[loeg]

What makes you say "certainly," especially in the hypothetical scenario where the US is unstable? Canada has a relatively much shorter history as an independent nation. Canada heavily benefits from its southern neighbor, and has a host of domestic economic issues (low wages, high housing prices; whatever the farmers are on about) that could cause instability as well. I think Canada is reasonably stable, I just quibble with "certainly" and "more" politically stable as compared with the US.

[well_ackshually]

Your "long history as a nation" mostly means you have a flawed constitution, no counter powers, a broken political system and absolutely _zero_ attempts to fix it.

There's a reason proper countries have had 5+ constitutions and keep changing them.

[toomuchtodo]

Canada will not invade allies and will adhere to the rule of law. Their forward looking economics are more favorable as they strengthen ties with China and Europe. By decoupling from the US, their economic risk declines, and their sovereign debt risk is downstream of that.

[AnimalMuppet]

Under current conditions, though, they may be invaded and/or annexed. That's a risk.

[overfeed]

That's one way to invite asymmetric warfare[1] on the mainland - the border with Canada is something that mostly exists on maps.

1. As recently wargamed by the Canadian military.

[ben_w]

I'm remembering an old painting, and briefly wondered if we'd see a repeat: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:The_President%27s_House_b...

Then I remembered the building works, and thought "If it happened, how would anyone even notice?"

[epgui]

This has nothing to do with Canada's political stability.

[gambiting]

>>especially in the hypothetical scenario where the US is unstable?

How does it feel to bury your head in the sand so hard that you can't see what's happening around you?

[loeg]

Do you think if you just sneer hard enough, it makes your viewpoint true or persuasive?

There are probably two or three different commenting guidelines this runs afoul of: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[toomuchtodo]

You are arguing as if nothing material in the US has changed while at the same time arguing “be more polite towards my ignorance|avoidance of the situation.” It comes across as arguing in bad faith.

The US can no longer be trusted based on the actions of this administration. Other countries are pragmatically and reasonably adjusting accordingly, very publicly. There are other options besides the US from an economic, trade, investment, and defense ally perspective. These are facts. Whether you believe them is a choice.

[toomuchtodo]

Citation:

Europe is learning that a ‘deal’ with Trump doesn’t exist - https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/21/business/trump-davos-greenlan... - January 21st, 2026

[hulitu]

Europe isn't learning anything. Europe is dreaming to be a great empire, while licking the butt of another great empire.

[gambiting]

...what? That literally makes no sense. "Europe" is not a country. "Europe" does not dream of being an empire, because it has no cohesive governing body or even identity as a whole - maybe France or UK dream of being empires but collectively? Does Slovakia or Portugal dream of being empires?

That is such a naively simplistic view of how the world works it reads like it's straight from a Daily Mail or Fox News headline, which always say "Europe does X" - like, who is Europe? Are they in the room with us now?

"Europe is learning" should say - (some) European states are learning, and they are learning that you cannot negotiate with convicted criminals and fascists - they will betray you on a whim because they do not answer to anyone, not even themselves.

[gambiting]

No I just think this is so obvious by reading literally any news website for 5 minutes that I can only conclude that someone saying it's "hypothetical" is either acting maliciously or they are actually ignorant of what's going on.