this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2026
298 points (99.3% liked)

World News

57720 readers
1543 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world

Ask Historians !askhistorians@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The premier of a Canadian province launched a blistering attack on U.S. President Donald Trump on Thursday, calling him a “bad person” and “not to be trusted” and urging Canada to keep fighting rather than rush to make concessions in trade talks with Washington.

Manitoba Premier Wab Kinew said Canada has leverage in the talks even as his province weighs restoring U.S. alcohol sales at Prime Minister Mark Carney’s urging to help secure a deal that would avert threatened 50% U.S. tariffs.

“Everybody knows the American president by now, he’s erratic, he’s irresponsible, and he’s not to be trusted. And this is the person that we were supposed to make a deal with, and we’re going to make additional concessions for it. That’s why I say you can’t make a good deal with a bad person, because who’s to say it’s not going to be undone?” Kinew said.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I got confused at the headline for a moment because I didn't realize "premier" means something specific in Canada. In most countries it means Prime Minister or President.

[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yeah, it should have been capitalized as it's a formal title.

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago

It looks like a lot of people made the same mistake, because AP seem to have now edited the headline on their site to clarify.

[–] rozodru@piefed.world 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Premier is essentially the same as a United States Governor. Premier's lead the Province.

[–] HamsterRage@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

This is essentially incorrect. Canadian provinces use a parliamentary system very similar to the federal government. The Premier of a province is analogous to the Prime Minister of the country, but for a single province.

The Premier in not elected separately like a US Governor, nor does he act separately from the legislature of the province. He's the leader of the party that holds the most seats in the Legislature and forms the Government of the province.

[–] ergonomic_importer@piefed.ca 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Essentially incorrect but still analogous

[–] HamsterRage@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Well, I object to the need to somehow relate everything to an American frame of reference. The two systems are fundamentally different, and the roles are not really analogous. Far better to say, "Like a Prime Minister, but for a province." What's hard about that?

[–] ieGod@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's misleading, because the scope of powers is nowhere near that of a true Prime Minister. The former analogy is useful when explaining to a non-Canadian.

[–] HamsterRage@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The scope of the powers is virtually identical within their jurisdictions. Provinces are clearly not going to be negotiating international treaties, for instance, but they are going to be negotiating inter-provincial relations.

[–] ieGod@lemmy.zip 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

they are going to be negotiating inter-provincial relations

This is the part where I think the analogy falters because it requires understanding of the scope of what they can negotiate, which you would only know if you're Canadian. The provinces are subservient to federal regulations. The delineation of responsibilities is a uniquely Canadian trait.

[–] HamsterRage@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 hours ago

My objection centres around the wording, "Premier is essentially the same as a US Governor".

Not, "similar", or "somewhat the same responsibilities", "essentially the same".

Yes, lots of countries use the term "Governor" for the leaders of states and provinces. But specifying, "US Governor", adds a ton of baggage to the term that essentially makes the statement incorrect.

It's a Parliamentary system, a different form of government and the roles are not "essentially" the same.