Broad bent was best, didn’t win only due to the party he was with. Mulroney might’ve been technically good in debates, but his overall oiliness overcame everything else
@@hardcorehouse NDP is a sound party for some provinces. I voted for Thomas Mulcair in my riding when he was our candidate, but it is not a Party to form a Government for the entire country of Canada.
I sought out this debate after watching my first Canadian debate in 2021 which was a total shitshow. This is how I thought a debate would be. Our party leaders today are completely incompetent.
Ed Broadbent was a rather popular "ordinary Canadians'" political party leader during his leadership of the New Democrats (1975-1989), but not enough Canadians wanted to vote for his political party. Yet under his leadership, the New Democrats made significant gains for a minority party. In the 1974 federal elections, they had plummeted to 16 seats. By contrast, in 1979 they rose to 26 seats, in 1984 to 30 seats, and in 1988 to 43 seats. While even that figure was a far cry from their record number of seats in the 2011 federal elections (103 seats under the fatally ill Jack Layton), nevertheless it showed that a notable minority of the active Canadian voters would have preferred a 3rd-party alternative to the Liberals and the Progressive Conservatives.
I admire John Turner, but at 28:28 what he said was unsavoury. Gesture of friendship? It's one thing to kiss a lady or pat them on their shoulder while embracing them, but going south of the border is going too far, pun unintended.
Turner did poorly here, but he rebounded well four years later, destroying Mulroney near the end - almost winning the election on his debate performance alone.
@@tylerboi They were all alive 36 years after the election until John Turner’s death in 2020. Since Robert Stanfield’s death in 2003, the 1979 election’s been the earliest election with a living party leader - and since Ed Broadbent died, it’s just Joe Clark now.
After Mulroney delivered his verbal smack-down to Turner, David Johnston was probably thinking "Man, where did the Liberals find this guy? I'll bet even Pierre's bratty son could have done a better job of leading the party."
and...no one knew that as this debate was going..the FTA between Canada and US was on the making...what a different debate this is from that from 1988. It pushed me to go back in time to have a look at PM J Diefenbaker legacy to understand Mulroney..still even going back that far..what Mulroney did became NAFTA and that was the end for Canada as these men kneew it This format of debate I hope, one day, to see again in Canada
Exactly. In my community alone of a population of approximately 16,000 the amount of manufacturing plants that have closed since the late '80/ early 90's is nightmarish. THIS HAPPENED ACCROSS THE COUNTRY...bloody pathetic...jobs gone. Offshore china china china. We're in trouble🔥
It's crazy to see how far the NDP has come, and I don't mean that in a good way. Ed called out Turner for overstepping his authority by intervening in the private sector. Jagmeet Singh wouldn't dare utter those words.
In retrospect, John Turner should probably have returned to the Canadian House of Commons already in the 1980 federal elections, and thus re-gained enough politcal experience - even as a backbencher. By doing so, Turner would have avoided the embarrassing gaffes and the other humiliating errors which helped to undo his election campaign. In addition, given many Canadian voters' disgust at the Liberal government's patronage policies, he should have refused to appoint over 70 fellow Liberals to the federal civil service. Yes, he had an option - although admittedly, the pressure from certain fellow Liberals in that situation was great. Ironically, he agreed to make those politically fatal appointments on behalf of his predecessor, Pierre Trudeau, with whom he had had a cool and distant relationship ever since September 1975. Why had they drifted apart? Because, as Turner eventually admitted, Trudeau had asked Turner to implement the wage and price controls that Trudeau himself had mockingly rejected during his successful re-election campaign in 1974. Understandably, Turner had no liking for the role of a backbencher. In retrospect, Turner probably would have lost the 1984 federal elections anyway, given many Canadian voters' desire for change, but by having returned to Parliament already 1980, and by having refused to make the patronage appointments, he would not have lost the elections by as wide margin (40 seats, compared to the PCs' 211 seats) as he ended up doing. RIP, Mulroney and Turner.
I remember (age 11) being a bit frightened by the unique look of desperation/rage/deer-in-the-headlights that the RH Mr. Turner would so often flash journalists, waitresses, plants, walls, furniture... He had the stage presence of Superman rogue's gallery member, "Atomic Skull" and the natural political ability of Hillary Clinton. Ouch. We've a deep history of high profile political tragic figures in the late 20th century: Turner, Campbell, "Joe"... there are more as you know.
Yet, have you watched him in interviews after he's left politics? Relaxed, focused, intelligent & insightful, are all words that can be used to describe him. I agree though, that back in the 80s he came across as a man with a terrible case of stagefright. I think too much of a connection to the corporate world made him ont of touch with the population at large and he wasn't very confident in how to handle them.
Also, Pierre Trudeau laid an egg on Turner's election campaign, with his last minute patronage appointments. Turner's leaving the Trudeau Government in '75, over wage and price controls, made Trudeau cross with him. Trudeau could be very spiteful. The way in which he implemented the appointments, leaving it up to his successor (correctly expected to be Turner) to explain them, pretty much sealed Turner's fate. Turner , having been out of politics for so many years, lost the political savvy to handle the situation.
@@Libertyjack1 But say if Turner axed the appointments? Hindsight says he might have signaled a break from the Trudeau era, might have represented the change Canadians demanded.
It's obvious that all major political figures were and are essentially slaves to the cultural and media trends of the times. As for economic matters, the only real effect they can promise people is higher taxes and mounting debt. The post 1960's thinking on all matters of importance are hard pressed into all of their pronouncements. Today the only difference is more liberalism and more debt, all supported by near zero interest rates.
Term limits are needed. Please term-limit the prime minister of Canada, Canadians. Please also establish a fixed term for the office of prime minister of Canada and the years of election for prime minister of Canada during which elections for prime minister of Canada would take place and establish how many every years Canadian federal elections would take place at. Just get these things done. No office is a lifetime position. I hate and I despise the lack of term limits for the offices that need term limits in many countries in the world. All offices must be term-limited at all costs. Straight up! There need to be new people, new ideas, new experiences and new energies for the offices that are in existence in the world. We don't need career politicians and we don't certainly even need entrenchments in political elected offices either. Career politics is something that I strongly hate and loathe.
I love the reduction of unemployment and the way to do it is to reduce taxes that get paid to the government to make sure that the money would be used by the unemployed people who would eventually be able to use the money to buy things or materials that they need to create their own jobs and to provide for themselves and this way they would be independent because they would not need to work for anyone except themselves and because they would be self-employed and through this situation there have been supermarket owners, shop owners, mall owners, industry owners, producers of steels, producers of foods, producers of furniture, construction workers, businesspeople and many others (you name it). The increase of taxes is dangerous because not only it is equivalent to inflation but also it will destroy the economy and it will cause economic depressions and crises because an increase in taxes would cause people to spend all the money and to waste all of their money leading them to remain unemployed and unemployment would increase day by day when there would be more unemployed people. Carbon emissions can be reduced through the disposal of carbons by not using them at all.
It's sad to see how much dumber we've become. Instead of convincing voters on the basis of economics and policy like politicians used to , "some" politicians are too busy using meaningless buzz words like shecession, shecovery, and peoplekind. 😓
Mulroney performed very strongly and very well in this debate. Turner was very weak and nervous and filled with nervousness in this debate and performed very poorly.
I believe Trudeau has since eclipsed him. And it was Trudeau Sr. who had been expanding government operations, handcuffed successors to spending obligations that can't be easily eliminated. Mulroney did slow the exponential growth in spending, just not enough.
i like how journalist Peter Trueman at 1:24:53 packaged his question to the leaders and triggered them to remind them were they come from yet neither got it.. : " ..both been at some pains gentlemen and then in the course of this campaign and the leadership Contest that preceded it to establish your own modest origins but there is a public perception I think that if you were not born with silver spoons in your mouth you have acquired them since but you now represent the interests of a wealthy and privileged corporate class perhaps you could begin ...."
@@lawrencewright2816 But Lawrence, how can you accuse a politician for being a parasite when he wasn't responsible for implementing any policy? He was a professor before getting into politics, which is supported through student tuition, with (ever decreasing) public support. May I ask you how Conservatives, with their rhetoric on balanced budgets and paper wealth, have made your life any better? Trump supporters down South blame Obama for the deindustrialization of the States. Harper's monetary policies and focus on oil extraction did much worse for Canada.
***** Mulroney did look strong at that moment. However ,Turner was already in trouble. He seemed nervous when he was talking and his body language seemed "off".(waving his arms around the way he did) Then to , patting women on the rear probably did not help his cause ! I had forgotten how "oily " Mulroney seemed. In the first part of the debate he seemed so insincere that I had trouble watching him. He certainly picked up speed though and was strong at the end. He actually seemed able to bully Turner who did not seem to have the wit or the courage to fight back.Because we seem to love or hate politicians ,it tends to be, "my guy won." I am enjoying watching the debates from 1968, 1979 and 1984 .It would be interesting to see what academics have to say about those battles. What would have happened in 1984 if there had been no debate? Were the Conservatives already leading in the polls before the debate ? Maybe Canadians were ready for a change. The Liberals had been in power since 1963 with only Joe Clark's short stint to break up the 21 year run.
Perhaps it's my youth but in terms of intellectualism, character, and credibility, the 1984 election just seems especially weak to me. Mulroney was later revealed to be terribly corrupt, but even before those revelations had occurred, he still comes off as an untrustworthy asshole during the election. I was surprised that Mulroney could get away with his pep talk ramblings back in the '80s about loving Canada more than the other candidates and other meaningless crap. Mulroney regularly veers off point. In the internet age, people would tear him apart for such substanceless vocalisations. Turner's character is pitiful; he looks passionless and puts minimal effort into giving voters a compelling reason to vote for him. It's as if the Liberals gave up on trying because they had already assumed a win was a given. This was an era when the Liberals' ego had been inflated to consider themselves Canada's de facto party. Broadbent may as well not even have been there. He was so forgettable. His enthusiasm was that of a corporate executive hosting a drawn out board meeting. It feels as if the NDP didn't even have a strategy beyond regurgitating their party platform. In contrast to the politically polarising though esteemed personas of Tommy Douglas, Jack Layton, and Thomas Mulcair, Broadbent was absolutely hopeless.
+William Eddy The Sun. July 6 1984 Lib 49%. +3% PC 38%. -3% NDP 11%. Liberals have 50% in Ontario. 2/3 in Quebec....If an election was held today (poll June 21-23) Prime Minister Turner flew to London today to ask Queen Elizabeth....... I miss the evening newspaper. Today's news today.
***** Oh newspapers. No one can make yesterday's news seem as sexy as you cumbersome sheets of greyness. Even as you claim to be objective and impartial, you tell me who to vote for come election time, because that somehow became the norm... Sure, you're a paid subscription, but that doesn't mean you can't have advertisements left, right, and center. Newspapers, your biases may be transparent, your ads can be obnoxious, and your news a bit dated, but you never let me down newspapers, never.
Broadbent calls Turner and Mulroney twins, Brian calls the other two twins. But the real twins at the end of this debate were Ed Broadbent and Brian Mulroney; Mulroney said he turned to him after his exchange with John Turner and Broadbent gave him that jackpot kinda look. They both knew that any chance of John winning were done.
well for me Ed Broadbent was the best here, and I would've voted for him if it was just seeing this. Turner seemed like an earnest fellow but sadly lacked the charisma and cheekiness of Trudeau and Mulroney as William B said, even if your not for his policies he was really good in this debate and I could see why many bought into him and thought of giving him a chance. Funny to hear an NDP leader talk of pulling out of NATO when the NDP historically supported NATO and its criminal wars and Mulroney was a supporter of CIA backed warfare in much of Latin America and Turner talk of helping out First Nations when his party like the others historically disenfranchised Indigenous folk. lol interesting indeed.
Bravo... Ed’s voice is most Canadians...most just don’t know it because of theater politics the Lib-Cons have drowned upon us...and the red scare from the US.
@@chadsimmons4496 pity the NDP was often overlooked although NDP have been elected as Premiers and as the Canadian historian/media critic/NGO critic Yves Engler has told me its often been "a mix bag"of the NDP of often talking left, then governing from the right and often just being a Diet Liberal Party or moderating their stances so as to not be seen as too "left" for the Canadian corporate/state press.
Yuri muckraker yup, unfortunately power seeds compromise...otherwise it’s a coup or literal revolution. Mulcair moved the NDP to the right, and that’s how Trudeau out-lefted him. 153 years should be enough, you would think, to give them a try.
@@chadsimmons4496 what's hilarious how when the NDP get the most psuedo of the pseudo left or become a Diet Liberal Party they are still consideered too left for Canada but the Liberals will take into consideration some of their big policy proposals like Pharmacare or expanding singlepayer healthcare something they've done in the past or if an NDP leader was to say "bollocks to deficits" the CBC, much of the Canadian liberal party and business friendly would mock the candidate mercilessly but pretty boy Justin, 'the White Obama' Trudeau gets to say we'll run deficits and slighty increase the personal income tax to those making over whatever such and such millions of dollars and he's hailed as a wonderful candidate meanwhile Harper is thinking "and they call my tax reliefs voo-doo economics". haha! I've always believed even though I'm a left-winger and no fan of the Canadian right, that there is a bias and double standard against anyone not part of the ruling Liberal Party and the press is mosty biased in favor of them at the expense certainly of the NDP and Greens but the former Progressive Conservatives and Conservative Party. that ridiculous politically correct hysteria over Jean Chretein's face, that saw Kim Campbell lose and the PC wiped out was super unfair especially given how much the Liberals continued the policies that made every Canadian nationalists on the left, right, and extreme centre see Mulroney as a traitor who sold Canada to American domination and for cheap labor in Mexico.
Brian Mulroney managed to attract enough right-wing amd centrist voters across Canada - even in his native Quebec - to win the 1984 and the 1988 federal elections. Then his "Big Blue" coalition fell apart, due to the recession, the persistent budget deficits, the painful spending cutbacks, the controversies over the U.S.-Canadian Free Trade Agreement, the two failed attempts to recognize Quebec as a "distinct society" (the Meech Lake and Charlottetown Accords), the rise of right-wing populism (because of the Reform Party), and the growing gap between Mulroney's rhetoric and his divisive policies (from the social programs' "sacred trust" to their cutbacks). By retiring in June 1993, Mulroney avoided the humiliation of losing his parliamentary majority as Prime Minister. Ironically, his short-term successor Kim Campbell had to experience a nearly total defeat - dropping from over 150 seats in September 1993 to just 2 seats in October 1993, and neither one of those remaining seats was her own!
University principal or dean Not sure for that reason I am asking you . In school systems we call principal . Of course I love Mulroney but never ever voted for conservatives. ( over 4 decades ) always voted for liberals change is good coming election I will definitely vote for conservatives
I would vote for progressive conservative but Joh turner seem intelligent good ideas, judged too harshly for not being charismatic had many good ideas unfairly treated no different than Trudeau!
~@1:17:00 "Why would you say this when you know this is inaccurate" narrator: it was actually accurate ~@1:34:00 this *was* however true Mulroney may have been part of the upper crust, but he *was* a change in the same way that Trump was a change in the US in '16 the Liberals *had* been in power for a full generation by that point Mulroney is *really* strong on the patronage issue (Result: tons of conservative patronage appointments). He probably sounded strong on fiscal responsibility too (Result: worst deficit in canadian history pre-harper).
I love how you have to narrow the deficit talks to pre-Harper, just to avoid the absolute disaster that Justin Trudeau has been. Also, Trudeau Snr ran higher deficits and spending, so your comment is inaccurate anyway.
Future Canadian debates should adopt this format. We need more back and forth between leaders instead of 5 people gasping for airtime.
Not a big fan of Mulroney nor pro-conservative but he was brillant and perhaps the best ever in debates.
I think that Broadbent holds his own. His message resonates even more, today.
@@Libertyjack1 Have to agree that Broadbent held his own in this debate as well.
Broad bent was best, didn’t win only due to the party he was with. Mulroney might’ve been technically good in debates, but his overall oiliness overcame everything else
@@Libertyjack1 It was resonating before 1984.
@@hardcorehouse NDP is a sound party for some provinces. I voted for Thomas Mulcair in my riding when he was our candidate, but it is not a Party to form a Government for the entire country of Canada.
thank you for putting these vids up. im not sure how the hell you got them, but its about time they were on youtube.
00:01 Of all the debates in Canadian history, this one seems to have the most ominous musical intro. Probably apropo if you were John Turner...
Election '79's intro was every bit as dreary, as were Trudeau's chances of beating Clark.
I sought out this debate after watching my first Canadian debate in 2021 which was a total shitshow. This is how I thought a debate would be. Our party leaders today are completely incompetent.
RIP John Turner.
It is nice and polite that politicians use the title Mister when they talk to each other.
1:36:44 "You had an option, sir!"
thanks I was finding that
Yes, he got him there.
Johnson should have enforced the rule, stopped him right there.
@@broadstreet21 I’m conservative but you’re right, he should’ve. That said, Turner deserved what Mulroney said to him.
this was Mulroney's knock out blow of the debate. It turned the election.
Kinda interesting to see that the future GG was the host of the debate.
Ed Broadbent was a rather popular "ordinary Canadians'" political party leader during his leadership of the New Democrats (1975-1989), but not enough Canadians wanted to vote for his political party. Yet under his leadership, the New Democrats made significant gains for a minority party. In the 1974 federal elections, they had plummeted to 16 seats. By contrast, in 1979 they rose to 26 seats, in 1984 to 30 seats, and in 1988 to 43 seats. While even that figure was a far cry from their record number of seats in the 2011 federal elections (103 seats under the fatally ill Jack Layton), nevertheless it showed that a notable minority of the active Canadian voters would have preferred a 3rd-party alternative to the Liberals and the Progressive Conservatives.
I admire John Turner, but at 28:28 what he said was unsavoury. Gesture of friendship? It's one thing to kiss a lady or pat them on their shoulder while embracing them, but going south of the border is going too far, pun unintended.
Mulroney won, although Broadbent came close. Turner was horrible, he was visibly nervous and robotic
John Turner had been out of public life for to long and it showed. So much for the being the great white knight who saved the Liberal party in 1984.
Turner did poorly here, but he rebounded well four years later, destroying Mulroney near the end - almost winning the election on his debate performance alone.
robots don't usually grab women's asses
Brian Mulroney is older than Joe Clark by 77 days as they were both born in 1939.
RIP Brian Mulroney
all the men on this stage are now deceased. We lost Turner in 2020 I believe & both Broadbent & Mulroney in 2024.
@@tylerboi They were all alive 36 years after the election until John Turner’s death in 2020. Since Robert Stanfield’s death in 2003, the 1979 election’s been the earliest election with a living party leader - and since Ed Broadbent died, it’s just Joe Clark now.
This was the last time until the 2015 election in which the winning party and leader won more than 100 new seats.
David Johnston at the beginning also mentioned Radio-Canada and TVA, as these were the first separate English-language and French-language debates
You know Mulroney seems to have had a similar style to Obama much later. Relatively young, indealistic/inspiring, smart, and baritone voiced
After Mulroney delivered his verbal smack-down to Turner, David Johnston was probably thinking "Man, where did the Liberals find this guy? I'll bet even Pierre's bratty son could have done a better job of leading the party."
To be fair, Mulroney spoke out of turn because the moderator had called on the next journalist to ask his question.
@@Mani26031981 True.
@@Mani26031981 But Turner deserved what was said to him.
Thanks for sharing this!
Thanks for the upload!
Correction: In 1980, the NDP rose to 32 seats, while in 1984, it suffered a slight defeat, ending up with 30 seats.
and...no one knew that as this debate was going..the FTA between Canada and US was on the making...what a different debate this is from that from 1988. It pushed me to go back in time to have a look at PM J Diefenbaker legacy to understand Mulroney..still even going back that far..what Mulroney did became NAFTA and that was the end for Canada as these men kneew it
This format of debate I hope, one day, to see again in Canada
Exactly.
In my community alone of a population of approximately 16,000 the amount of manufacturing plants that have closed since the late '80/ early 90's is nightmarish.
THIS HAPPENED ACCROSS THE COUNTRY...bloody pathetic...jobs gone.
Offshore china china china.
We're in trouble🔥
The 1984 Canadian federal election is the most recent election and the last election where the winner won more than 200 seats or won above 200 seats.
We'll never see that kind of majority ever again in Canadian politics!!
As well as winning more than 50% of the popular vote, an 'absolute majority.'
it was 211 out of 282 seats at the time, a crushing landslide. Today's Commons has 338 seats.
Mulroney has Irish origins.
It's crazy to see how far the NDP has come, and I don't mean that in a good way. Ed called out Turner for overstepping his authority by intervening in the private sector. Jagmeet Singh wouldn't dare utter those words.
Hey! Justine Trudeau stole Brian Mulroney's opening speech!
link?
In retrospect, John Turner should probably have returned to the Canadian House of Commons already in the 1980 federal elections, and thus re-gained enough politcal experience - even as a backbencher. By doing so, Turner would have avoided the embarrassing gaffes and the other humiliating errors which helped to undo his election campaign. In addition, given many Canadian voters' disgust at the Liberal government's patronage policies, he should have refused to appoint over 70 fellow Liberals to the federal civil service. Yes, he had an option - although admittedly, the pressure from certain fellow Liberals in that situation was great. Ironically, he agreed to make those politically fatal appointments on behalf of his predecessor, Pierre Trudeau, with whom he had had a cool and distant relationship ever since September 1975. Why had they drifted apart? Because, as Turner eventually admitted, Trudeau had asked Turner to implement the wage and price controls that Trudeau himself had mockingly rejected during his successful re-election campaign in 1974. Understandably, Turner had no liking for the role of a backbencher. In retrospect, Turner probably would have lost the 1984 federal elections anyway, given many Canadian voters' desire for change, but by having returned to Parliament already 1980, and by having refused to make the patronage appointments, he would not have lost the elections by as wide margin (40 seats, compared to the PCs' 211 seats) as he ended up doing. RIP, Mulroney and Turner.
I remember (age 11) being a bit frightened by the unique look of desperation/rage/deer-in-the-headlights that the RH Mr. Turner would so often flash journalists, waitresses, plants, walls, furniture... He had the stage presence of Superman rogue's gallery member, "Atomic Skull" and the natural political ability of Hillary Clinton. Ouch. We've a deep history of high profile political tragic figures in the late 20th century: Turner, Campbell, "Joe"... there are more as you know.
Yet, have you watched him in interviews after he's left politics? Relaxed, focused, intelligent & insightful, are all words that can be used to describe him. I agree though, that back in the 80s he came across as a man with a terrible case of stagefright. I think too much of a connection to the corporate world made him ont of touch with the population at large and he wasn't very confident in how to handle them.
Also, Pierre Trudeau laid an egg on Turner's election campaign, with his last minute patronage appointments.
Turner's leaving the Trudeau Government in '75, over wage and price controls, made Trudeau cross with him. Trudeau could be very spiteful. The way in which he implemented the appointments, leaving it up to his successor (correctly expected to be Turner) to explain them, pretty much sealed Turner's fate. Turner , having been out of politics for so many years, lost the political savvy to handle the situation.
@@Libertyjack1 But say if Turner axed the appointments? Hindsight says he might have signaled a break from the Trudeau era, might have represented the change Canadians demanded.
It's obvious that all major political figures were and are essentially slaves to the cultural and media trends of the times. As for economic matters, the only real effect they can promise people is higher taxes and mounting debt. The post 1960's thinking on all matters of importance are hard pressed into all of their pronouncements. Today the only difference is more liberalism and more debt, all supported by near zero interest rates.
Term limits are needed. Please term-limit the prime minister of Canada, Canadians. Please also establish a fixed term for the office of prime minister of Canada and the years of election for prime minister of Canada during which elections for prime minister of Canada would take place and establish how many every years Canadian federal elections would take place at. Just get these things done. No office is a lifetime position. I hate and I despise the lack of term limits for the offices that need term limits in many countries in the world. All offices must be term-limited at all costs. Straight up! There need to be new people, new ideas, new experiences and new energies for the offices that are in existence in the world. We don't need career politicians and we don't certainly even need entrenchments in political elected offices either. Career politics is something that I strongly hate and loathe.
I love the reduction of unemployment and the way to do it is to reduce taxes that get paid to the government to make sure that the money would be used by the unemployed people who would eventually be able to use the money to buy things or materials that they need to create their own jobs and to provide for themselves and this way they would be independent because they would not need to work for anyone except themselves and because they would be self-employed and through this situation there have been supermarket owners, shop owners, mall owners, industry owners, producers of steels, producers of foods, producers of furniture, construction workers, businesspeople and many others (you name it). The increase of taxes is dangerous because not only it is equivalent to inflation but also it will destroy the economy and it will cause economic depressions and crises because an increase in taxes would cause people to spend all the money and to waste all of their money leading them to remain unemployed and unemployment would increase day by day when there would be more unemployed people. Carbon emissions can be reduced through the disposal of carbons by not using them at all.
It's sad to see how much dumber we've become. Instead of convincing voters on the basis of economics and policy like politicians used to , "some" politicians are too busy using meaningless buzz words like shecession, shecovery, and peoplekind. 😓
You racist bigoted misogynist you.
Do you know if this is public domain? I'd like to use a short clip from this.
You can use a clip under the Fair Dealing doctrine.
Mulroney performed very strongly and very well in this debate. Turner was very weak and nervous and filled with nervousness in this debate and performed very poorly.
Back when this country wasn’t a woke dump
yes, he had an option !
Brian Mulroney was the highest spending PM in Canadian history! It makes me laugh listening to him discuss fiscal responsibility.
I believe Trudeau has since eclipsed him. And it was Trudeau Sr. who had been expanding government operations, handcuffed successors to spending obligations that can't be easily eliminated. Mulroney did slow the exponential growth in spending, just not enough.
Have you met Justin?
Lol Justin Trudy has something to say about that record
Uhhh no he’s not. The dullard Trudeaus, both senior and junior, have spent far more. Mulroney slowed the rate of spending.
i like how journalist Peter Trueman at 1:24:53 packaged his question to the leaders and triggered them to remind them were they come from yet neither got it.. : " ..both been at some pains gentlemen and then in the course of this campaign and the leadership
Contest that preceded it to establish your own modest origins but there is a public perception I think that if you were not born with silver spoons in your mouth you have acquired them since but you now represent the interests of a wealthy and privileged corporate class perhaps you could begin ...."
I'm from the UK. Never seen this debate. Shame the UK don't have this
Oh, the bottom patting did him in.
Broadbent was right about the Senate it's an embarrassment to Canada
Broadbent was right about a lot of things.
Scott Anderson
That fucking parasite Broadbent was nobody to talk about being an embarrassment.
@@Libertyjack1 especially Central (and South) America.
And we still won't vote NDP. Canadians are weak.
@@lawrencewright2816 I take it you're not a lefty?
@@lawrencewright2816 But Lawrence, how can you accuse a politician for being a parasite when he wasn't responsible for implementing any policy? He was a professor before getting into politics, which is supported through student tuition, with (ever decreasing) public support.
May I ask you how Conservatives, with their rhetoric on balanced budgets and paper wealth, have made your life any better? Trump supporters down South blame Obama for the deindustrialization of the States. Harper's monetary policies and focus on oil extraction did much worse for Canada.
you had an option sir
Philip Bird What point in the video is that quote?
***** Mulroney did look strong at that moment. However ,Turner was already in trouble. He seemed nervous when he was talking and his body language seemed "off".(waving his arms around the way he did) Then to , patting women on the rear probably did not help his cause ! I had forgotten how "oily " Mulroney seemed. In the first part of the debate he seemed so insincere that I had trouble watching him. He certainly picked up speed though and was strong at the end. He actually seemed able to bully Turner who did not seem to have the wit or the courage to fight back.Because we seem to love or hate politicians ,it tends to be, "my guy won." I am enjoying watching the debates from 1968, 1979 and 1984 .It would be interesting to see what academics have to say about those battles. What would have happened in 1984 if there had been no debate? Were the Conservatives already leading in the polls before the debate ? Maybe Canadians were ready for a change. The Liberals had been in power since 1963 with only Joe Clark's short stint to break up the 21 year run.
Perhaps it's my youth but in terms of intellectualism, character, and credibility, the 1984 election just seems especially weak to me.
Mulroney was later revealed to be terribly corrupt, but even before those revelations had occurred, he still comes off as an untrustworthy asshole during the election. I was surprised that Mulroney could get away with his pep talk ramblings back in the '80s about loving Canada more than the other candidates and other meaningless crap. Mulroney regularly veers off point. In the internet age, people would tear him apart for such substanceless vocalisations.
Turner's character is pitiful; he looks passionless and puts minimal effort into giving voters a compelling reason to vote for him. It's as if the Liberals gave up on trying because they had already assumed a win was a given. This was an era when the Liberals' ego had been inflated to consider themselves Canada's de facto party.
Broadbent may as well not even have been there. He was so forgettable. His enthusiasm was that of a corporate executive hosting a drawn out board meeting. It feels as if the NDP didn't even have a strategy beyond regurgitating their party platform. In contrast to the politically polarising though esteemed personas of Tommy Douglas, Jack Layton, and Thomas Mulcair, Broadbent was absolutely hopeless.
+William Eddy
The Sun. July 6 1984
Lib 49%. +3%
PC 38%. -3%
NDP 11%.
Liberals have 50% in Ontario. 2/3 in Quebec....If an election was held today (poll June 21-23)
Prime Minister Turner flew to London today to ask Queen Elizabeth.......
I miss the evening newspaper. Today's news today.
***** Oh newspapers. No one can make yesterday's news seem as sexy as you cumbersome sheets of greyness. Even as you claim to be objective and impartial, you tell me who to vote for come election time, because that somehow became the norm... Sure, you're a paid subscription, but that doesn't mean you can't have advertisements left, right, and center. Newspapers, your biases may be transparent, your ads can be obnoxious, and your news a bit dated, but you never let me down newspapers, never.
Broadbent calls Turner and Mulroney twins, Brian calls the other two twins. But the real twins at the end of this debate were Ed Broadbent and Brian Mulroney; Mulroney said he turned to him after his exchange with John Turner and Broadbent gave him that jackpot kinda look. They both knew that any chance of John winning were done.
these old time canadian politicians seem quite articulate,and thoughtful esp. compared to american debates these days.
well for me Ed Broadbent was the best here, and I would've voted for him if it was just seeing this. Turner seemed like an earnest fellow but sadly lacked the charisma and cheekiness of Trudeau and Mulroney as William B said, even if your not for his policies he was really good in this debate and I could see why many bought into him and thought of giving him a chance. Funny to hear an NDP leader talk of pulling out of NATO when the NDP historically supported NATO and its criminal wars and Mulroney was a supporter of CIA backed warfare in much of Latin America and Turner talk of helping out First Nations when his party like the others historically disenfranchised Indigenous folk. lol interesting indeed.
Bravo... Ed’s voice is most Canadians...most just don’t know it because of theater politics the Lib-Cons have drowned upon us...and the red scare from the US.
@@chadsimmons4496 pity the NDP was often overlooked although NDP have been elected as Premiers and as the Canadian historian/media critic/NGO critic Yves Engler has told me its often been "a mix bag"of the NDP of often talking left, then governing from the right and often just being a Diet Liberal Party or moderating their stances so as to not be seen as too "left" for the Canadian corporate/state press.
Yuri muckraker yup, unfortunately power seeds compromise...otherwise it’s a coup or literal revolution.
Mulcair moved the NDP to the right, and that’s how Trudeau out-lefted him.
153 years should be enough, you would think, to give them a try.
@@chadsimmons4496 what's hilarious how when the NDP get the most psuedo of the pseudo left or become a Diet Liberal Party they are still consideered too left for Canada but the Liberals will take into consideration some of their big policy proposals like Pharmacare or expanding singlepayer healthcare something they've done in the past or if an NDP leader was to say "bollocks to deficits" the CBC, much of the Canadian liberal party and business friendly would mock the candidate mercilessly but pretty boy Justin, 'the White Obama' Trudeau gets to say we'll run deficits and slighty increase the personal income tax to those making over whatever such and such millions of dollars and he's hailed as a wonderful candidate meanwhile Harper is thinking "and they call my tax reliefs voo-doo economics". haha! I've always believed even though I'm a left-winger and no fan of the Canadian right, that there is a bias and double standard against anyone not part of the ruling Liberal Party and the press is mosty biased in favor of them at the expense certainly of the NDP and Greens but the former Progressive Conservatives and Conservative Party. that ridiculous politically correct hysteria over Jean Chretein's face, that saw Kim Campbell lose and the PC wiped out was super unfair especially given how much the Liberals continued the policies that made every Canadian nationalists on the left, right, and extreme centre see Mulroney as a traitor who sold Canada to American domination and for cheap labor in Mexico.
Yuri muckraker yup. I’ve stopped blaming the media though, and have focused on those willing to swallow it as gospel.
Brian Mulroney managed to attract enough right-wing amd centrist voters across Canada - even in his native Quebec - to win the 1984 and the 1988 federal elections. Then his "Big Blue" coalition fell apart, due to the recession, the persistent budget deficits, the painful spending cutbacks, the controversies over the U.S.-Canadian Free Trade Agreement, the two failed attempts to recognize Quebec as a "distinct society" (the Meech Lake and Charlottetown Accords), the rise of right-wing populism (because of the Reform Party), and the growing gap between Mulroney's rhetoric and his divisive policies (from the social programs' "sacred trust" to their cutbacks). By retiring in June 1993, Mulroney avoided the humiliation of losing his parliamentary majority as Prime Minister. Ironically, his short-term successor Kim Campbell had to experience a nearly total defeat - dropping from over 150 seats in September 1993 to just 2 seats in October 1993, and neither one of those remaining seats was her own!
Turner seriously believes that the provinces wouldn't support an elected senate. The provinces are begging for less federal power.
Another correction: "right-wing AND centrist voters..."
Any Americans🦅 watching this?
yes
@@ag8313-i4m Cool.
University principal or dean
Not sure for that reason I am asking you .
In school systems we call principal .
Of course I love Mulroney but never ever voted for conservatives. ( over 4 decades ) always voted for liberals change is good coming election I will definitely vote for conservatives
I would vote for progressive conservative but Joh turner seem intelligent good ideas, judged too harshly for not being charismatic had many good ideas unfairly treated no different than Trudeau!
~@1:17:00
"Why would you say this when you know this is inaccurate"
narrator: it was actually accurate
~@1:34:00 this *was* however true
Mulroney may have been part of the upper crust, but he *was* a change in the same way that Trump was a change in the US in '16
the Liberals *had* been in power for a full generation by that point
Mulroney is *really* strong on the patronage issue (Result: tons of conservative patronage appointments). He probably sounded strong on fiscal responsibility too (Result: worst deficit in canadian history pre-harper).
I love how you have to narrow the deficit talks to pre-Harper, just to avoid the absolute disaster that Justin Trudeau has been. Also, Trudeau Snr ran higher deficits and spending, so your comment is inaccurate anyway.