What Smith said, and why it matters

The "mayday" scenario

On the eve of the 2025 federal election call, an excerpt from Danielle Smith’s interview with Breitbart News started making the rounds on social media. Today it has hit mainstream media.

In the interview, Smith said: “The longer this (tariff) dispute goes on, politicians posture, and it seems to be benefiting the Liberals right now so I would hope that we could put things on pause is what I’ve told administration officials. … Let’s just put things on pause so we can get through an election.”

Why should the Trump administration care about the Canadian election? Smith went on to say that she told the Americans “I would say, on balance, the perspective that Pierre [Poilievre] would bring would be very much in sync with, I think…the new direction in America. And I think we’d have a really great relationship for the period of time they’re both in (office).”¹

So, why should WE care about what Smith claims to have said to “administration officials”?

First, in her “diplomatic” efforts to engage with the Americans, Smith wasn’t asking them not to levy tariffs but to postpone them until after the election. Is it her position that tariffs aren’t a problem in and of themselves, but only if they help the Liberals?

Second, asking the American president to put off levying tariffs with the goal of affecting the outcome of a Canadian federal election constitutes inviting foreign interference in Canada’s election (as Ken Boessenkool has pointed out). It’s on par with Trump asking Zelensky to investigate Hunter Biden in the run-up to the 2020 presidential election.

Finally, the tariffs just keep coming, suggesting that Smith’s “diplomatic” efforts aren’t working.

Setting all of this aside, let’s take a moment to consider the sheer stupidity of bragging about this to a media outlet. Breitbart isn’t exactly mainstream journalism, but the “News” in the title does suggest that they are likely to publish what you tell them.

And what Smith told them was that she believes that “the perspective Pierre [Poilievre] would bring would be very much in sync with…the new direction in America.” If there isn’t a Liberal campaign ad being produced with this quote, then Carney needs a new campaign team.

Poilievre’s greatest weakness going into the federal election is the concern from middle-of-the-road voters that he won’t be tough on Trump, or that he’s “maple MAGA.” And here, Danielle Smith has validated this perception.

We are only a few hours into the 2025 federal election and a lot can change. But a Liberal win is now a possibility, according to this week’s polls. If the Liberals win, Danielle Smith has volunteered for the role of scapegoat for angry Conservatives.

It was just three days after the Liberals won the 2021 federal election that Jason Kenney faced a caucus revolt. It had been a long time coming and had more to do with his caucus management style and the challenge of COVID than federal politics, but there were those who believed that his government’s mismanagement of COVID-19 in the fall of 2021 contributed to the federal party’s failure to form government.

Fast forward to May Day, 2025. If the Liberals are able to maintain their astonishing support in the polls and the Conservatives lose, there will be a nationwide search for scapegoats. With her efforts to get the Americans to tilt the playing field in Poilievre’s direction and her inexplicable decision to brag about it, Smith has volunteered to join the list of potential scapegoats. Together with the ongoing scandal around AHS contracting, it might be ‘mayday’ on May Day for Smith.

This would be an excellent moment for the Premier to reconsider her upcoming taxpayer-paid trip to Florida to appear at a fundraiser for the Trumpian “PragerU.” The best gift she could give Poilievre would be to retreat to Panama for the next six weeks, to avoid reminding voters elsewhere in Canada of the ties between some Canadian Conservatives and the MAGA movement.

1. Quotes taken from CTV’s article about the interview.