The undefended Canada-U.S. border gets renewed scrutiny as Trump’s win revives historic anxieties

Good long read and overview. Excerpt some of the most interesting comments:

…In the rush to find ways of taming Mr. Trump’s sudden fury about the Canadian border, experts are now calling for the revival of obscure and long-dormant bilateral bodies. Former public safety minister Marco Mendicino said one way to “send a very strong signal to the president-elect” is to immediately reconvene a meeting of the Canada-U.S. Cross-Border Crime Forum, which was revived after several years in abeyance last year.

The forum, composed of Canada’s public safety and justice ministers, and the U.S. secretary of homeland security and attorney-general, is a ready-made platform for sharing intelligence and addressing concerns about human and drug smuggling across the border.

“Being pro-active is crucial, because we want to transmit that we are in total alignment when it comes to shoring up the integrity of the border,” Mr. Mendicino said.

If Canadians often thought of their border with the U.S. as a kind of decorative ticker tape, the Trump administration appears to believe the border is more like a fishing net that is full of holes. And some of the numbers do suggest that our shared border is becoming more porous to migrants and drugs, as Mr. Trump alleged in his social media post.

Statistics from U.S. Customs and Border Protection show that roughly twice as many suspected terrorists have tried to cross from Canada into the U.S. as have from Mexico in recent years.

The data are deeply concerning for Americans in the post-9/11 era and should be taken seriously and investigated by Canadian officials, said Michael Barutciski, a York University professor of international affairs.

As recently as September, he pointed out, a Pakistani man living in the Toronto area was arrested near the border in Ormstown, Que., in September on allegations he was plotting an Islamic State-inspired mass shooting on a Jewish centre in New York. The man entered Canada on a student visa last year.

“It doesn’t look good,” said Prof. Barutciski. “It’s a very sensitive issue and they often turn to Canada as sort of a weak point and they’re paranoid about that and we can’t deny that once in a while we do give them reasons to be afraid.”

Former Conservative public safety minister Peter Van Loan thinks the fear of Canadian terror strikes in the U.S. is overblown and that the perception is worth combatting while the issue is front and centre. After all, the data on terrorists reflect those who tried to enter the country and were prevented from doing so.

“It has been a long running misunderstanding among Americans that Canada has been a source of terrorists,” he said. “None of the 9/11 terrorists came from Canada. I continually ran into American politicians who believe they did come in through Canada, and the fact is, they did not. So Canada has a bit of a public relations issue there.”

The border is certainly under growing strain from irregular migrants – although the perception that they are more likely to be criminals has been harshly scrutinized. A recent U.S. study found that undocumented immigrants in Texas, at least, had lower rates of violent crime than U.S.-born citizens….

Source: The undefended Canada-U.S. border gets renewed scrutiny as Trump’s win revives historic anxieties

Canada can’t support influx of migrants fleeing Trump, must prevent border crossings, says former top aide

Clearly the case, for domestic as well as USA reasons:

Canada needs to significantly strengthen its border, says a former chief of staff to Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly, because it can’t absorb large numbers of migrants who could flee here to evade U.S. president-elect Donald Trump’s pledge of mass deportations.

Peter Wilkinson, who recently spent 21 months as Ms. Joly’s top lieutenant and previously served as chief of staff to former Ontario premier Dalton McGuinty, said Canadians should be deeply concerned about Mr. Trump’s plan to deport up to 11 million undocumented migrants after he takes office in January.

While Mr. Trump has vowed to impose 25-per-cent tariffs on Canada and Mexico in a bid to stop illegal crossings and the flow of fentanyl into the U.S., Mr. Wilkinson worries about the threat of mass deportations.

“We just can’t take 11 million people. We can’t even take one million people or 500,000 people,” he said in an interview. “We have to stop people from coming in. We will be faced with something that as Canadians, that we never really faced before.”

Mr. Wilkinson said the country’s health care and social-welfare systems can’t handle potentially huge numbers of people crossing into Canada. While many groups will argue that this country should accept these migrants, he warned that this issue could fracture the Canadian consensus on immigration.

“Lots of groups in society will be saying ‘no, we can’t do that, it is inhumane,’ and I understand that,” he said. “We are straining a bit now on the consensus in the country in regard to immigration and refugees. This will blow it up.”…

Source: Canada can’t support influx of migrants fleeing Trump, must prevent border crossings, says former top aide

Why Indians are risking it all to chase the American Dream

Good analysis and reminder how the Northern border is of increasing concern to the USA:

…Since October 2020, US Customs and Border Protection (CPB) officials have detained nearly 170,000 Indian migrants attempting unauthorised crossings at both the northern and southern land borders.

“Though smaller than the numbers from Latin America and the Caribbean, Indian nationals represent the largest group of migrants from outside the Western Hemisphere encountered by the CPB in the past four years,” say Gil Guerra and Sneha Puri, immigration analysts at Niskanen Center, a Washington-based think tank.

As of 2022, an estimated 725,000 undocumented Indian immigrants were in the US, making them the third-largest group after those from Mexico and El Salvador, according to new data from the Pew Research Center. Unauthorised immigrants in all make up 3% of US’s total population and 22% of the foreign-born population.

Looking at the data, Mr Guerra and Ms Puri have identified notable trends in the spike in Indians attempting illegal border crossings. 

For one, the migrants are not from the lowest economic strata. But they cannot secure tourist or student visas to the US, often due to lower education or English proficiency.

Instead, they rely on agencies charging up to $100,000 (£79,000), sometimes using long and arduous routes designed to dodge border controls. To afford this, many sell farms or take out loans. Not surprisingly, data from the US immigration courts in 2024 reveals that the majority of Indian migrants were male, aged 18-34.

Second, Canada on the northern border has become a more accessible entry point for Indians, with a visitor visa processing time of 76 days (compared to up to a year for a US visa in India).

The Swanton Sector – covering the states of Vermont and counties in New York and New Hampshire – has experienced a sudden surge in encounters with Indian nationals since early this year, peaking at 2,715 in June, the researchers found.

Earlier, most irregular Indian migrants entered the Americas through the busier southern border with Mexico via El Salvador or Nicaragua, both of which facilitated migration. Until November last year, Indian nationals enjoyed visa-free travel to El Salvador.

“The US-Canada border is also longer and less guarded than the US-Mexico border. And while it is not necessarily safer, criminal groups do not have the same presence there as they do along the route from South and Central America,” Mr Guerra and Ms Puri say.

Thirdly, much of the migration appears to originate from the Sikh-dominated Indian state of Punjab and neighbouring Haryana, which has traditionally seen people migrating overseas. The other source of origin is Gujarat, the home state of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Punjab, which accounts for a large share of irregular Indian migrants, is facing economic hardships, including high unemployment, farming distress and a looming drug crisis. 

Migration has also long been common among Punjabis, with rural youth still eager to move abroad. 

A recent study of 120 respondents in Punjab by Navjot Kaur, Gaganpreet Kaur and Lavjit Kaur found that 56% emigrated between ages 18-28, often after secondary education. Many funded their move through non-institutional loans, later sending remittances to their families. 

Then there has been a rise in tensions over the separatist Khalistan movement, which seeks to establish an independent homeland for Sikhs. “This has caused fear from some Sikhs in India about being unfairly targeted by authorities or politicians. These fears may also provide a credible basis for claims of persecution that allows them to seek asylum, whether or not true,” says Ms Puri.

But pinning down the exact triggers for migration is challenging. 

“While motivations vary, economic opportunity remains the primary driver, reinforced by social networks and a sense of pride in having family members ‘settled’ in the US,” says Ms Puri.

Fourth, researchers found a shift in the family demographics of Indian nationals at the borders.

More families are trying to cross the border. In 2021, single adults were overwhelmingly detained at both borders. Now, family units make up 16-18% of the detentions at both borders.

This has sometimes led to tragic consequences. In January 2022, an Indian family of four – part of a group of 11 people from Gujarat – froze to death just 12m (39ft) from the border in Canada while attempting to enter the US.

Pablo Bose, a migration and urban studies scholar at the University of Vermont, says Indians are trying to cross into the US in larger numbers because of more economic opportunities and “more ability to enter the informal economies in the US cities”, especially the large ones like New York or Boston.

“From everything I know and interviews I have conducted, most of the Indians are not staying in the more rural locations like Vermont or upstate New York but rather heading to the cities as soon as they can,” Mr Bose told the BBC. There, he says, they are entering mostly informal jobs like domestic labour and restaurant work.

Things are likely to become more difficult soon. Veteran immigration official Tom Homan, who will be in charge of the country’s borders following Trump’s inauguration in January, has said that the northern border with Canada is a priority because illegal migration in the area is a “huge national security issue”.

What happens next is unclear. “It remains to be seen if Canada would impose similar policies to prevent people migrating into the US from its borders. If that happens, we can expect a decline in detentions of Indians nationals at the border,” says Ms Puri. 

Whatever the case, the dreams driving thousands of desperate Indians to seek a better life in the US are unlikely to fade, even as the road ahead becomes more perilous.

Source: Why Indians are risking it all to chase the American Dream

Immigration Under the Trump Administration: Five Things to Expect in the First 90 Days

Good solid analysis:

The first Trump administration brought significant changes to U.S. immigration policies, which had profound impacts on businesses and individuals alike. Donald Trump has shared plans for closing the U.S. borders and enforcing mass deportations for undocumented immigrants almost immediately after taking office in January. Below are five major impacts to immigration policy we saw as a result of Trump’s first term, and what we can expect for his second term.

  1. Extreme Vetting: The administration introduced stringent vetting processes for visa applicants, with the stated aim of enhancing national security. This led to longer processing times and increased scrutiny of applicants’ backgrounds. The U.S. Department of State, whose Bureau of Consular Affairs oversees the issuance of U.S. visas, has yet to recover from staffing shortages resulting from the first Trump administration, while geopolitical conflicts continue to grow in size and severity, drawing limited resources away from visa processing. Like under the first Trump administration, visa applicants – and the U.S. companies that employ them – can expect extremely long wait times for visa interview appointments, more frequent administrative processing delays, and much higher visa refusal rates. Foreign workers may be less able to travel internationally for work due to the risk of being unable to return to the U.S.
     
  2. Hiring and Onboarding Delays: Slow adjudication and consular operations, coupled with heavy scrutiny, caused significant delays in hiring and onboarding international employees. Businesses faced challenges in maintaining their high-skilled workforces due to these prolonged processes since such (legal) foreign workers are the cohort most affected by delays and increased scrutiny of work visa applications. Only the H-2 visa category for seasonal and temporary workers seems to have been unaffected by these delays. In fact, the number of available H-2 visas doubled under Trump, and applications maintained an average approval rate of over 98 percent. Given this history, employers should plan for delays in onboarding high-skilled foreign workers as well as decreased ability to recruit such candidates to the U.S., though the ability to recruit short-term and seasonal labor should remain steady.
     
  3. Business Disruption: Border closures, visa bans, skyrocketing processing times, and denial rates under the first Trump administration exacerbated the staffing issues faced by companies during the pandemic and recovery. Year-plus processing times caused foreign nationals working legally in the U.S. to lose their work authorization and, in some cases, their jobs as employers struggled to navigate the changing adjudication standards. Employers in highly scrutinized industries like construction, manufacturing, food service, hospitality, and agriculture can expect increased immigration enforcement activity, including raids. Raids, in particular, have a chilling impact on recruitment and hiring even of authorized workers, including workers permanently authorized to work in the U.S. – like U.S. citizens, permanent residents, and asylees. In 2022, a federal court ordered ICE to pay more than $1 million to victims of the agency’s raid of a meatpacking plant in Tennessee, after determining ICE agents used racial profiling and excessive force to illegally detain workers without regard to their actual status – lawful or unlawful – in the U.S.
     
  4. Increased Costs: The cost of sponsoring employees for visas and green cards increased due to additional documentary requirements and higher denial rates. Businesses had to allocate more resources to manage immigration-related expenses. Under the incoming administration, employers can expect a return to those high immigration costs and then some. Since Biden took office, denial rates for H-1B visa applications have hovered between 2 – 3 percent; under Trump, H-1B denial rates were more than triple that, ranging from 8 – 15 percent.
     
  5. Uncertainty: In the first Trump administration, sudden policy changes, reduced service levels, and uncertain decisions created concern among employees and businesses. Companies had to adjust their expectations and factor in events that created disruptions impacting all levels of their business, including employee onboarding, production, and service delivery. We expect the impacts of the areas outlined above will lead to a significant number of additional uncertainties for both employers and employees that could impact workforce morale and productivity in anticipation of what could come….

Meredith C. Doll, of counsel in Baker Donelson’s Houston office, helps clients with business immigration matters, including strategy planning, worksite compliance and enforcement, and immigrant and nonimmigrant petitions.  Melanie C. Walker, a shareholder in the Baker Donelson’s Global Immigration Group in Chattanooga. Tennessee, provides strategic guidance and immigration counseling services to companies and their employees.

Source: Immigration Under the Trump Administration: Five Things to Expect in the First 90 Days

Keller: Donald Trump’s victory is about class, not race. And that’s a good thing

I would argue both but more discussion about class and less about identity is positive:

…A multiracial society is a lot more difficult to sustain if politics is fought over immutable characteristics, with skin colour or ethnicity dictating how I vote, and which party courts or targets me. Democrats have long accused the MAGA movement of being white supremacy on steroids, but more and more blue-collar voters of all races, particularly Hispanics, don’t see it that way. They see MAGA as a working-class movement.

It’s not a great thing for a society to have deep class divisions – but it’s a heck of a lot better than a deep racial divide. Class, in the U.S. and Canada, is not a fixed thing. It’s mutable, evolving and debatable. It’s about everything from lifestyle to mindset to culture, all which can and do change – unlike skin colour.

It’s notable that, while Ms. Harris and Democrats ran against the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision that ruled against a constitutional right to abortion, they never mentioned the monumental 2023 Supreme Court decision that declared affirmative action in college admission unconstitutional. Race-blind admission is a popular policy, even in Democratic-controlled California, where whites are a minority.

In the years to come, Democrats and Republicans alike will continue to appeal to voters on the basis of tribal identities – small town versus city, college versus blue collar, conservative versus progressive. But electoral appeals based on race have become a lot less salient in American politics. That’s progress.

Source: Donald Trump’s victory is about class, not race. And that’s a good thing

Ministers urged to explain how they will prevent a surge in asylum seekers from U.S. after Trump election

Suggests major increase in funding for the IRB along with some process re-engineering will be needed. Nothing reduces public support more than the perception that immigration is not being well managed as we have seen over the past two years:

Federal ministers came under pressure from MPs Thursday to explain how they plan to prevent an influx of asylum seekers from the United States after the election of Donald Trump, as a senior official at the Immigration and Refugee Board disclosed it now takes almost four years for asylum claims to be processed.

Roula Eatrides, deputy chairperson of IRB’s refugee protection division, told the Commons immigration committee Thursday that it now takes 44 months for a refugee claim to be dealt with after being referred to the board. She said the IRB has a record backlog of about 250,000 cases.

On Wednesday, immigration lawyer Richard Kurland told The Globe and Mail that because asylum claims take so long to process, undocumented migrants facing deportation from the U.S. may try to find a safe haven and “buy time” in Canada, though he said few are likely to have their claims approved.

During his campaign, Mr. Trump promised to conduct the largest deportation in American history of people living there illegally. On Thursday, Mr. Trump said he will move forward with that pledge. “Really, we have no choice,” he told NBC News. There are an estimated 11 million undocumented migrants in the U.S.

The RCMP’s national headquarters confirmed Thursday it has a plan to deal with a predicted influx of migrants, informed by its experience of a surge during the first Trump presidency…

Source: Ministers urged to explain how they will prevent a surge in asylum seekers from U.S. after Trump election

Immigrants Didn’t Steal the Election After All

Yet another myth questioned:

Among the rampant absurdities about immigration that spread from both the obscure and prominent corners of the Internet, the idea that the Biden administration was “importing” voters from abroad to help Kamala Harris win was simultaneously the silliest and the most common. Setting aside the conspiracy theories, the 2024 election provides the best evidence to date that Republicans can compete when immigration is high.

For reasons I can’t appreciate, many Republicans act as if they cannot do well if there are many immigrants in the electorate. Vice President-elect JD Vance saidrecently that immigration would permanently tilt the balance of power in favor of the Democrats. He said this even as his running mate was poised to make historic gains among Hispanic voters, many of whom are immigrants or children of immigrants. Regardless, the historical evidence shows that GOP performance improves with more immigration, so there are no data behind Vance’s fears.

The immigrant share isn’t associated with a stronger performance of either party in presidential elections. But there is a relationship between stronger Republican performance and a larger immigrant share of the US population. The Democrats controlled both houses of Congress for 83 percent of the years from 1935 to 1994 when the immigrant share of the US population was below 10 percent. Since 1995, Democrats have not controlled either house of Congress 53 percent of the time.

Republicans have performed much better during the high immigration periods of US history. Why? Not only do new populations assimilate, but the more Democrats compete and cater to the votes of naturalized citizens, the more US-born voters drift toward Republicans. An additional factor is that the immigrant share has been high when the unionized share of the labor force has been low, possibly because immigrants undermine unionization

Unions were historically the base of the Democratic Party until recently. Any benefit from naturalized citizens did not outweigh losses among the unionized population.

Does this mean that Democrats needed to be even more anti-immigrant to win? That was Kamala Harris’s assessment of the situation. But my view is that her (and Biden’s) immigration gambit backfired. Polls show that from 2019 to 2023 the share of voters saying immigration should be decreased grew just 6 points. Even though illegal immigration fell sharply in 2024, the share of Americans saying that immigration should be restricted suddenly jumped 14 points in June 2024.

Here’s what happened: Harris and Biden endorsed a bill to “shut the border” in 2024, which they reiterated as their position repeatedly before finally acting unilaterally to ban asylum in June 2024. It’s no surprise that when the heads of both parties endorse immigration restrictions, more people move toward that position. We have seen similar swings on other issues, like trade, when the head of a party (Trump) suddenly endorses a different view. Rather than neutralizing Trump’s immigration attacks, Harris’s flip validated them.

Source: Immigrants Didn’t Steal the Election After All

So you’re an American who now wants to move to Canada? Here’s what you need to know, American interest in moving abroad is about to ‘go into overdrive.’ These are the easiest countries to immigrate to

Repeat of 2016, although more words than action as there was a relatively small increase 2016 to 2019 as a percentage of all immigrants:

Immigration was one of the top issues in the 2024 United States presidential election, sparking rancorous debates between the candidates and among everyday citizens.

But now many Americans are the ones considering leaving the country, particularly for Canada, as they face another four years of Donald Trump as president.

Minnesota resident Krystal Majerus Enquist is one of those people.

She stayed up late on election night watching the results roll in, and said it was “nauseating” to learn that Donald Trump was elected president of the United States.

“Being in a country overall that has chosen someone who is hateful, spreading fear … It feels like we just keep going backwards.”

Searches for terms such as “How to move to Canada” spiked by more than 5,000 per cent over the last 24 hours, according to Google Trends, with the highest interest in the neighbouring states of Vermont, Maine and New Hampshire….

Source: So you’re an American who now wants to move to Canada? Here’s what you need to know

And for wealthy Americans, hedging their bets:

In a repeat of 2016, the re-election of Donald Trump as president of the United States has many Americans taking stock of their options to leave the country. 

Wealthy Americans have already been making the preparations, their attorneys have told Fortune—and many were doing so as a “Plan B” regardless of who won the presidency. Other surveys have found that an increasing number of Americans at all income levels want to leave the country, with political and social unrest being a top concern, followed by the high cost of living. Over the past few years, more and more Americans have been renouncing their citizenship altogether. Anti-immigrant, anti-Semitic, and anti-LGBTQ sentiment are major drivers, as is the erosion of women’s reproductive rights, say immigration attorneys and firms.

“We saw a spike in 2017 after Trump won, and then again in 2020 due to concerns about a Democrat winning and the potential for higher taxes on income, capital gains and a wealth tax, the contested election, and the January 6 riots,” says Reaz Jafri, an attorney at international immigration law firm Withers and CEO of advisory firm Dasein.

U.S. nationals now make up the largest portion of client applications at Henley & Partners, a global citizenship firm. “We expect this now to go into overdrive and increase even further following the results of [Tuesday]’s U.S. election,” says Sarah Nicklin, Henley & Partners’s head of public relations.

Most Americans moving abroad look north to Canada or across the Atlantic to Europe, where popular destinations include Greece, Italy, Malta, Portugal, and Spain, according to Henley & Partners. But moving to a new country isn’t as a simple as it is domestically. Most countries have stringent requirements, and Americans can only move under certain circumstances….

Source: American interest in moving abroad is about to ‘go into overdrive.’ These are the easiest countries to immigrate to

Trump’s Immigration Policies Made America Less Safe. Here’s the Data.

Yet another example:

Listen to just about any of former president Donald Trump’s rallies, and you’ll hear claims that President Joe Biden’s border policies have made the country less safe. At a recent town hall, Trump said Biden is releasing murderers, “drug dealers, drug addicts, everybody” into the country.

But new data reveal that Trump was the one whose immigration policies damaged the country’s security. In fact, he released more convicted criminals into the United States than his successor.

This is not to lend credence to Trump’s efforts to demonize immigrants as dangerous or violent. Data from the Census Bureau shows that immigrants — both legal and illegal — are at least half as likely as citizens to be incarcerated for crimes committed in the United States. (This is why deporting everyone living here illegally would increase crime rates.)

But when it comes to the small percentage of noncitizens who do commit crimes, Trump did not prioritize removing them during his term in office. In fact, he explicitly deprioritized them.

Trump released more criminals into the United States than Biden.

In his first week in office, Trump signed an executive order rescinding Obama-era orders that directed the Department of Homeland Security to focus its resources on detaining and removing noncitizens who committed serious crimes. Trump said he would not “exempt classes or categories of removable aliens.” His goal, he said, was enforcement “against all removable aliens.”

What did that mean in practice? Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents were no longer required to focus on felons. They could arrest anyone caught here illegally, and they did — from pizza delivery drivers to domestic-violence victimsto spouses of U.S. citizens with no criminal records.

New government data obtained by the Cato Institute highlight what happened next: Immigrants with serious criminal records were frequently released into the country instead of being detained for deportation. This included individuals who were transferred to the custody of ICE after serving their sentences and those who were previously deported and encountered ICE after crossing into the country again.

From January 2017 to February 2020, the Trump administration released more than 58,000 convicted criminals into the United States, including more than 8,600 violent criminals and 306 murderers. Contrast that with the Biden administration, which reinstated enforcement priorities: Overall, the average month under Trump saw twice as many releases as under Biden.

Bier WaPo1

Source: Trump’s Immigration Policies Made America Less Safe. Here’s the Data.

Lisée | Mauvaise influence

Foreign interference from south of the border:

….Dans ce Far West politique qu’est devenu Internet, écrit Perez, et « compte tenu de l’extraordinaire propension en ligne des extrémistes d’extrême droite de tous types, cette carte fait le jeu de politiciens comme Poilievre. Le pouvoir de cette “arme secrète” est énorme ». Il s’agit, pense le militant libéral, de la « principale menace » pesant sur la démocratie canadienne. Il a parfaitement raison.

On peut d’ores et déjà se demander comment réagira Elon Musk, lui qui a à ce jour investi une centaine de millions de dollars pour l’élection de Trump, sans compter l’influence qu’il détient personnellement avec ses 167 millions d’abonnés. Maintenant qu’il a pris goût à la politique partisane, pourquoi se priverait-il d’aider l’accession au pouvoir d’un homme, Pierre Poilievre, qui s’est opposé à toutes les initiatives visant à réguler les géants du Web ?

Si les trumpistes perdent l’élection américaine, une intervention massive dans l’élection canadienne ne serait-elle pas pour eux un prix de consolation ? Et s’ils gagnent, pourquoi Trump se gênerait-il non seulement d’encourager ses partisans à s’en mêler, mais aussi d’activer quelques-uns des leviers gouvernementaux à sa disposition pour aider à faire pencher la balance ? Déclassées, la Chine et l’Inde pourront aller se rhabiller.

Source: Chronique | Mauvaise influence

…. In this political Wild West that has become the Internet, writes Perez, and “given the extraordinary online propensity of far-right extremists of all kinds, this card plays into the game of politicians like Poilievre. The power of this “secret weapon” is enormous.” This is, the liberal activist believes, the “main threat” to Canadian democracy. He is absolutely right.

We can already wonder how Elon Musk will react, who has so far invested a hundred million dollars for Trump’s election, not to mention the influence he personally holds with his 167 million subscribers. Now that he has taken a liking to partisan politics, why would he deprive himself of helping a man, Pierre Poilievre, who has opposed all initiatives to regulate the giants of the Web?

If the Trumpists lose the American election, wouldn’t a massive intervention in the Canadian election be a consolation price for them? And if they win, why would Trump hesitate not only to encourage his supporters to get involved, but also to activate some of the government levers at his disposal to help tip the balance? Downgraded, China and India will be able to get dressed.