of the few spas in the U.S. that had a quit-smoke program. I liked the spa so much I went back several times. Christmas week-- wonderful weather. Then in both off-peak seasons. (They had 3 seasons for rates)
I wouldn't be able to count the number of times I've been to Florida, starting from the time I was a teenager. Although I've only been there in the Winter or Spring.
Interesting sentence construction. With my limited knowledge of English grammer I assume correct it is.
How about:
Even owned a golf condo in Florida my brother with?
Actually I was thinking of other possible structures, something like:
For a while I even owned a golf condo in Florida with my brother.
Or maybe: For a while my brother and I even owned a golf condo in Florida.
Actually any way someone contructs their sentences is fine with me.
But I think the sentence might be more powerful if it only expressed one idea (that you even owned a condo in the U.S.). That's the first idea.
IMO there's a second idea-- that you owned it with your brother. Which is interesting, but imo it takes away a bit from the first idea (In the U.S.). My opinion is it should be two sentences, not one-- one sentence saying you owned property in the U.S., the second sentence saying it was with your brother.
(Of course neither way is inherently better...)
Lots of possibilities.
Actually the reason I thought of all this is the concept of "How sentences are structured".
Because I recently discovered a site I really like. Its all humor (your brother might like it!). Its called "Structuring Sentences For Dummies". I like it because:
1. Its about humor-- not really about how to structure sentences.
2. Its a strange kind of humor that I like.
And now the bad news (only slightly) it on Facebook and IIRC you aren't able to access fb (?)
Depends up the individual. There's a saying:
In the beginner's mind, there are many possibilities, but in the expert's there are few.
--Zen Master Suzuki
(He believed we must approach Zen practices with a beginner's mind . . . )
It's a strange kind of humour that you post.
Incidentally if Canada were to become a state, it would have 2 Senators. In addition, it would have representatives in the House.
Assuming the majority of Canadians are a bit more liberal than most Americans, Canada becoming a state would not be good politically for the Republicans!
And then there's the issue of Greenland-- how would they vote if they were part of the U.S.?
And what if Trump sent in the U.S> military to conquer Panama-- would it become yet another of trump's new states? (Or maybe just a garden variety colony?)
The Green Party?
That's even less likely than Greenland, and NO WAY is he going to get away with waging war against Canada - a NATO country that is also a member of a multi-nation Commonwealth.
Oh of course! (Now why didn't I think of that?)
I totally agree-- he won't wage war against Canada.
And BTW one reason he want's Greenland is location (good early warning site if Russia ever fires missiles at North America).
But what some people aren't aware of: the U.S. already has a military base in Greenland ("Thule") and the country is perfectly OK with us having the base there.
As for Panama-- I doubt if he'd be that crazy.
The people or the government?
Are you sure about that?
Their current government of course.
I don't know how the people feel about it. I would imagine some feel positive about it..if it brings jobs (?). And as long as the staff there doesn't do anything negative towards the inhabitants.
No.
You actually think that anyone other than an American would want Trump running the show?
What I couldn't understand from the beginning is why the whole nation would be considered a State when there are 10 separate provinces and 3 territories - that would make 13 States for a total of 63
I had thought about that.
In that case the Republicans would never again control Congress! (Sometimes I wonder...could it be possible that Trump sometimes doesn't think thing through-- doesn't try to hard to see what the ultimate impact of his choices might be...???
That's why he said ONE State.
I can't imagine Canada becoming one state.
At a minimum there would be one state for the Atlantic provinces, one for Quebec, one for Ontario, one for the plains provinces, one for the Pacific, and one for the North. At least six states. That would make the average "Canadian state" very close in population to the average "American state", but much bigger in surface.
Thanks, Bob, but of course I'm sure there aren't very many Canadians who want where they live to become an American State.
I can see no reason for any Canadian to want to be American.
70% seems about right after what Donald has done/said recently. That being said how much should that even matter? Do you think Canada really cares what the people of the US thinks about their choice of leaders? Do you think any country votes based on what Americans may think of the choice?
Yes, it should matter to you that one of our closest allies is now pissed off at us and that the reason for their anger was entirely unnecessary. That Trump alone fucked this up and that he will continue to do this.
Surely you see that gratuitously angering our allies is counterproductive ... that it is brain-dead stupid ... and that it matters.
Do you think Canada really cares what the people of the US thinks about their choice of leaders? Do you think any country votes based on what Americans may think of the choice? Do you think they will get over being "pissed off"? Do we know about every time another country's leaders say something bad about us? Do we really give a shit or do we get over it?
Personally I would not have gone about it the way Trump did but I am not running around with my hair on fire either.
Apparently some think it is a huge deal and just won't get over it.
Not presently, but that question has nothing to do with my response. I was talking about Canadian's view of Trump and why it matters.
No, but again, I was talking about Canadian's view of Trump and why it matters.
Yes, over time, if Trump stops fucking with them.
No. Just asking silly questions now?
We should care because having one of our closest allies angry is bad. We would prefer that they be happy or at least content. I can explain why if this does not make sense to you.
Well that is a promising sign.
And of course you engage in the dishonest tactic of exaggerating any criticism of Trump and then criticizing the exaggeration you invented. That is a strawman tactic. It is a dishonest attempt to take a rational criticism of Trump and try to portray the critic as overly-emotional and irrational.
The theme with Trump-defense comments always seems to be dishonesty.
They seem much more pissed off about it than Canada does. The Canadian Government is going to do what is best for their country. It is not in the best interest of their country if they stay pissed off.
If they are still angry that is their problem. I don't believe they are . It is all part of being in a relationship.
Backhanded insult noted
Ah, the standard accusations when the spin isn't working. The sheer volume of posts about Trump damaging international relations over the past week would lead any rational person to conclude the criticism has gone into overly-emotional and irrational.
The accusation of dishonesty if people don't buy into the Trump hysteria seems to be emotional, irrational and dishonest.
Brilliant. I suppose you would be perfectly content if some asshole gratuitously threatened tariffs and insulted your nation (i.e. 51st state).
Given Trump is indeed damaging international relationships you should not be surprised that this is a topic of discussion.
No, the accusation of dishonesty when someone engages in dishonesty.
Well, IMO there are actually two possibilities:
1. The criticism has gone into overly-emotional and irrational.
or
2. Its entirely valid.
Any rational person?
So-- in your opinion-- who decides what is truly rational-- and what isn't?
Being a Canadian I can say that I am DAMNED angry, angry at what Trump has been saying about Canada, angry at what he has been doing about Canada, angry that he was elected in the first place, angry at the ignorance of Americans for electing him, and angry at your comments posted about this matter and about Canadians. And contrary to your belief, that anger is not going to subside easily.
When a relationship goes sour, it can end in divorce - just as my first marriage did.
The individual of course. Why? Do you think someone else should?
I would give it all the consideration it deserves, maybe 15 seconds, and then move on with my life
That is too bad but as I said that is your problem to deal with any way you see fit.
Then you are not the type of person who can understand why Canadians would be angry.
Well then you need to factor in the number of comments made by those people. Looks like you are complaining that their comments are rebutted. Such a shame.
Of course. But just because you seem willing to dismiss most things as unimportant does not mean they are indeed unimportant.
So far your comments do not seem to identify fault with anything Trump does. The worst criticism in your comments of Trump is that you would not necessarily handle things as he has. But your comments sure have plenty to say about those who criticize Trump ... and almost never contain an actual argument ... just complaints about the critics.
Of course not. Just as some folks that think everything is important does not make it important.
I can say I am less likely to end up with an ulcer than someone that is always outraged, looking for a reason to be outraged or accusing people of everything from being partisan to unpatriotic for not understanding and sharing the outrage..
The key is the ability to back up claims.
You will be hard pressed to back up your claim that Trump's actions against Canada are unimportant and Canadians should not be angry at what Trump has done and said.
Just demonstrates to me (yet again) that you are imagining things that are not true.
Which means to me that you really don't give a shit about anyone your hero harms. Yes, Canada WILL deal with it and I hope to Hell that it effectively teaches a hard lesson.
[deleted][✘]
I didn't vote for Trump to play nice with Canada, Mexico, or any of our so called allies.
Really not happy he of his unconditional support of Israel; or trying to foist Palestinians on surrounding Arab countries.
Our allies dictated things while Brandon was in charge; and looked how that turned out.
If our so called "allies" don't like it they can stop taking advantage of the US. Canada can pay for it's own defense. Mexico can take care of their Cartel problems; and keep their borders with the US closed to illegal immigrants.
We shouldn't have to bribe countries; or allow them to take advantage of us just so they "like us".
Time for the rest of the world to put on their big boy pants again and actually live up to their obligations.
Such a smart move to gratuitously threaten and anger our closest trade partners. Fucking brilliant. And of course you defend this crap.
I don't think Iron Man hurts people that don't deserve to be hurt. I also don't care much about all peoples feelings since there is always someone whose feelings will be hurt by pretty much everything a person does.
Wow!!! I'm surprised Trump didn't pick you to head America's diplomatic service.
He asked but I declined.
We may not see eye to eye on this issue but I've got to tell you that that was the best reply to a comment - I'm still laughing.
Actually I've never really thought about it-- at least not much.
(For some strange reason I mostly think about other stuff).
Actually I've never really thought about it-- at least not much.
There's an old Russian saying:
Chacun à son goût
Or as they say in Bolivia:
One's man's meat is another man's poisson
At this point, when I should be asleep, I want to thank TiG for posting rational and defensible arguments to attempts to discredit and rewrite reality, and I want to thank Krishna for making me laugh out loud by exposing and ridiculing twisted commentary with his usual wry humour.
Good thing I have Russian ancestry or I never would have understood what that meant.
I myself am half Scotch and half water!
Human beings are actually an average of 60% water.
Donald Trump's support has come from his core base supporters. In The US, this has historically been about 20-30% of the voting age population. Given the similar makeup of the population of Canada, it is not surprising that he polls the same there.
His lack of character, lack of moral underpinnings of any sort for his policies, lack of any caring for the population except as a source of votes and money, combined with his total disregard for the Constitution and Laws of the of the US makes me wonder how he could fool even that many people, until one realizes that a certain portion of the population are just plain mean, vindictive and don't care about (or even like) hurting people who they may have disagreements with.
I think that's part of it.
And IMO in some cases another principle applies. In the words of Albert Einstein:
I know of two things that are infinite, the Universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the former.
While we're talking about Canada becoming American... shouldn't we also be talking about Mexico becoming American?
To stay at not quite 7 million people per state, Mexico would have to become nineteen or twenty states.
I wonder why Trump hasn't suggested this.
I am thinking that you forgot your sarcasm tag...
I think it would be because he doesn't understand Spanish.
.
No hablo!