The Bridge with Peter Mansbridge - Okay America, What Now?

Episode Date: July 15, 2024

As promised, today's show is the first of four special programs during this summer of 2024. It just so happens it comes after a weekend assassination attempt on Donald Trump and on day one of his party's national convention in Milwaukee. Veteran journalist Keith Boag has been our guide this year on US politics and he's with us again today.

And hello there, Peter Mansbridge here. You are just moments away from the latest episode of The Bridge. And it's a new one, new episode, that's right. It's the first of our four special Summer of 2024 episodes of The Bridge. And we could not have picked a better day for number one. We're coming right up. And hello there, Peter Mansbridge here. Yes, in the middle of the summer of 2024, we've been on hiatus for the summer, but as promised, we're doing four special episodes this summer. There'll be two good talks, one near the end of July, coming up in a couple of weeks, one near the end of August,

coming up in a month and a half. Good talk, special episodes, the summer of 2024. But the other two are equally important. One in August is for the Democratic National Convention, and the one today, as it starts in Milwaukee, is all about the Republicans. And what a time to choose to do that story. After the weekend events, Saturday night, the horror of yet another assassination attempt in U.S. presidential politics. Some of us grew up in this mode with John Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, Martin Luther King, 1968, the same time, same year as RFK. So we watched what happened on Saturday night, and now we're watching the aftermath of what happened on Saturday night. And throughout this year, our U.S. political coverage has kind of been anchored through the conversations I've been

having with Keith Bogue, good friend, good colleague, former chief political correspondent in Ottawa, but also CBC's former Washington correspondent. And Keith loves U.S. politics. He spends a lot of time researching the stories, talking to people. He's got great contacts throughout the United States based on his travels as the Washington correspondent. And, of course, he covered campaigns in 2016, 2020 that Donald Trump was involved in.

And of course, the last one that Joe Biden won. So he knows of what he talks, but he goes beyond the headlines. And that's what we want to talk to him about. Lots of people we can talk about the immediacy of the headlines. But I wanted to get a better sense of, you know, what we should be thinking about as we watch this week unfold, but as we watch this whole race unfold. That's why we've been talking to him a number of times throughout the first six months of this year, and that's why we're talking to him today. So enough from me, let's get to our conversation with Keith Bogue about U.S. presidential politics, and especially given the last, well, 48 hours. Here we go. So Keith, I think

the most common phrase that I heard over a lot of different journalists talking over the weekend after the Saturday night assassination attempt was this, this changes everything. Does it change everything? Well, I think it changes everything for until the next thing that comes along that changes everything. And I don't mean that flippantly. I really think that we're in for a roller coaster right up until November, where you have events coming along. Some of them will be, you know, what Donald Rumsfeld would call the known unknowns. So we'll see one of those this week. We don't know who the VP pick is going to be for Trump, for instance. We'll get an answer to that, and that'll have its own little buzz. But what we had on the weekend was what Rumsfeld called an unknown unknown. No one saw this coming and no one consequently was able to factor in what it would mean for the campaign,

what the consequences would be. But what I'm saying is don't expect that to be the only one. You know, we are living in an unbelievably turbulent time. Yes, that is going to have an impact. It is going to change this week dramatically. And we, I mean, we can speculate with some degree of accuracy, some of the ways in which it's going to change it. You know, Trump's speech on Thursday, for instance. But we can't really know until we see it play out all of the ways that it's going to change them. And in the same vein, we don't know what the next event is going to be that looks as though it's going to have a seismic effect on the campaign. Just to reiterate, we're just living in too extraordinary a time for us to think we've seen that everything we've seen is all there is. It's a very good point. You mentioned the speeches. This is going to be a week of speeches.

You're right. Trump doesn't speak till Thursday, at least his big major speech. He's already managing to get a few things out in the ways that he does. And so is Biden. Biden has been on the airways a lot since Saturday night. There seems to be this race to see who can sound the most reasonable and moderate at a time where both of them have been the opposite of that in the weeks leading up to this convention. But the race seems to be on now to see who can be that most reasonable person, the most moderate person, the person calling for unity and calm in the country. And the sense is that everything's being rewritten

in terms of what the Republicans are saying this week. But that race to moderation, talk to me about that, how you see that, especially given these two guys have really been going at each other in the most, you know, at times volatile ways? Yeah, so first of all, I don't know that it's having any impact at all on the atmosphere in the country in terms of the campaign. In Biden's case, of course, he also has a parallel kind of challenge. While he has to do all of the things that, that you say he's trying to do in terms of moderation.

He also has a performance issue that existed before the assassination attempt that is not resolved in the democratic party. So that each time that he goes on public television or in interviews with, you know, a message of calm and this is not us and we have to pull together and let's not point fingers and let's not descend into violence. People are also just looking at his performance to see if whether his his capability is as much a cause of concern today as it was, you know, a little over two weeks ago. Trump, we haven't heard from yet. I think it's

really interesting. I mean, you can only imagine the ways in which they they might want to play that this week. I mean, when I say we haven't heard from Trump, of course, we do know from his social media what he thinks. But we we and maybe even he has not settled on how he wants to play this yet. It's a tremendous opportunity for him. But I don't want to stray too far from your question because we can get to these things, you know, both sides. And I don't want to both sides is because I don't, I don't think it, I don't think it, it evens out on both sides, but both sides are into this, you know, it's time we stopped doing whatever we have been doing to some degree. And then, you know, it's time we stopped doing whatever we have been doing to some degree. And then, you know, their handlers or their supporters just pick it up right where they left off, accusing each other of being mostly responsible for what happened on Saturday night.

It's kind of a whirlwind that we don't really see the end of yet. But you go on social media. For instance, I was just looking this morning at a couple of people on social media who are just, you know, doing video lists of all of the things that Trump has said that could be construed as inciting violence, political violence specifically, whether, you know, it's making a light of Paul Pelosi, Nancy Pelosi's husband, who was attacked by a guy with a hammer who seemed to want to kill him, to whether it was both good people on both sides at Charlottetown, to whether it was the attack on the Capitol on January 6th, to whether it was, I mean, I could go on and on, right? And they do go on and on. And then on the other side,

you have this sense that, you know, there's a kind of false equivalence here when they say that Biden has jacked up the heat, turned up the heat in this campaign simply by saying that he believes that this campaign is one about democracy and one where there's an existential threat faced by the country. And people are thinking that is extreme. And yeah, it is extreme, but they did attack the Capitol. They have continued to say that the election was stolen. All of that rhetoric and those actions have contributed much more significantly, I think, in any objective reading to this sense of threat in this election coming

from Democrats. I mean, I don't know. It's so frustrating to listen to the false equivalents being made, largely by Republicans who seem to have no memory of Trump's own record or perhaps even their own over the last four years or more. I don't know. I'm not sure. I'm not sure if I'm making much sense. I do get emotionally involved in this because I have watched it too. Sure, you've been out there. You've seen it. And you've been on the campaign trail as you were the last time around watching Trump and watching Biden.

So, I mean, you've seen this. I want to talk. I want to break it down a little bit. You mentioned a few moments ago, this is a tremendous opportunity for Trump. And I 100% agree with you. What he does, what he says, how he says it, who he picks as a vice president. All of that is an opportunity this week to, no matter what you might have felt about him in the past, and you may never change your views about that, as an individual American voter,

this is an opportunity to bring more people into the Trump tent as a result of what happened over the weekend. So I want to break it down a little bit. First of all, I need you to set the scene because I think we immediately leap to the assumption, we meaning the sort of collective media, we immediately leap to the assumption that a major event changes the picture considerably in terms of voting intention.

And we're so often proven to be wrong on that assumption. The debate was supposed to have changed everything. It was like a disastrous night for Biden. But when you actually look at the numbers, it hasn't really changed things that much. It's changed things within the Democratic Party for sure, but the overall numbers you kind of wonder about. And so the immediate assumption on Friday night,

and you saw all kinds of smart people saying it on social media, he's just won the election. It's all over. What is your sense about that in terms of what Saturday night would have meant to an electorate that's pretty divided, polarized and hasn't moved a considerable amount one way or the other? Yes. I mean, I don't think that polarization ended on Saturday night. And I think, you know, again, I'm not sure what emphasis to place on social media, but it sure didn't end on social media.

I did get people texting to me, you know, it's over. He's won. I don't jump to that conclusion. I think there is a lot left to see in this campaign. As I have said, some of the other things that you said have made me thought about that. First of all, in talking about Joe Biden and the debate, everybody agreed it was a horrible debate. Everybody agreed it was something that Donald Trump could exploit to his advantage. Interestingly, he didn't. Interestingly to me, he stood back in a way that was uncharacteristic. He seemed to be able to control his impulses, or there was somebody

who was able to control his impulses for him in his campaign. His campaign is said to be more professionally, have more professionals at the top of it than either his 2020 campaign or and kind of obviously his 2016 campaign and they if if that's true what they did was recognize that this was a problem for democrats you step away let them fight it out in public it will do all the damage that it needs so i i say that because i think that kind of thinking will also apply in this case here. There are all kinds of directions in which Trump could take this. And if he were completely unrestrained, you know that he would follow up probably on some of the things that he has already said about how suggesting that the Biden administration tried to have him assassinated

at Mar-a-Lago, which are completely completely made-up story based on a deliberate misinterpretation of the search warrant instructions to the FBI as they went into Mar-a-Lago, where there was a caution about the use of lethal force. And Trump interpreted just the presence of the words as to mean that they were trying to assassinate him. He could go all the way there. I mean, I think that would be a huge mistake for him to be that extreme and hysterical about it. But I wonder whether the people around him who were able to urge him to resist his impulses on the debate will also be effective in telling him how he should play this in his speech this week. Obviously, he's not going to ignore it.

But boy, it would have a huge impact if he adopted the moderate tone that you would expect from a reasonable person who is genuinely concerned about the spread of violence and politics in the United States. That would maybe not be the red meat that his audience would want. But that's the spread of violence and politics in the United States. That would maybe not be the red meat that his audience would want, but that's the kind of message that people who might be on the fence and are left, who are persuadable, might respond to. And the ones who want the red meat, they're not changing anyway, no matter what he says. No.

He cannot lose their votes that's like his whole you know thing about i could shoot somebody on on fifth avenue and i wouldn't lose any support is precisely what's going to play out at this convention he's going to talk to a bunch of people who are never going to leave him and and does he does he instead recognize that the real audience is out there in america uh the real audience is out there in America, the television audience is the more important audience in this campaign for him at this moment? And he hasn't lost those skills just from watching how he reacted on Saturday night. Yeah, I mean, you know, give the guy credit.

His television instincts are unbelievable. I mean, under know, give the guy credit. His television instincts are unbelievable. I mean, under the pressure of that moment, and I don't want to minimize how it must feel that your life is under threat, he stays in the moment kind of almost in character, right, and exploits it for maximum political advantage. And I don't fault him for that. But, I mean, the photographs that are coming out of this, the video is, is, is almost, I mean, the video I think is clearly

less impactful than, than the photos, the photos, you know, if you were to stage the thing and have a super propagandist arrange it and compose it and shoot the photograph, you wouldn't do better than what they got in a split second by his sense of sense of the moment and his determination to show defiance. And, and I mean, it's just, it's an extraordinary and iconic photograph. They talk about, they talk about him like he's a, you know, a TV showman, uh, youman, a producer in a sense. And there's no doubt he has some of those skills. There's no doubt about that, no matter how one may feel about him.

And what he'd already had planned for this week, one assumes was going to be an attempt at being spectacular as well. Now he has this added ability to add a whole different aspect to it. Let me talk about one of the things that will be at center stage, and that'll be tomorrow when he, assuming he doesn't let it out of the bag today, and I don't think he will because I think it's all part of the showman thing. That's the vice president pick. It will be tomorrow.

And, you know, if you believe all the advance stuff, there are, you know, three potentials here. There's J.D. Vance and Marco Rubio who are kind of like flamethrowers in the Republican Party. And then you have the, you have the most boring man in America, Burgum, the North Dakota governor. But he's also pretty far out there on the right in terms of the abortion issue,

which is giving Trump some concern. Or it's going to be somebody else that we're not even talking about which would be a classic trump move right because you have everybody talk about these three for a month and it may be somebody else as a result of what happened on saturday night sure so it's it's the perfect setting for him nobody really knows for sure what the hell is going to happen. Yeah, yeah. Well, look, I mean, he's been through this. Well, I guess he's been through it once before. The demands on him in 2016 when choosing a running mate were different then.

He had to, he did not have control of the Republican Party. He needed the support of the Republican Party. He had, you know, the makings of what some refer to now as a cult that was solidly behind him, and he knew it, but it wasn't enough. The reason he won in 2016 was because he did get the party behind him. Traditional Republicans, country club Republicans, Trump fanatics, MAGA, all of it came together. And he won by a whisker on what some would describe as lucky bounce. But he's not there anymore. Now the party is his. He doesn't need a kind of Mike Pence the way that he needed in 2016 to reach out to the evangelical community, but also unjust as important to

represent something in the Republican that the Republican establishment could identify as familiar to them. He doesn't need any of that anymore. When you talk about the possibility of a J.D. Vance vice on the ticket, you're talking about somebody who rejects the institution of the Republican Party. You're talking about somebody who has. And I mean, there's a chameleon-like aspect to J.D. Vance. We've seen him transform himself from virulently anti-Trump to a slavishly pro-Trump.

Nevertheless, that's where he is now. And he's kind of fashioning himself into a bit of a mini-Trump, I think, understates it. I think he is kind of the natural evolution of a Trump like figure in terms of his thinking about the country and about politics. He is a MA clear statement about what the Republican Party is now in a way that obviously Mike Pence was not in 2016. So if that's the pick, I think that would be the most of the names that you mentioned. Trump owns this party and this is a MAGA party now and it is actually poised against the traditional institutional Republican or what's left of it within the Republican Party. So pick that outside the three person. Pick one outside the three? Yeah, I mean I just, like, we've watched Trump for, you know, 10 years in politics and, you know, 30 and kind of life.

And he likes to surprise, right? Yeah. And none of those three are women. None of those three are women. And isn't that interesting? Because if we'd had this conversation at the beginning of this year, I think the conventional wisdom, and we probably would have shared it, is that he needs to have a woman on the ticket because he has so many problems with women. I mean, he has problems with women in one sense, but he has problems with women as a voting constituency, in particular voting suburban women. That sort of, that just sort of disappeared.

You know, there was this moment when everybody thought the most likely person on the ticket would be Christine Owen, the governor of South Dakota, who was a very experienced politician as both a governor and as a member of Congress before that, who, who, who talked MAGA really well, you know, who, who would look great in the pictures. She was, you know, an attractive woman. And then for reasons we have not fully understood yet, she wrote in her book about shooting her dog. And that was the end of that. But it was not only the end of her in terms of speculation. It seems to me it was the

end of any woman in terms of speculation. And we turned the page on Trump needing to have a woman on the ticket to, to go after that suburban women constituency to, well, actually in Trump's mind, are there not more important things right now? One of the things that's not mentioned about Doug Bergen, the governor of North Dakota often enough is how rich he is and how Trump is both impressed by wealth and in need of wealth. And, you know, that's not a small thing. But he is also, as you said, he's the most, he's arguably the most boring man in American politics, which would help, you know, in the way that Mike Pence helped by being boring. He never upstaged Trump and he never let anyone to believe that he had serious political ambitions after Trump.

And as it turned out, his ambitions were, I mean, they were held by him and him alone, it seems. So that takes us to Marco Rubio. Marco Rubio is sort of, you know, I'm kind of avoiding your question, right? Like about if not those three, if not those three. But you're covering a lot of ground. You're still covering a lot of ground. And I just think it's an interesting thing. It wouldn't shock me in the slightest if he goes outside that.

Because all three of those have problems, you know, including Rubio. Including Rubio because, you know, he too is from Florida, somebody's going to have to change their address, can't have both people on the ticket from the same state, and blah, blah, blah. Okay. And doesn't get Trump anything that Trump doesn't already have. That's right. You mentioned the importance of the evangelical wing of the Republican Party. And I found that there was something I found really interesting over the

weekend. When Trump put out a statement on Saturday night, it was kind of a classic Trump. It was all about, it was all about him and, you know, how he'd survived through this terrible situation. But it kind of, you know, it wasn't short. It wasn't long, but, you know, it was a medium length statement. As soon as it was finished, I turned to my wife and I said, he just, he made a really bad move there he never thanked god for the fact that he got through the the shooting and i said that's gonna upset a certain element of the republican party not enough to make them go somewhere else

but they're not going to be happy that he didn't include that line. And so when I woke up on Sunday morning, they'd added a line to the statement. They thank God, which is interesting. Which suggests you fired off an email to Trump's private account right away. Yeah, exactly. Okay, we're going to, but that element is still really important, right? Yeah, and I mean, I don't think it's a stretch at all to suggest that significant elements of his base are going to see that as a divine moment. They already invest him

with different kinds of divine attributes anyway, which is strange, I think. It comes in violation of the first commandment, thus help. I have no other gods before me. But you can see how that circumstance,

that situation, those events on Saturday can be interpreted in that way by those willing to see it that way. And it's remarkable in that sense too. And as Trump, by changing his tweet, realizes this is an opportunity to exploit in exactly that way. So I think it's a good point you make, and we should look for more of it this week. Okay, we're going to take a quick break. But when we come back, I want to look at the other side of the political equation in the States and see how they handle this week as well, because there are two sides to this coin,

and how the Democrats deal with this situation is going to be more than a little bit interesting. We'll be right back after this. And welcome back. You're listening to The Bridge, one of our four special programs this summer. We're on hiatus for most of the summer, but there were always going to be a couple of days when we came back. And this was one of them, the beginning of the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee.

And as it turns out, it's a heck of a moment to be dealing with that story because of the things that happened over this past weekend. Keith Bogue is our guest, the former Washington correspondent for the CBC, former chief political correspondent for the CBC in Ottawa. Keith loves American politics, and he has stayed in tune, having covered past elections with Donald Trump and Joe Biden. Okay, so, Keith, we've discussed how we're going to be watching the Republicans this week, but it's equally interesting to watch how the Democrats react to this week.

And over the weekend, I think Joe Biden gave more appearances than he's done in a short period of time, like nationally through news conferences, through statements to the nation, all as it related to what happened on Saturday night and this seeming appearance that we need to grab hold of part of this story in terms of trying to be the voice of calm and moderation. At the same time, he's fighting for his own nomination. And one wonders, watching all this, whether what happened on Saturday night is going to increase the fervor around getting rid of Biden or decrease it. What's your sense?

You know, I think I can fairly comfortably argue both sides of that. So one of the strange things about the predicament that Joe Biden's in, which is all related to his age, is that he actually has time on his side. He's the one who wins by playing out the clock. He's the one who benefits when the confusion or concern about his ability to lead is not on page one. And because of the attempted assassination on Saturday, it's changed the subject at a time when he would really like the subject to be changed because every day he gets through, he gets closer to time having run out for any any reasonable expectation that you could replace him on the ballot. So that's one side of it. And I think that's a credible argument. The other side of it is, well, what if this does have an impact?

The shooting I'm talking about now on polling, we've talked about how how fixed in their positions so much of the electorate is. But this was such a monumental and monstrous event on Saturday that maybe it does start to chip away at some independent vote and create some sympathy for him. And particularly if he, against all his impulses, becomes a kind of voice of reason in in this this hellish moment then the polls reflect that and then that becomes further uh fuel for the fire under those who are trying to get rid of trump so there i've argued both sides of it i do think it can have a point to it but i think the important thing that the most important thing to understand is that that from Biden's perspective, every day he gets through this is a win for him. And every day he gets through this is a loss for those people who

think it's time for him to go because they're just running out of time to make it happen i like the way you describe the um you know chipping away at the independent vote because it really is true it's similar in some ways um in canada at different times but in in in the states you kind of look at it it's kind of 45 45 that are never going to be moved right they're just they're locked in they're either democrats or republicans that's the way they'll always be they may not vote they may be so upset at their party that they don't go to vote but they're unlikely to vote for the other guy but the that movable middle of 10 points is what it's all about, right? That's what it's still all about. I've seen a couple of people over the weekend, people I know,

but also again on social media that Trump is going to win in a landslide now. No, we are not in that. That's not the political environment in which we live anymore. And we haven't, there's not going to be landslides in presidential elections for the foreseeable future. You know, Ronald Reagan winning almost every state in 1984, that was then. That kind of politics doesn't exist anymore. What's going to happen in November is there's going to be another very tight election that's going to keep you on the edge of your seat all through the night and maybe through the next two or three days, who knows. It's going to be settled by thousands of votes, not millions, in a small

handful of battleground states, not necessarily seven, maybe only three. And that seems to me very unlikely to change. When you listen to the concerns that people have about Biden, you will come across occasionally, as I did, a clip with someone who says, I would vote for Biden if he were dead. A lot of Democrats will vote for whoever the Democratic nominee is. They really hope it's not Joe Biden. But if it is Joe Biden, they'll vote for him.

And he knows that. He knows that this is going to come down to thousands of votes in a very small number of states. It's not going to be a landslide no matter what happened on Saturday. And that's part of the reason why he believes he can win. And that obviously is the key to all of this. He's, if he believes he can win, why would he leave?

Those three States, Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania. Yeah. Yeah. 50 States. And it only matters what's going to happen in three of them.

That's the way it looks right now yeah that's and that is the effect of the kind of polarization i mean it's the effect of a lot of things some people to refer to something called the big sword as people you know of different political persuasions gathered geographically in more comfortable environments with um with like-minded people. But there's also like just the degree of polarization between the reds and the blues in the, in the battle that, um, that has a, that has a really insidious effect on politics because if it comes down to those three States, you're not going to pay attention to the concerns of tens of millions of people in other states because that's not the battleground.

I mean, it's just I think the whole political landscape represents something really sad in American politics. But don't let me go too far astray on that. Last point. If, for whatever reason, Biden decides, you know what, I am going to serve out my first term, but I want my name off the ticket in November, is it automatic that Kamala Harris becomes the Democratic nominee. You hear different things on this and different arguments put forward. What's your sense of what the actual situation is?

So there are two ways that it could go with regard to how Biden does it. He could say, I am not going to set the party's nomination in November. I will govern until then. I like Kamala Harris, but we should have a convention. We can have, you know, mini primaries and something like that. And you'd have, you know, multiple candidates. Or Biden could say, I've reassessed my position. I think I should step down. And for the good of the party, I think I should do it now. In which case, Kamala Harris becomes the president.

And then you, I think, very quickly begin to understand the perils of trying to have a competitive convention to essentially have someone other than the first black woman ever to be vice president and now be president. And I think people would quickly come to the conclusion that that is an astonishingly bad idea. And she becomes the nominee. She becomes the president and continues as a nominee in November, and people find out if that was their best shot or not. I think those are the two possibilities.

Yeah, the latter one, I think you're absolutely bang on. If they tried to force her out, it would just be. And you see it already among some columnists, African-American columnists, are sort of, you know, wait a sec, think this through. I mean, you may not like her. We love her. And remember who got you where you are.

And it's true, the African-American vote is probably the most vital constituency for the Democratic Party now. And they disregard it, ignore it at their peril. The first scenario you mentioned would seem to indicate that Biden, announcing he's leaving after the term, can set the rules for succession. Can he? Well, no, he can't but i think if biden i mean what i'm envisioning is that the you know he leaves uh at the end of his term um but he his endorsement of uh kamala harris is is the who gives her a tremendous stedge look she's going to be the front runner anyway

things are happening so quickly there are even technical arguments Look, she's going to be the front runner anyway. Things are happening so quickly. There are even technical arguments about that. She's on the ballot. She was, if you want to make a case that she has already been chosen by millions and millions of Democrats, you can make that case because the primaries were about the ticket

and she's on the ticket. So there are lots of arguments in her favor. I think there are some technical arguments about whether it's easier for her to have access to money as well, but I'm not that clear on it. I just think that we are already at a point where I think most people would consider that the choice would be, is it going to be Biden on the ballot in November or is it going to be Kamala Harris? There's not a lot of talk, even though I think there was some attempt to encourage it about like a Gavin Newsom

or Gretchen Whitmer or Josh Shapiro or others. I think because the window of opportunity is getting smaller, the choice is becoming clearer that it's either him or her. I think that's where we are that's, that's where we are.

Well, that's where we are this week. Exactly. Yeah. Let's go back to point number one. We're in a very turbulent time where, where the unknown unknowns could pop up every week. It's been a great conversation, Keith. It's why I wanted you to do this. Good to see you, Peter. You focus our minds. And Keith will be back in mid-August when the Democrats meet in Chicago, right? They haven't done that

since 68, and we all know how that went. Okay. We'll talk then. Thanks again, Keith. Thank you, Peter. Look forward to it. Keith Bogue, our guest on this first of what will be four summer of 2024 specials for the bridge. And let me go over the agenda there. The next one comes up at the end of next week on July 26, where Chantel and Bruce will be joining for Good Talk. And that'll be our first Good Talk in more than a month. And while some things haven't changed, everything's changing.

You know, like every day there's a new development in the stories around Ottawa in terms of, you know, what's the prime minister up to? What's his cabinet up to? How do they actually feel about each other, the cabinet and the prime minister? There's lots of stories to talk about. And Chantel and Bruce will be by with their first of two summer specials for the bridge, Good Talk, July 26th, right? A week Friday. And the next one for Good Talk for Chantal and Bruce will be August 30th,

which will be, well, exactly what it sounds like. It'll be the end of August, and it'll be our last one for the summer of 2024, which will set up the fall of 2024 as things will get back to normal the following week here on the bridge. So that's three of the four specials. What's the fourth one? Well, you guessed it.

The fourth one will be, Keith Bogue will join us once again, on August 19th. That's day one of the Democratic Convention that, as I mentioned in an interview, will be in Chicago. And, you know, let's try to imagine where will the Democrats be basically a month from now? Will Joe Biden still be the leader? Will Joe Biden be the presidential nominee for the Democratic Party? I guess that's, it's why Keith answered that first question the way he did, in terms of everything's changed. Hell, everything changes all the time.

Who's to predict what'll be the situation five weeks from now when the Democrats meet in Chicago? Well, look forward to that conversation. Once again, it will be on day one of the convention. So that's August 19th. And just like today, it'll help set you up, put things in context for you as the Democrats meet to decide on what their, not only nominee, but their platform will be going into the campaign.

There are a lot of assumptions being made already about what's going to happen on election day. Most people will tell you they can be Republicans or Democrats who have been in the campaign business for a while. They'll say, the campaign doesn't really start until after Labor Day. So lots of things will happen this summer, and lots of things already have, as you well know. But the campaign probably won't really get going until right after Labor Day. Okay, that's the first of our Summer 4, our special programs on the bridge for this summer.

I hope you're enjoying your summer. I am, although yesterday was not a good day. Once again, I bought an England T-shirt. Once again, as I have in every big tournament since 1966 when they won the World Cup, there I was for England. It was, you know, Spain was the better team yesterday, no doubt about it, but still, you know, it was a good finish. England had its chances to tie it up 2-2.

You know, one thing Harry Kane does really well, although he's getting older and getting tired, and that's why he has to get pulled usually early in the second half, he does headers well. And a header would have tied that game. A good header.

Anyway, we're left with England once again not quite being good enough to win the big game. They haven't won since 66, a world title, a trophy. Which makes the Leafs feel pretty good because they won in 67. They can always say, well, look at England. England's worse than we are. It's all going to be different this year. You wait.

All right, folks. Thanks for listening. Thanks for joining us on this special edition of The Bridge. I'm Peter Mansbridge. We'll talk to you again in about a week and a half. Bye for now.