One of America’s most influential conservative newspapers has delivered a brutal verdict on Donald Trump’s escalating trade war with Canada: The president has taken his “dumbest” economic plan and somehow made it even dumber.

The Rupert Murdoch-owned Wall Street Journal tore into Trump after he imposed 50 percent tariffs on approximately $20 billion worth of Canadian imports—just 10 weeks before voters decide control of Congress.

The newspaper’s editorial board said the escalation makes neither economic nor political sense, particularly as Republicans struggle to defend Trump’s record on inflation and the cost of living.

“President Trump took exception last year when we called his tariffs against Canada and Mexico the dumbest trade war in history,” the board wrote.

“It got dumber this weekend.”

The attack is especially damaging because it did not come from a liberal publication or Democratic campaign organization. The Journal’s editorial page has long championed conservative economic policies, low taxes and free enterprise.

Its condemnation signals that alarm over Trump’s tariffs is spreading deep into traditionally Republican territory.

The new duties cover a broad range of Canadian exports, including agricultural products, hockey sticks, wine and cement. They also bypass previous exemptions for goods protected under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement—the trade pact Trump himself promoted during his first administration.

American importers pay the tariffs when Canadian goods enter the United States. Those companies can absorb the expense, but many are expected to pass at least part of it to consumers through higher prices.

That means Trump’s economic offensive could soon appear in grocery bills, construction costs and prices for manufactured goods.

Canada has promised to respond.

Prime Minister Mark Carney accused Trump of attacking his country and vowed to impose matching tariffs “dollar for dollar.” Canadian retaliation, expected to begin Sept. 8, could target American steel, dairy products and electronics.

The result could be a cycle in which each government responds to economic punishment with even greater punishment—while consumers and workers absorb the consequences.

Trump activated Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 to impose the duties. The long-dormant provision allows a president to target countries deemed to discriminate against American commerce.

According to the report, Trump is the first president to use the Depression-era law to impose tariffs.

The historical connection has intensified anxiety among critics who fear that aggressive protectionism could slow economic growth and disrupt international trade. Invoking a law from 1930 does not mean another Great Depression is inevitable, but the symbolism is politically combustible.

The Journal warned that Trump’s escalation would make it more difficult for Carney to compromise.

Canadian voters may punish any leader who appears to surrender after being threatened or humiliated by Washington. Trump’s pressure could therefore strengthen the political demand for retaliation rather than forcing Ottawa to retreat.

Both governments could still “walk back from the ledge,” the Journal argued. But each new insult and tariff makes that exit more difficult.

The White House firmly rejected the criticism.

Spokesman Kush Desai accused Canada of undermining American workers, businesses and farmers through unfair trade practices. He said Ottawa abandoned a generous agreement and demanded access to the American economy while restricting U.S. exports.

“President Trump will never waver from putting Americans and America First,” Desai said.

Trump’s defenders argue that tariffs can protect domestic industries, reduce reliance on foreign suppliers and pressure other countries to remove trade barriers. They believe short-term disruption may be necessary to secure a better long-term arrangement.

The Journal’s editorial board sees no coherent strategy behind the current confrontation.

It warned that Trump’s latest tariffs would strike consumer products, construction materials and manufacturing components while Republicans were already being “pounded” over inflation.

That criticism goes directly to the political danger facing the GOP.

Trump has recorded weak approval ratings on his handling of the economy. Voters are also confronting elevated fuel costs associated with the war in Iran, while earlier tariffs have faced blame for increasing prices.

Republicans now risk entering the midterms forced to explain why their president launched another trade war with America’s closest neighbor during a cost-of-living crisis.

Control of both the House and Senate could be at stake. Losing the House would expose Trump to Democratic investigations and potentially renewed impeachment pressure. Losing the Senate would make confirmations and legislation far more difficult.

The Journal argued that Trump’s political weakness stems partly from voters believing he launches broad, chaotic conflicts without a clear strategy.

“On trade,” the board concluded, “they’re right.”

Trump may dismiss the editorial as another attack from an establishment institution. But Murdoch’s paper has identified a danger the White House cannot easily insult away.

If prices rise, exporters lose Canadian customers and Republicans collapse in November, voters may remember who warned that Trump’s “dumbest” trade war had become even dumber.

By then, the political bill—like the tariff itself—will already have come due.