Pierre did take a measured, adult approach. He clearly rejected Trumpβs annexation rhetoric, saying Canada would never become the 51st state, but he did not call for severing relations or launching a reckless trade war.
His proposed response was practical: targeted dollar-for-dollar counter-tariffs on goods Canada could replace, minimizing the cost to Canadians, directing the revenue to affected workers and businesses, removing internal trade barriers and building Canadian energy and export capacity.
Independent reporting noted that Poilievre supported targeted retaliation, greater economic resilience and negotiations to pause the tariffs while renewing CUSMA. He also called Trump unreliable and said he had repeatedly betrayed Canada.
That is measured: defend Canadian sovereignty, retaliate carefully and keep a working relationship with the country that buys most of our exports.
Comparing that to Canadaβs COVID response is simply an assertion. What, specifically, should Poilievre have done differently when the American president was threatening our economy and openly talking about absorbing our country?