The Western Hoser

When President Donald Trump suspended trade talks with Canada over an Ontario ad featuring Ronald Reagan’s voice, it marked a new low in an already strained relationship. But while Trump’s response drew global headlines, the spark came from north of the border. The ad, though provincial, was a political misstep that handed Washington an easy excuse to turn up the pressure.

Prime Minister Mark Carney’s response was calm and deliberate: an open invitation to resume talks, paired with a push to diversify Canada’s trade ties. By refusing to retaliate with tariffs, Carney avoided collateral damage to Canadian households and positioned the country for steadier footing. His composure, despite campaign promises of “elbows up” toughness, reveals the disciplined banker beneath the populist veneer. In a period of economic fragility, that restraint may prove stabilizing.

The Reagan Ad That Lit the Fuse

The controversy began on October 16, when Ontario Premier Doug Ford launched a U.S.-targeted ad quoting Reagan’s 1987 radio address warning that tariffs “inevitably lead to retaliation … and the triggering of fierce trade wars.” The campaign, aimed at swaying American opinion against Trump’s protectionism, quickly backfired.

The Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation condemned the ad as “selective and misleading,” objecting to the use of Reagan’s voice without authorization. Trump seized on the issue, posting on Truth Social that Canada had “fraudulently used” Reagan’s words before halting negotiations and threatening a 10 percent tariff hike.

The complication was that the ad wasn’t federal. It was a provincial initiative paid for by Ontario, not Ottawa. Carney was aware of the campaign before its release, as confirmed by Ford, but stopped short of intervening. That caution may have been intended to respect provincial autonomy, but it came at a cost. In Washington, the distinction between Ontario and “Canada” was quickly lost. Ford announced a pause on October 24 after consulting Carney, admitting it had “reached U.S. audiences at the highest levels.” But the pause wasn’t immediate—the ad continued airing through the weekend’s World Series broadcasts, underscoring Ontario’s delay in defusing a crisis that had already escalated to the Oval Office.

Regardless of motives, the result was predictable. Trump’s threatened tariffs risk further economic pain on both sides of the border, especially for Canadian steel, aluminum, auto, and lumber sectors already battered by previous rounds of duties.

Carney’s Pragmatic Pivot

Speaking from the ASEAN Summit in Kuala Lumpur on October 26, Carney’s remarks were characteristically measured: “The government of Canada stands ready to build on the progress that we had been making.” He emphasized focusing on what Canada can control, including domestic investment and new global partnerships, while outlining a plan to double non-U.S. exports within a decade.

This approach follows earlier efforts to keep talks alive, including scrapping the digital services tax in June and lifting certain counter-tariffs in August. Critics call it appeasement, but Carney’s refusal to escalate spares Canadian consumers from higher costs. With three-quarters of Canada’s $600 billion in exports bound for the U.S., restraint is not weakness. It is realism.

Carney’s background as a central banker at the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England, and as a Goldman Sachs alumnus, shapes his methodical style. His instinct is to stabilize, not grandstand. That is a sharp contrast to his campaign persona, the “elbows up” outsider who promised to respond firmly to U.S. policies. The shift from rhetoric to realism reflects a focus on governance over theatre.

From Campaign Maverick to Trade Realist

Carney’s campaign channeled populist grit, invoking hockey toughness and nationalist pride. It worked. The Liberals got a reboot free of Trudeau’s baggage. But governing has revealed a more cautious side: the financier who prizes predictability over confrontation.

In his October 7 meeting with Trump at the White House, Carney praised “signs of fairness” even as the U.S. delayed a metals tariff deal. The diplomatic tone frustrated some in Ottawa but kept Canada in the conversation. And with Trump’s unpredictable approach to the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, and his quip that he has “no plans to meet Carney for a while,” patience may be Canada’s only leverage.

Carney’s broader strategy, strengthening ties with ASEAN and the EU, acknowledges a new reality. The era of automatic alignment with Washington is fading.

A Path Forward

The Ontario ad’s use of Reagan’s words underscored the risks of political showmanship in a delicate trade climate. Both Ford and Carney now face a common challenge: restoring confidence and preventing future diplomatic missteps. Carney’s steady posture offers an opening for constructive dialogue, but that will require all levels of government to align their messages and priorities.

Conclusion

This latest flare-up was avoidable. Ontario’s misjudged campaign handed Trump ammunition, and Carney’s caution came at a political cost. Yet his measured response, focusing on stability over spectacle, may help mitigate the damage. As talks resume, Canada’s task is clear: less performance, more prudence. In diplomacy as in markets, composure often wins where outrage fails.