A new poll says Canadians are divided on whether the US is an 'ally' or 'enemy' country
Faced with a trade war they didn't start, Canadians are divided on whether they see the United States as an "enemy" or an "ally," a new poll suggests.
The Leger poll, which was conducted online and can't be assigned a margin of error, surveyed more than 1,500 people between May 30 and June 1.
Almost a third of respondents said they view the US as a "neutral country," while 27 per cent said they consider it an "ally" and 26 per cent see it as an "enemy country."
Just over a third of men said they consider the US an ally, compared with one in five women. Almost 30 per cent of women said they view the US as an enemy, compared with 22 per cent of men.
Older Canadians, those at least 55 years of age, were more likely to consider the US an enemy than younger Canadians. Regionally Albertans were most likely to consider the US an ally while Ontarians and British Columbians were most likely to see it as an enemy.
The difference is starkest between political party supporters, with 44 per cent of Conservative supporters saying they view the US as an ally, compared with 17 per cent of Liberal supporters and 12 per cent of NDP supporters said the same.
Comparatively 16 per cent of Conservative supporters said they view the US as an enemy country, while 36 per cent of Liberal supporters and 41 per cent of NDP supporters said the same.
US President Donald Trump signed an executive order Tuesday to double his levies on steel and aluminum to 50 per cent. He claimed the measure will protect the country's national security and domestic industries.
Prime Minister Mark Carney has said his government will need to take "some time" to craft a response to the increased US tariffs.
The number of Canadians that report seeing the US as an enemy country has dropped by six points since mid-March. At that time, 32 per cent of survey respondents told Leger they viewed the country as an enemy.
The number of Canadians that view the US as an ally also decreased by two percentage points since March, from 29 to 27 per cent, while the number that view it as a neutral country increased by six percentage points, from 24 to 30 per cent.
Andrew Enns, Leger's executive vice-president for Central Canada, said that, broadly speaking, the patterns haven't changed much since the organization asked the question in February — when 27 per cent of respondents said they viewed the US as an enemy and 30 per cent said they viewed it as an ally.
Enns said the decline in the number of people saying the US is an enemy likely reflects the overall sentiment on tariffs.
"It's still obviously there and, you know, clearly now we're dealing with higher steel tariffs, but the commentary coming from the White House and the Trump administration seems to have dissipated a bit and that's probably helping just tone things down," he said.
Enns said Canada also has a new prime minister with a mandate that might "take the edge off things."
"I think that just keeps things more at a moderate level, and I think that reflects in people maybe feeling a little less threatened by the US," Enns said.
Enns said political and business leaders have also sent a consistent message that the US remains an important trading partner. He said that may encourage Canadians to believe there's a way to "work things out."
The polling industry's professional body, the Canadian Research Insights Council, says online surveys cannot be assigned a margin of error because they do not randomly sample the population.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Canada Standard
an hour ago
- Canada Standard
Liberals Table Bill to Speed Up Approvals for Major 'National Interest' Projects
Prime Minister Mark Carney's government introduced legislation Friday that would grant it new powers to quickly push forward major projects the federal cabinet deems to be in the national interest. Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Dominic LeBlanc tabled a bill in the House of Commons that would give Ottawa the authority to draw up a list of large projects it wants to prioritize and to expedite their federal approval, The Canadian Press reports. Carney said it has become too hard to build new projects in Canada and vowed that this legislation will change that. "We're in an economic crisis," Carney told a news conference on Parliament Hill on Friday. "We're still facing intensifying, unjustified tariffs from our largest trading partner and the best way to respond to that is to respond at home, build strength at home." Bill C-5, the "free trade and labour mobility in Canada act and the building Canada act," is twinned legislation meant to break down internal trade barriers and cut red tape for major projects. The bill was a marquee election promise by Carney, who campaigned on a pledge to make the country an "energy superpower" and build up a more resilient economy in response to U.S. President Donald Trump's global trade war. The prime minister said he will do everything possible to get the legislation passed this summer and did not rule out having Parliament sit longer. The House is only scheduled to sit for another two weeks and the Liberals are governing with a precarious minority, forcing them to seek the support of MPs from other parties to advance their agenda. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre described the new bill as a small step in the right direction. He also said it amounts to an admission by the Liberals that their laws have inhibited building and urged the government to take much bolder action. "We do not need baby steps. We need breakthroughs," he said. Poilievre said he wants the government to repeal the oil tanker ban on B.C.'s northern coast, terminate the oil and gas sector's emissions cap and scrap the Impact Assessment Act that sets out a process for environmental reviews. He said he will consult with his caucus about how to approach the bill in Parliament but added that Conservatives would "vote in favour of accelerating even one project." Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers CEO Lisa Baiton said she is "encouraged by the federal government's flexibility and efforts to work with the provinces to accelerate the approval process for major projects." But environmental groups warned the new process could upend efforts to fight climate change. Jessica Clogg, executive director of West Coast Environmental Law, said that past experience shows "rushed approvals without assessment of risks are a recipe for conflict, legal challenges and future environmental disasters." Keith Stewart of Greenpeace Canada said the government should not fast track new fossil-fuel projects, as Carney has suggested. "To even consider designating oil and gas expansion projects as in the national interest is a slap in the face to not just the next generation, but every Canadian struggling right now to deal with climate change-fueled wildfires," he said. The legislation would create a new federal office to take the lead on streamlining approvals for major projects and task the intergovernmental affairs minister with overseeing the final permitting decision. The government said the goal of the bill is to send a clear signal to businesses and quickly build up investor confidence. Carney said the current approval process forces projects to undergo multiple reviews and assessments one after another, rather than at the same time. "That process is arduous," he said. "It takes too long and it's holding our country back." "For too long, when federal agencies examined a project, their immediate question has been, 'Why?' With this new bill, we will ask ourselves, 'How?'" The bill sets out five criteria to evaluate whether a project is in the national interest. They include the project's likelihood of success, whether it would strengthen the country's resiliency and advance the interests of Indigenous peoples, and whether it would contribute to economic growth in an environmentally responsible way. The new federal review office will work toward a goal of approving projects within two years. That's a political promise rather than a hard-and-fast rule; the legislation does not mention timelines. While the bill would give the government broad power to skirt environmental laws to push projects forward, one expert said it remains to be seen how Ottawa will use it. "This is the kind of consolidation that you sometimes see in times of national emergency. We see it in wartime, we saw it in COVID to some extent. That consolidation can let you move more quickly, which can be a good thing, but it can also be a risky thing," said Stewart Elgie, the Jarislowsky chair in clean economy at the University of Ottawa. He warned that trying to "shortcut environmental interests" does not help expedite projects. "The Harper government never got a major pipeline built, and it's because they gave short shrift to environment and Indigenous concerns. It ended up with blockades and litigation that ultimately slowed down the projects," Elgie said. Carney said the legislation requires meaningful consultation with Indigenous Peoples consistent with the Constitution and the Crown's duty to consult. The federal review office will also include an Indigenous Advisory Council with First Nation, Inuit and Metis representation. The legislation comes with a sunset clause that forces a review of the law after five years. Carney met with the premiers earlier in the week in Saskatoon, where they privately discussed various projects the premiers want to see quickly launched - including pipelines, trade corridors and mining projects. The new legislation does not touch on any provincial approvals that might be needed to allow a project to go ahead. - With files from Sarah Ritchie and Nick Murray This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 6, 2025. Source: The Energy Mix
Toronto Star
an hour ago
- Toronto Star
Democratic states double down on laws resisting Trump's immigration crackdown
As President Donald Trump's administration targets states and local governments for not cooperating with federal immigration authorities, lawmakers in some Democratic-led states are intensifying their resistance by strengthening state laws restricting such cooperation. In California alone, more than a dozen pro-immigrant bills passed either the Assembly or Senate this week, including one prohibiting schools from allowing federal immigration officials into nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant.
Winnipeg Free Press
2 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Democratic states double down on laws resisting Trump's immigration crackdown
As President Donald Trump's administration targets states and local governments for not cooperating with federal immigration authorities, lawmakers in some Democratic-led states are intensifying their resistance by strengthening state laws restricting such cooperation. In California alone, more than a dozen pro-immigrant bills passed either the Assembly or Senate this week, including one prohibiting schools from allowing federal immigration officials into nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant. Other state measures have sought to protect immigrants in housing, employment and police encounters, even as Trump's administration has ramped up arrests as part of his plan for mass deportations. In Connecticut, legislation pending before Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont would expand a law that already limits when law enforcement officers can cooperate with federal requests to detain immigrants. Among other things, it would let 'any aggrieved person' sue municipalities for alleged violations of the state's Trust Act. Two days after lawmakers gave final approval to the measure, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security included Connecticut on a list of hundreds of 'sanctuary jurisdictions' obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration laws. The list later was removed from the department's website after criticism that it errantly included some local governments that support Trump's immigration policies. States split on whether to aid or resist Trump Since taking office in January, Trump has enlisted hundreds of state and local law enforcement agencies to help identify immigrants in the U.S. illegally and detain them for potential deportation. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement now lists 640 such cooperative agreements, a nearly fivefold increase under Trump. Trump also has lifted longtime rules restricting immigration enforcement near schools, churches and hospitals, and ordered federal prosecutors to investigate state or local officials believed to be interfering with his crackdown on illegal immigration. The Department of Justice sued Colorado, Illinois and New York, as well as several cities in those states and New Jersey, alleging their policies violate the U.S. Constitution or federal immigration laws. Just three weeks after Colorado was sued, Democratic Gov. Jared Polis signed a wide-ranging law expanding the state's protections for immigrants. Among other things, it bars jails from delaying the release of inmates for immigration enforcement and allows penalties of up to $50,000 for public schools, colleges, libraries, child care centers and health care facilities that collect information about people's immigration status, with some exceptions. Polis rejected the administration's description of Colorado as a 'sanctuary state,' asserting that law officers remain 'deeply committed' to working with federal authorities on criminal investigations. 'But to be clear, state and local law enforcement cannot be commandeered to enforce federal civil immigration laws,' Polis said in a bill-signing statement. Illinois also has continued to press pro-immigrant legislation. A bill recently given final approval says no child can be denied a free public education because of immigration status — something already guaranteed nationwide under a 1982 U.S. Supreme Court decision. Supporters say the state legislation provides a backstop in case court precedent is overturned. The bill also requires schools to develop policies on handling requests from federal immigration officials and allows lawsuits for alleged violations of the measure. Legislation supporting immigrants takes a variety of forms Democratic-led states are pursuing a wide range of means to protect immigrants. A new Oregon law bars landlords from inquiring about the immigration status of tenants or applicants. New laws in Washington declare it unprofessional conduct for bail bond agents to enforce civil immigration warrants, prohibit employers from using immigration status to threaten workers and let employees use paid sick leave to attend immigration proceedings for themselves or family members. Vermont last month repealed a state law that let law enforcement agencies enter into immigration enforcement agreements with federal authorities during state or national emergencies. They now need special permission from the governor to do so. As passed by the House, Maryland legislation also would have barred local governments from reaching immigration enforcement agreements with the federal government. That provision was removed in the Senate following pushback from some of the seven Maryland counties that currently have agreements. The final version, which took effect as law at the start of June, forbids public schools and libraries from granting federal immigration authorities access to nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant or 'exigent circumstances.' Maryland Del. Nicole Williams said residents' concerns about Trump's immigration policies prompted her to sponsor the legislation. 'We believe that diversity is our strength, and our role as elected officials is to make sure that all of the residents within our community — regardless of their background — feel safe and comfortable,' Williams said. Many new measures reinforce existing policies Though legislation advancing in Democratic states may shield against Trump's policies, 'I would say it's more so to send a message to immigrant communities to let them know that they are welcome,' said Juan Avilez, a policy associate at the American Immigration Council, a nonprofit advocacy group. In California, a law that took effect in 2018 already requires public schools to adopt policies 'limiting assistance with immigration enforcement to the fullest extent possible.' Some schools have readily applied the law. When DHS officers attempted a welfare check on migrant children at two Los Angeles elementary schools in April, they were denied access by both principals. Legislation passed by the state Senate would reinforce such policies by specifically requiring a judicial warrant for public schools to let immigration authorities into nonpublic areas, allow students to be questioned or disclose information about students and their families. 'Having ICE in our schools means that you'll have parents who will not want to send their kids to school at all,' Democratic state Sen. Scott Wiener said in support of the bill. But some Republicans said the measure was 'injecting partisan immigration policies' into schools. 'We have yet to see a case in California where we have scary people in masks entering schools and ripping children away,' said state Sen. Marie Alvarado-Gil. 'Let's stop these fear tactics that do us an injustice.' ___ Associated Press writers Susan Haigh, Trân Nguyễn, Jesse Bedayn, John O'Connor and Brian Witte contributed to this report.
