Commentary
When two prominent figures are scheduled to appear at the same event, venue, or conference, many people will obviously take notice. Especially if they’ve occasionally served as lightning rods for controversy.
The internet was abuzz with news that Alberta Premier Danielle Smith and American conservative political host/commentator Tucker Carlson will soon be in the same geographical orbit. They’ll be having a conversation on the same stage during a luncheon at Calgary’s Telus Convention Centre on Jan. 24, 2024.
(Full disclosure: I’ve known Smith for over 25 years, whereas my interactions with Carlson are limited to two short conversations.)
What will they talk about? I have no insider knowledge, but it’s not difficult to make a few assumptions about the likely topics du jour.
They’ll surely discuss areas of mutual interest, including conservative history and ideas, Canada-U.S. relations, and ongoing international conflicts like the Russo-Ukrainian war and Israel-Hamas war. The environment and Alberta’s oil industry are natural subjects. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s leadership will undoubtedly come up, too.
Since this conversation won’t take place for a while, most people are focusing on the meeting itself. Some are intrigued, while others are more critical. In the latter instance, Smith and Carlson are viewed as two peas in a pod with respect to making controversial remarks. Some have mused why Smith would even want to share the same stage with Carlson.
Yes, the two have their share of (mostly) left-leaning critics. Smith has been heavily criticized in the Canadian media, and was depicted as the “most polarizing politician in Alberta—and arguably in Canada” in a Sept. 14 Maclean’s profile. The article also pointed to Smith’s “inability to keep her foot out of her mouth and her susceptibility to some truly out-there ideas.” This included suggesting cancer was preventable until stage 4, claiming “Indigenous ancestry,” and a 2021 video that compared Albertans vaccinated against COVID-19 to supporters of Nazi Germany.
Carlson was described as a “source of repeated controversies” and a “polarizing and unpopular figure” by the New York Times after parting ways with Fox News in April. Several publications have created a variety of timelines listing what they view as his eye-popping comments. This includes topics related to race, immigration, climate-change denial, efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, and questioning U.S. support of Ukraine—which led MSNBC’s Alex Wagner to call him “one of the biggest cheerleaders for Russia” last February.
Points of agreement and disagreement aside, the world of opinion and analysis—which I’ve been part of since 1996—is to write, speak, and think about issues that are both mainstream and outside the box. It’s in our nature to question people, places, and things, and not blindly accept the status quo unless it makes sense in a particular instance. Carlson is still an active player in this world. He’s far less restricted than Smith, a longtime member of the media until she re-entered politics—where public opinion and personal opinion often tend to diverge rather than converge. Regardless, both of them think and act exactly like columnists and pundits in every facet of life. It’s part of our DNA, for better or for worse.
With respect to sharing the same stage next January, it’s heavily in the Alberta premier’s favour to appear with the American political host/commentator.
One assumes that part or all of the Smith-Carlson discussion will be posted to the latter’s show, “Tucker on X.” He started this program on X (formerly known as Twitter) in June, and there have been a total of 40 episodes to date. The show’s popularity has exploded, with several episodes receiving 100 million views or more (including Ep. 19 with former U.S. president Donald Trump, Ep. 20 with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, and Ep. 24 with Argentinian presidential candidate Javier Milei). The vast majority have averaged more than 10 million views.
Even if Smith ended up in the latter category, it would be a massive boost to her political career. She’s an intelligent, talented, and thoughtful speaker and thinker. Carlson’s large international audience on X would become more aware of her views on politics and economics. Her public profile would be raised to the stratosphere.
Are there any risks involved? Yes. Smith would become indirectly linked with Carlson’s political brand. Not every “Tucker on X” viewer would necessarily agree with her ideas. The two Conservative personalities could have an awkward moment or two during their chat. That being said, the positives far outweigh the negatives in this forthcoming conversation—and, more importantly, the rewards far outweigh the risks.
When Danielle meets Tucker next January, it will be a notable political event. No matter what people think of both participants, many will be watching with interest and curiosity.
Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
