Apple TV recently caught my attention with a film called Blitz. I’ve always been intrigued by the creative ways directors tackle the Second World War, so I decided to give this Steve McQueen project—centered on the bombings of London—a curious watch. Without spoiling the plot, there’s a moment where a young character recalls a phrase his grandfather taught him to deal with bullies: “All mouth and no trousers.” As soon as I heard it, my mind immediately jumped to Donald Trump.
Trump came to mind not just because the phrase feels so fitting, but because his entire political career has been built on a masterful strategy of controlling the narrative.
Take a step back for a moment, and let’s revisit a quintessential example: the infamous “they’re eating the cats, they’re eating the dogs” remark during a debate. That single, outrageous line dominated the post-debate discourse, overshadowing substantive issues entirely. Trump didn’t just wing it; this was deliberate. From the beginning, his strategy has been to seize the narrative, setting traps for his opponents to walk into—and they’ve consistently obliged.
“There is no such thing as bad press.” Trump doesn’t just believe this mantra—he weaponizes it, using distraction to shift attention away from what’s truly at stake. That infamous debate moment wasn’t just an offhand comment; it was a calculated move to drown out any resonance the Democratic plans might have had. Trump didn’t need Americans to vote for him back then—he needed them to vote against a system they felt had failed them. People would have thought: “Is it really going to get any worse?”
The 25% Tariff Threat
Enter the 25% tariff threat—a narrative masterstroke. Financially, it’s a non-starter; the numbers simply don’t add up for such a move to be sustainable. So why did Trump throw it into the spotlight? Two reasons stand out:
- Playing to the Common American: For many Americans, this is a power play that resonates. It frames Trump as the defender of the economy, willing to stand up to neighboring countries that, in his words, have “failed” to control their borders. By linking tariffs to border security and immigration—a hot-button issue for his base—Trump cements his image as the only leader fighting for “America first.”
- Rattling Canada and Mexico: While the tariffs themselves are unlikely to materialize, the mere suggestion has left Canada and Mexico scrambling. A 25% surcharge is an economic and political earthquake for two countries heavily reliant on U.S. trade. The narrative is already working—Canadian officials are calling emergency meetings, Mexican leaders are warning of inflation and job losses, and both governments are in defensive mode.
Canada’s Reaction: Divided and Weak
The first to fall into Trump’s trap are often those who think they’re his allies. Ontario Premier Doug Ford, clearly offended by Trump’s rhetoric, described the proposed 25% tariffs as “like a family member stabbing you right in the heart.” But what really set him off was Trump’s comparison of Canada to Mexico, which Ford called “the most insulting thing I’ve ever heard from our friends and closest allies.” He added, “What I found unfair about the comments is to compare us to Mexico. And I can tell you, Canada is no Mexico.”
Ford’s reaction, however, reveals more about his own ignorance than any meaningful critique of Trump’s agenda. His dismissal of Mexico reeks of the kind of superiority complex that assumes Canada’s economy is somehow beyond comparison with its southern neighbor. Ford misses the point entirely: these tariffs aren’t about Canada. Canada is a side effect, caught in the crossfire of Trump’s real focus—Mexico.
Adding to Canada’s fragmented response, both Ford and Alberta Premier Danielle Smith have advocated for bypassing Mexico entirely by pursuing direct trade agreements with the U.S. While this might seem pragmatic provincially, it undercuts Trudeau’s already weak response. A divided Canada plays directly into Trump’s hands, making it far easier for him to negotiate unilateral deals that favor American interests.
Mexico’s Strategy: Focused and Effective
Mexico, by contrast, is playing a far more strategic game. President Claudia Sheinbaum has taken a firm but measured approach, criticizing Trump’s proposed tariffs while emphasizing their potential harm to both economies. “Our policy is to build bridges, not close borders,” she stated, making it clear that migration and drug issues cannot be solved through economic threats.
Sheinbaum has adopted the hyper-communication strategy perfected by her predecessor, AMLO. Her daily morning conferences ensure she controls the narrative, getting her message to the public before anyone else. This week, she used the platform to dismantle Trump’s tariff proposal, highlighting why it would hurt not only Mexico but also U.S. companies operating there. At the same time, she made it clear that Mexico would not hesitate to impose retaliatory tariffs if the U.S. followed through on its threat, ensuring that the potential consequences for both sides were fully understood.
Her strategy worked. Trump later claimed to have had a “wonderful conversation” with Sheinbaum, though he falsely stated that she had agreed to “close Mexico’s borders.” Sheinbaum never made such concessions, but the narrative ball was already rolling, thanks to Trump’s ability to bend reality to fit his agenda.
It’s Not About Tariffs—It’s About Money
Trump’s response today makes one thing clear: he’s not serious about the tariffs themselves, but he is absolutely serious about using them as leverage to play a heavier hand in negotiations. This could very well be the beginning of the end for NAFTA—or what’s left of it in the form of CUSMA.
To understand politics, you have to ask one fundamental question: Who benefits? Who benefits from these declarations, these threats, this carefully constructed chaos? It’s not about tariffs. It’s about winning. And in this case, winning translates to one thing: more money.
A stronger dollar. A stronger market. A stronger crypto. It’s no surprise Elon Musk is all in on this rhetoric. His so-called “austerity government,” with its cuts to bureaucracy, is named DOGE—like his favorite cryptocurrency. Stay tuned for the usual pattern: the richer get richer, and everyone else watches from the sidelines.
So why is controlling the narrative so important? Because it pays. It’s not about imports or exports, trade balances, or economic policies. It’s about ensuring that a few well-placed friends—Trump’s entourage—are making a good coin. This isn’t governance; it’s a game played for the financial elite, by the financial elite, and at the expense of everyone else.
Does it make sense? In a way, it’s brutally simple. There’s no better time to get richer than always. If you grasp this, you grasp Trump and his orbit. The tariffs, the chaos, the constant churn of the narrative—it’s all about keeping the ball in their court. And for now, that court isn’t government or public service. It’s a private game, played with public stakes.
As Kenny Rogers sang, “Every hand’s a winner, and every hand’s a loser.” For Trump, the game is fixed, and he’s holding the deck- for now.
