The Bridge with Peter Mansbridge - SMT -- The Morning After The Day Before.

Episode Date: April 29, 2025

Canadians voted, and Mark Carney was the winner, but it was not a majority win, at least not yet. 

Smoke, mirrors and the truth. Fred DeLorey, Bruce Anderson coming right up. And hello there, quite a night. Yes, it was. And this will be quite a day. We have Fred with us for a little bit anyway. He's doing he's doing the tough job. He's hitting every radio station in Canada pretty much,

CBC station, kind of explaining where the Tories sit on the morning after the day before. And Bruce, of course, is with us for the full show. So let's get right out of Fred, we'll start with you. What happened? I thought it was a strange night. It's a mix of emotions. It's a bit obviously positive.

I don't think anyone expected conservatives to do as well as they did throughout this campaign. You know, 140 some seats and the Liberals to a minority. I never saw that coming. I thought the Liberals would get a very large majority. I'm grateful the Liberals decided to stop campaigning two weeks ago. That certainly helped us in a big way. They really just took their foot off the gas. You can see it in the

advance polls. In Atlantic Canada, when we moved into watching Central Canada results come in, my Conservative Party had around 11 or 12 seats. Then, and then the advanced polls started coming in and we almost got down to five seats, uh, in Atlanta, Canada. Like it really swung. I think we're at seven now, uh, because the liberals dominated earlier, uh, in the election and the advanced polls really worked in their favor. Um, but at the end of the day, Fred, you seem to be forgetting you had a 25 point lead two months ago.

Yeah, I'm getting to that. I'm getting to that. I'm getting to that. It's still incredibly disappointing that we did have a 25-point lead and the liberals have been elected to a fourth mandate. It's very disheartening. And also for the only the second time in about two decades, they beat us in the popular vote.

That's disappointing. You know, I know conservatives are quite happy. We got 41.5% of the vote, but liberals got 43.5%. That's the highest they got since 1980 when Pierre Trudeau led the party. There was definitely a coalition of the progressive vote around the liberals. So, I'm not sure what the path forward is going to be for us on that. Well, we'll get to that in a sec. Let's hear what Bruce has to say because I guess there were

mixed emotions. Obviously, this is an incredible couple of months turnaround for the liberals, but to being so close to the majority position, you may still get there with all these, you know, recounts and advanced polling and all that's coming in. But how are you feeling this morning? I mean, what was the biggest surprise for you last night? Well, first of all, how am I feeling this morning? I'm feeling that it was actually

a pretty good democratic exercise. We could all point to things that we wish had been a little bit different, but in the end a lot of people voted. We don't know what that turnout number is, but a lot of people voted. And there were two really different options on the table talking about the two main parties. I think that there's plenty of room to sort of look at well who didn't predict what. I didn't see the level of support that the conservatives ended up having. I was within a point I think on the liberal number in terms of

the popular vote share but I think Fred's point is right that there were a lot of people who if whether they embraced Pierre Poliev or not, did like some of that conservative message about crime and affordability and cost of living. And I think that the message for the conservatives is there's a market for that. It remains to be seen whether Mark Carney as prime minister-elect will be able to eat into that market. I think he probably will, but there's a market for that. And that was the reason why the conservatives had such a big advantage going back to December. The questions around Pierre Pauliev, I think, are the really important ones for the conservatives going forward, which is, was he a limiting factor in the end, even though he may have

been a really good communicator during the period that Justin Trudeau was his opponent? But where does he stand now? Was he somebody who just wasn't able to compete in that market for mainstream opinion with Carney? We don't know. But a good night for the liberals, because to your point, Peter, and I'll finish on this, it's a massive lift over what the numbers were going to be as of December.

It's probably the most spectacular turnaround that I can recall maybe that has ever happened in Canadian politics. So a lot of that credit goes to Mark Carney. Yeah, I don't think anybody's going to challenge you on the precedent that was set in this campaign, that kind of a turnaround. It's quite remarkable. Already people are wondering, seeing as the two main parties got about 85% of the vote, are we now suddenly a two-party nation or is this kind of a one-off, a special occasion

because of a special occasion because of, you know, a special election because of the American situation, etc. etc. Fred, what do you think on that? Yeah, I'm going to be curious to see how this plays out. The NDP are a resilient party in many ways. They tend to bounce back. Their government or official opposition in six provinces, that's more than the liberals are. But it's, you know, if these are the same candidates next election, if it's Kearney versus Poliev, 2.0 in the next election, maybe we'll get a similar thing where there is that squeeze

of the progressive vote from the NDP. And I shouldn't say just the NDP. I think Poliev ate a good chunk of the NDP vote. I think that's something that needs to be explored a bit further as well, particularly the blue collar working class vote that used to be NDP. I think probably may have gotten a lot of that. So I think it's, I think the potential is there that we are moving to a two-party system like we do in a lot of provinces. You know, sometimes we'll have a three-party system, like we do in a lot of provinces. You know, sometimes we'll have a three-party system for a little while in provinces, and

then one of the parties will eventually get squeezed, at West in particular, and even in Atlantic Canada. Really, Ontario and Quebec are the only provinces right now, I think, that have multi-party systems. So, we could be heading to a national two-party system, maybe with the regional bloc as the outlier. I know we're going to lose you in a moment because you've got these other obligations you got to do but before you go, can Pauliev survive the situation he's in now? Because there's no doubt there are some people who are very

upset that you know the blown 25-point lead etc etc. What do you think? I think he's got a lot of thinking to do, particularly where he lost his own seat. He's no longer leader of the official opposition. He won't be in the house when the house comes back. He won't be able to debate or hold the government to account, which certainly weakens his position, but he does have a strong, strong following within the party. He did, again, he added seats, he raised record numbers of money, he got the largest vote share we had in decades, so he certainly has a case. And I'm going to be curious to see what caucus has to say, those who lost their seats and those who have been elected, what their opinions are on this.

And we do have to have a convention within a year, I believe, and there will be a leadership review that's automatic. But I think he's in a strong position. I do think that if you look at this campaign, look at the rallies he had and the support he had and the enthusiasm, I think it's quite strong for him. So I think he definitely has a good shot at staying on if that's what he ultimately chooses to do. Okay, don't be shy. I know you got to jump off when you do jump. He's going to go before I get to tell him what I think about that question. You got to phone rings I'll drop but until then I'll stay on.

Okay, go ahead then Bruce. Well, I think that conservatives do have, you know, some important choices to make. I think that what they see in these results is that they have the opportunity to win enough votes to form a government with a big tent party. The question of whether they want a big tent party has been something that they've struggled with for a number of years, and they've struggled with it with Pierre Poliev in particular, who has been that kind of leader who says you're either with us or you're our enemy, you're our political opponent and we're not really that interested in courting people who might be interested in us, but

also might vote NDP or might vote liberal. I think Fred's right that under Poliev, two things undermined the NDP. One was Poliev making a point of going after those working voters, the blue collar males especially, and he did pull a lot of those away from the NDP. He did it most of it last year and the year before rather than this year, but it was still an important initiative on his part. What he did at the same time though was he alienated a lot of women. He alienated a lot of older voters who especially when they saw the contrast with Mark Carney said, I don't think this guy is the steadying big tent governed for all Canadians kind of person that we might need if we're in a crisis.

So I think the question in part for the conservatives is, do they want to embrace the idea that they should be a party that's trying to win a majority of Canadians support? Or, you know, to go back to a formulation I heard not that many years ago, mission conservatives only want 39.5% super efficiently organized because they don't want people inside their voting block who don't believe in exactly the same things as they do. So that's a big challenge and it's a big one for Pierre-Paul Lievre and to Fred's point about if you're not in the house, how are you going to manifest your leadership if you decide to stay on? Who are you going to make be the lead spokesperson in the house? If it's somebody like Andrew Scheer, I think it's not going to work very well. If it's somebody that we haven't seen that much before

and has that kind of manner that might build a larger tent, I think that could be useful. But ultimately, I think the country will have come through this election and said, let's get on with the work of the country. Even if it's a minority, we don't know how that's going to turn out at this point. Let's get on with the work of the country, even if it's a minority. We don't know how that's going to turn out at this point. Let's get on with the work of the country. Let's not have an obstructionist

parliament. You asked about, are we headed towards a two-party system? I think the odds have been significant of that for the last number of years, maybe since Donald Trump entered the mind space of Canadians, because those progressive voters, when they saw that version of what conservative winning elections looked like, started to realize that the consequences of splitting the progressive vote were worse than they ever had been, potentially more severe than they ever had been. And I think that's part of, you I think that's part of what happened here. I think those progressive voters just sort of took a look at the NDP and said, what is the evidence that a vote for the NDP will do something positive for us?

Not so strong because people were liking Mark Karnick, but is there evidence that voting NDP will create an outcome that we really don't want? And a lot of those progressive voters who would have cast a ballot for the NDP definitely didn't want to see Pierre Poliev. It was 80% of NDP voters who wanted a Carney government over Poliev government. So I think that was quite telling. Okay.

I want to pick up on a couple of the points that you've raised already. One, both you and Fred talked about the difficulties that Poliev will have from you know trying to lead from outside the house and those problems are obvious but they could last a while. I mean for him to get back into the house assuming there's no recount situation in last night's vote. For him to get back in, someone needs to quit, he needs a vacancy and then it's up to the government as to when they call that by election. So it could be months, it's certainly going to be months before that possibility exists for him. So that will be a difficult period of time for him and his leadership. The other point which I'd like to talk about some more and get your sense on,

both you mentioned and last night Mark Carney mentioned about the long list that's in front of him as he takes over this government and with, you know, after having won the election and the priorities that exist. And clearly he sees the Trump situation as a, as a major priority, but there are a lot of things. Now we are used to, you and I have heard many a victory speech on election nights going back 40, 50 years, and there's always a line in there. I recognize that not everybody voted for me, but I'm going to be the prime minister for all Canadians. I know that there are deep divisions in the country, et cetera, et cetera,

and I'm going to work at trying to resolve those. As I said, we've heard that before. It never seems to really turn out that way. How do you make that happen? Because you saw last night, there are deep divisions in the country on some particular issues. And it's regional in some degree, whether it's, you know, Alberta and Saskatchewan, Southwestern Ontario, there are pockets of deep division in the country.

So how do you get at that in real terms? Well, I think it's a really great question, Peter. I mean, I'll give you my take, and obviously it's partly a function of what people might presume is a really great question, Peter. I mean, I'll give you my take, and obviously it's partly a function of what people might presume is a bias, a personal bias. I met Mark Carney a couple of years ago, several years ago, and decided that he was one of the more extraordinary people

I've ever met who was willing to get into politics. And one of the reasons I felt that way and feel that way about him is that he is a good person. He's a unifier. He is not somebody who decided to do this because he wanted to add another line on his resume, already a great resume. He isn't somebody who wanted to do it because the love of the knife fight in politics was something that kind of appealed to him as a way of living your life. I think he really believes that the role is to unify the country as well as to put in place policies that will help people.

So part of my answer is it isn't just about communicating it in a way that is convincing to people. So part of my answer is, it isn't just about communicating it in a way that is convincing to people, it's about doing it and showing it, not just telling it. And I think he will do that because I think he sees that as an important project for the country, a kind of a way that human beings in a democracy should try to organize themselves. But I also believe that he found during the course of his campaign, the 102 or three days that he has spent in politics, because that's really all it has been, is that people reacted to him from different parts of the political spectrum. You could have made the argument that kind of NDP voters would look at him with some

skepticism. You know, successful guy coming from the private sector, affluent. Can we really trust him to care about the things that we care about? You know, we did see that the conservatives, and I made a list of this yesterday, tried a lot of things to kind of run him down, just like Justin, carbon tax, Carney, radical left, woke, elitist, sneaky, plagiarist, conflicts of interest, Brookfield, China. The list goes on and on, tax dodger, stolen, valor, remember about the role that he played

in the financial crisis. None of that stuck. And part of the reason none of that really stuck is that people, when they experienced Mark Carney talking like Mark Carney about the things that he believes, it felt unifying. It didn't feel divisive. And so, I think he really believes it and I think you can't convince people who are skeptical of that just by saying it over and over again. They need to see it.

The last point for me, I guess, is on the question of platforms around the issues that had tended to be among the more divisive, resources, extraction, that kind of thing, permitting processes. The position that Mark Carney put on the table was quite different from what Justin Trudeau's government did and quite appealing to a lot of people who work in and around that sector and are knowledgeable about those businesses. There's still some political skirmishing about an East-West pipeline, but most of that, in my view, is phony political skirmishing. There is no proponent for that pipeline. There's no active question about which pipeline should be built or anything like

that. It's really being used as a kind of a billboard, I think, by some conservatives to say, well, the liberals aren't as pro-development as you think, because they're not willing to embrace an East-West pipeline. But below that political headline, the policies that Mark Carney has put on the table would do a lot to ease at least some of the substantive issues which have been at the heart of some of the division East-West. Now, it hasn't been the whole thing, obviously, but I think it's an important part of the puzzle. You know, there are a lot of balls in the air right away as he takes this position after the

election. And trying to prioritize is going to be a challenge. I mean, the US situation clearly appears to be first up for him and he wants to get down there or have Trump come up here or at least the two of them talk on the phone at some point soon. I think there's a Friday meeting of some kind schedule already. But that's going to take a lot of focus off a lot of these other things that you just mentioned and that we talk about. How do you prioritize a time like that? Because How do you prioritize a time like that? Because these are big issues, all of them, fundamentally changing the nature of the country on a lot of fronts. So how do you prioritize and

you know, how does one guy with a new government, which could well be a minority one, do it? Well, you know, I think the things that I observed over the last few months anyway, as Mark Carney got into politics and then in the relatively brief period that he was prime minister is he's an extremely quick study. He also brings to the job a lot of relevant experience and knowledge. He knows a lot of the players around the world that are important in terms of talking about changing our trading dynamics, building different and new productive relationships. And he also has a pretty good understanding of what it's going to take to create a reasonable outcome for Canada in the context of the Canada-US issue. And he has a prodigious work ethic. I mean, he's, you know, he campaigned hard.

He's not somebody who, who will wanna take a lot of time away from the business of solving for some of these priority issues. So I have a good deal of confidence that he'll be able to prioritize, grind through, think strategically. And I kind of like the fact that his whole platform, his orientation is pretty seriously focused on those economic and geopolitical issues. We're not talking about government.

I don't think they will have these expansive mandate letters for ministers with dozens and dozens and dozens of things that they're intended to do, especially not in the near term. And so I think that focus, along with his experience and his work ethic will help. You know, I had an interesting conversation with Janice Stein the other day. You know her, and you know her background and her knowledge on leadership and how various governments operate

and have operated. I was making the argument that from the little I know about Mark Carney, he seems like the kind of person to me, given this mandate by the Canadian people with the big issues in front of him and his government, that he's not going to dilly-dally. He's going to move on this fairly quickly and it won't be a normal sort of Canadian summer of let's go barbecue and we'll take it easy and we'll worry about all this stuff in the fall. I get the sense that he'll get at it right away and ensure that his ministers get at it right away. She wasn't so sure about that. She said, oh, there's going to be a lot of focus on the G7 meetings in Alberta, which Canada is hosting

the G7 this year and it's very important set of meetings and he's going to have to focus on that. She wondered whether I was accurate in assuming that he's going to hit the ground running, so to speak, on this stack of issues that he outlined himself last night. What do you think? Well, I'm closer to where you are on that. I think the evidence is to me that this is somebody who likes to be in motion, likes to be not in motion just for emotion sake, but very much there are things that need doing, let's get at them.

And the kind of the showy aspects of politics, I think he sort of embraced that a campaign has to look a certain way, it has to do certain things that are really for the communication aspect of the democratic solution that you're putting in front of people. But he didn't wait around very long to call that election. He didn't wait around very long after Justin Trudeau resigned to declare his intention to run for the leadership. And there have been times throughout that process where people were quite skeptical

about it wasn't that many, it was like a hundred days ago when people were saying, this guy can't win the liberal leadership. He doesn't have any political experience. He doesn't have an organization. He won't be able to learn French well enough. He won't be able to kind of accomplish the skills upgrade of a politician that will be needed to compete against the people that he's going to be competing against. My observation of him is that he's a fast learner and he works hard.

And I think that his approach to getting into this was to win these political contests so he could do the work that he thinks urgently needs to be done. And I think that sense of urgency was something that he communicated throughout the campaign. I think he's something he really believes. Okay, last one. You've got to know him quite well in this last year or two. Tell us something about Mark Carney that will surprise us, that you've learned as a result of that relationship. Well, I don't know if it'll surprise everybody, but I was a little bit surprised, I suppose,

at one point at how, what a sense of humor he has. He's quite a funny guy, likes to laugh. And he has a, it's a genuine laugh. It's a, he sees the fun in the world. He enjoys a good joke, enjoys a little banter. So that was part of it. Just realizing that this guy who had this really storied career and by some observations, a real technocratic kind of DNA, that wasn't the fellow that I came to know. That's not

how he comes across to me. And the second thing is also in the same vein and there's some video on social media today of him dancing with music and I didn't realize just how extensive his knowledge of music was and not just music that people my age, I'm older than him, know but people my daughter's ages and younger know. And there's something about that kind of immersion in contemporary culture and music in particular that surprised me. I don't know that it should have, but it sort of made me understand him in a different way because sometimes people only get a sense of the resume and the more kind of qualification oriented aspects of how a politician is presented. But, uh, this is somebody with a kind of a richness, uh, of personal experience

and, um, and, uh, you know, genuinely human, um, life lived and qualities, uh, that, that I came to, uh, to admire and to relate to. Are there any names in that list of new MPs last night? Um, that we should keep in mind? In other words, that are likely to end up or could well end up in a cabinet or could well end up with a position of some significance that Canadians are going to be following? You know, there's a lot of good people that got elected. I wouldn't want to go down the road of who are they that might end up in a cabinet.

I think that it's too early for that and we need to see, you know, where all the results end up. There's still some counting left to be done. And so, no. But I mean, it is nice to see the number of new people coming into parliament. I think it's going to be interesting to see that, you know, the new conservatives as well. I feel better about the, I mean, I would have rather had some more seats on the board for the liberals than the night ended up with.

But as I said at the beginning, this seemed like a good democratic exercise. It seemed as though people had a chance to compare two alternatives and come out the other end. And I know that one can always make the case that the country feels more polarized, but I don't know that it really is. I feel like we can overstate that a little bit sometimes that maybe people will sort of breathe a sigh of relief after this election, not like what happened in the United States, but breathe a sigh of relief and say, you know, maybe the country in total sent a combination of signals to the political system that reflected the different mindsets of different parts of the population, and that's a productive exercise in and of itself. And I think there'd be some good people, new people in parliament on both sides of the

aisle. Well, that would be an achievement in itself if there would end up up as a result of this election being less polarization and more, which is the fear, which is clearly the fear with this vote split as it was. Okay, we're going to leave it at that for now. It's good to chat, Bruce, and it was good to have Fred with us at least for a couple of minutes and we appreciate the fact he'd made an obligation to do all these shows. It's quite the run doing them all right across the country. Yeah, I've done it before. It's hard. It's a tough slog. Okay, you take care. All right, you too Peter. We'll talk again soon. Cheers. Talk soon. We'll talk again soon. Cheers. Talk soon.

And welcome back. You're listening to The Bridge right here on SiriusXM, Channel 167, Canada Talks or on your favorite podcast platform. A reminder that our Tuesday episodes, at least they have been for the last couple of months, are in two places. You can find the initial part of the Tuesday episode of The Bridge, which is Smoke, Mirrors, and the Truth with Bruce Anderson and Fred DeLorey on our YouTube channel. And it's been very successful. Thousands of views each week. And the second half, which we're in now, is only available on our SiriusXM program, Canada Talks from channel 167, and also has a download for podcast users. So,

whatever venue you're on, glad to have you with us. So we're going to keep talking about the election for a little bit and I'll go through the question. It's funny, I talked about the question of the week for Thursdays, your turn on yesterday on Monday. And I said, you know, really, you need to wait for the result before you get your thoughts in. You didn't, a lot of you didn't and you wrote already. But I'm going to go through it again today to let you know because you have a short period of time, 36 to 48 hours to, well, I guess closer to 36, deadline 6 p.m. tomorrow, Wednesday. Okay, but I want to tell you about my night last night. As someone who has done elections since my first one was 1972.

Now, I was just at the local desk of CBC Winnipeg during that time, but that was the 72 election that reduced the conservatives to, sorry, the liberals under Pierre Trudeau to a minority government. And it was a really close, they only ended up winning that night by one or two seats. But ever since then, I've been on air in some fashion on election nights and I anchored, you know, a lot of the federal elections, a dozen of them I think, for the CBC, their network programming. So this time I'm actually over in Scotland. I've been doing a lot of radio work and mainly with American stations who've wanted my thoughts on who've wanted my thoughts on what's happening and I'm doing them again today on the day after. But my friend Jamie Poisson from Frontburner, the CBC podcast, it's one of if not the highest

rated podcast, the general podcast, Canadian of nature in Canada. It's a great program. Anyway, Jamie was doing a kind of a special front burner of some sort on election night where she was just sitting around with some of the people she enjoys working with. And she asked me to join for part of the evening. People were dropping in and out of the program. So she wanted me to come on at 10 30 local time. That's Toronto 10 30. When things would be clear at that point as to who'd won, because that's usually what time networks end up declaring.

And in fact fact they did declare around that time last night. Declared a liberal government win. Anyway it was still interesting because the numbers were tight, were close and they were going up and down. So I was supposed to be on there for like 20, 25 minutes, but ended up being on there for pretty much an hour and a half, along with some great other commentators. Jamie, of course, she had David Colletto from Abacostata, the poll columnist, Elamin Abdelmahmoud. And who else was there? Somebody else.

I've forgotten already. It was the middle of the night, especially for me, in Scotland, so I, you know, it was 10.30 there, but it was 3. of the night for, especially for me in Scotland. So I, you know, it was 10 30 there, but it was three 30 in the morning here. Um, and it kept going for me until 5 AM, but it was great fun. And I really enjoyed doing it. Um, and it, you know, it's one of the ways of, of current podcasting and clearly a way of the future.

I I've thought often about trying to do a program like that with, um, some of the people we're used to on the bridge, uh, on a big night, whether it's an election night in Canada or in the U S or elsewhere, just getting people together and talking it through. And that's what we did last night. We weren't fixated on the numbers as much as we were on the various issues surrounding what was happening.

So it was a good time. I don't know whether it's still out there somewhere, if you want to listen to it, but it, probably not because, you know, that was in the moment. It's one of those in the moment things. It would sound, sound, some of it wouldn't make sense now because the numbers have changed and the facts have changed and they

probably will continue to do so for the next hours. Elections Canada is still counting in some areas and there's going to be recounts because so many of the votes are really close and there's a lot at stake obviously. The uh, the liberals, um, are currently sitting in a minority position. They would love to get to a majority position, but they need a few more seats. I think at last count, they needed four more or five more, um, to get to the numbers that you could say they were in a majority situation. It's interesting cause I remember well, the last time there was a minority government,

there was just four or five seats short of a majority. You remember who that was? 1979, Joe Clark. He was five seats short of a majority. And yet his government fell. It was a very healthy minority, but it was still a minority. And the liberals ganged up on the Tories around Christmas time in 1979 and brought the government down on a budget vote. And the election that then took place in,

I think it was February of 1980, resulted in the return to office of one Pierre Trudeau. So that's the importance of what's going on right now. Okay, some thoughts on the your turn question for this Thursday. Answers need to be in by 6 p.m. tomorrow night, that's Wednesday, at the Mansbridge podcast at gmail.com. And you need to ensure that you put in your name

and the location you're writing from. Here's the question and it's kind of it's very general. It's basically what now? What did you make of what happened last night and what's still happening at this hour? Does it bother you that it could be a minority government? Would you have preferred a majority government no matter of whose stripe given the situation the country's in, the negotiations with the United States, the need to make a new economic plan for this country on a lot of different fronts? Would you have preferred a majority over a minority or does it make any difference to you? What do you think

should happen now? Is the NDP dead forever? They lost official party status. That's happened to them before in the 1990s and they came back. Do you think they can come back now or is the NDP leftDP left is it dead in Canada are we now a two-party state and if we are is that a good thing or a bad thing what about Pierre Poliev loses his seat his party does better than it's done in some time time in terms of the share of the vote. Very impressive. It increases numbers of seats.

That's impressive, but they didn't win. And this was the party that had a 25 point lead just a couple of months ago. So does poly F given all those negatives, does he get to stay in the job? Do you think he should stay in the job or do you think they should seek another new leader? This would be the third in a row that's one and done. One one, you know, ran one election, lost to the liberals and was replaced. And what's the most important thing on your agenda right now? Is it the negotiations with the United States?

Is it dealing with Donald Trump face to face? Or is it housing, immigration, inflation, cost of living, groceries, you name it. So I don't want answers to all those questions. I want you to pick one. And in 75 words or less, we don't take more. Let's get your answer. Find out where you are on that. So that's our Your Turn question for Thursday and the random renter will be along as well.

I'm sure he's going to have something to say about what happened last night. Tomorrow it is our encore edition. I think I'll try to find someone who's got absolutely nothing to do with the election. I'll look for one of our shows from the past. Thursday, your turn, Random Ranter, and Friday, after much reflection through this week. And this story's gonna keep churning a little bit. We'll have the good talk panel, Chantel and Rob Chantel, a bear and Rob Russo.

Last week, another record setting YouTube edition of a good talk, a hundred and 66,000, something like that views, which is unheard of for us. I wonder where things will go as we move on when we're past all the excitement of the election and the Trump story. I wonder if you'll still be entrusted. I guess we're about to find that out. Alright then, that's it for this day. I'm Peter Mansbridge. Thanks so much for listening and we will talk again in less than 24 hours.