Please see the article for the full analysis, here is the intro:
The complete index of American products subject to Canadian retaliatory tariffs on September 8 includes more than 600 different entries. Searching for patterns can drive you to madness. Butterfly nets will be hit with a 50 percent tariff. So will eye makeup preparations and fish-egg incubators. Track suits are also among the items facing the trade fury of Prime Minister Mark Carney, alongside swimming pools, paddling pools, video game consoles, and a buffet’s worth of tableware and cheeses.
The tariffs are meant to match American counterparts dollar for dollar, targeting $27.6 billion in products. When asked about the decision-making process, Industry Minister Mélanie Joly said some goods are meant to hurt Trump-supporting states, though she declined to say which. In other words, the United States may be a behemoth but Canada can concentrate the pain in sensitive corners of the country.
Despite the minister’s demurral, the Associated Press and Newsweek were quick to highlight the political implications of the tariffs ahead of the midterm elections. States with Republican senators, such as Maine, Ohio, Michigan, Iowa, and Texas, all have substantive trade relationships with Canada—and are considered possible battleground states. Some experts are calling the issue “a political trap for Republicans,” with Democrats already seizing on the matter as a talking point.


As the article noted, it’s more effective if it is targeted.
Hitting them all would create solidarity. Hitting the trump supporting ones will create internal tension.
The headline already says “which trump-supporting states”, not “which states”
Oh fair enough, I read the title as “which states (the trump supporting states)”, but it does sound like “which of the trump supporting states”
In which case, I agree with the sentiment of the original comment that it should be all of the trump supporting states