Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

Frosty the no man as our next PM? – politicalbetting.com

2456

Comments

  • Options
    StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    HYUFD said:

    Heathener said:

    The funny thing about the Mail's reactionary outrage is that it will make it more of a 'thing' to boo the royals.

    They really do shoot themselves in the foot.

    I find it interesting though. I'm not sure I would boo William but I get this sense at the moment that reminds me so much of 1992-7. During that time there was this same reactionary 'Back to Basics' guff and outrage from the right wing press. The same Nasty Party rearing its ugly head. But all the while the country was getting ready to move on.

    Times they are a changing.

    No it doesn't at all, just shows the fact that Liverpool is the most socialist city in the UK after Glasgow and does not have a single Tory MP. Indeed every MP in Liverpool is Labour and there are no Tory councillors in Liverpool either despite the Tory landslide in the rest of the UK in 2019
    “… the Tory landslide in the rest of the UK in 2019.”

    Planet Earth to Tank Commander! Grave abuse of the definition “UK”.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,297
    HYUFD said:

    Heathener said:

    The funny thing about the Mail's reactionary outrage is that it will make it more of a 'thing' to boo the royals.

    They really do shoot themselves in the foot.

    I find it interesting though. I'm not sure I would boo William but I get this sense at the moment that reminds me so much of 1992-7. During that time there was this same reactionary 'Back to Basics' guff and outrage from the right wing press. The same Nasty Party rearing its ugly head. But all the while the country was getting ready to move on.

    Times they are a changing.

    No it doesn't at all, just shows the fact that Liverpool is the most socialist city in the UK after Glasgow and does not have a single Tory MP. Indeed every MP in Liverpool is Labour and there are no Tory councillors in Liverpool either despite the Tory landslide in the rest of the UK in 2019
    Utter nonsense

    Liverpool supporters come from across the globe
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,005

    Probably conducted before Wills & Kate's epochal visit to Glasgow.



    https://tinyurl.com/nhzp2vhy

    Yet only 36% of Scots want Scotland to become a republic when the Queen dies rather than have Prince Charles as King.

    About 60% of UK voters overall want the monarchy to continue with King Charles IIIrd
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,611

    It is almost impossible to imagine a worse choice for Prime Minister than Boris Johnson, but David Frost could be it. A man of no achievement with a sub-mediocre mind with no political experience and no support base of any kind beyond the comment pages of the Telegraph would be an absolute disaster. Not even the Taliban Tories would be so stupid, would they?

    "It is almost impossible to imagine a worse choice for Prime Minister than Boris Johnson"

    It is far, far from impossible. Labour's candidate for the 2019 GE is an example: particularly given the two crises that have faced the country since then. Corbyn would have been disastrous with both the Covid crisis and the Ukrainian War. The former we did not do too badly at, nor well; but on the latter we've done very well indeed IMO.

    And we came very near having PM Corbyn during both of these.

    I'd hope both parties consider this and try to get leaders who are more competent than Johnson or Corbyn.

    I always thought that Johnson was the better choice than Corbyn, but now I am not so sure. Labour MPs at least sought to remove Corbyn and would have had a lot of control over him if he had got into office. I am not sure they would have played along with him undoing the UK's democracy in the way that Tory MPs have allowed Johnson to do.

    I suspect that Corbyn's handling of Covid would have produced similar overall results to Johnson's. And Ukraine would have seen him toppled.

    "I suspect that Corbyn's handling of Covid would have produced similar overall results to Johnson's. "

    Why do you suspect that? He has refused to say if he has been vaccinated. It was vital for politicians to encourage as many people as possible to get vaccinated, which was why we saw politicians publicising getting vaccinated once it was their turn. Corbyn sadly has quite a following in a demographic where (AIUI) vaccination rates are lower, and his unequivocally saying that he had been vaccinated would have helped.

    I'm also unsure how well he would have tackled vaccine procurement, given the inclusion of big pharma (boo, hiss).

    "And Ukraine would have seen him toppled."

    Which would have been too late to help Ukraine.
    It was two exceedingly poor options, but Corbyn shaded it in the crap stakes.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,756
    edited May 2022
    HYUFD said:

    Probably conducted before Wills & Kate's epochal visit to Glasgow.



    https://tinyurl.com/nhzp2vhy

    Yet only 36% of Scots want Scotland to become a republic when the Queen dies rather than have Prince Charles as King.

    About 60% of UK voters overall want the monarchy to continue with King Charles IIIrd
    Who cares about the rest of the UK, to adopt a phrase? Scotland is a separate kingdom with its own crown. HMtQ had to come up to Edinburgh to claim it. HMG was too cheapskate to pay for a coronation, though.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,297
    Jonathan said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Lord Frost would be a perfectly capable PM however I highly doubt he could give up a seat in the Lords to fight a by election he might well lose to the Liberal Democrats for a miniscule chance of PM for which there is currently no vacancy and won't be on the Tory side unless the PM resigns or is removed by a VONC

    He is the last person the conservative party need just now
    Chris Chope is still around.
    BigG is rather hoping Corbyn or Farage steps up to lead the Tories.
    Where on earth did you come up with that one
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,005
    edited May 2022

    Andy_JS said:

    I'd be interested to know how Stuart thinks the UK entry in Eurovision managed to come second.

    Worse than that — Britain usurped Sweden who were expected (by the betting markets) to come second to Ukraine.
    FPT - my point was that Ukraine were too short in the betting markets and it was cheap to lay them at 1/3 before the judges voting results came in, where they underperformed expectations.

    Sometimes you take a value loser and there's always a price that makes that worthwhile - would you have backed them even at 1.05, for example, before any votes came in?

    I didn't do this last night as I totally misread how the public votes worked on top of the judges - but I'd definitely consider doing it again on the basis that markets do overrreact, sometimes get it wrong and can be surprisingly slow to correct.
    I was flabbergasted* by your error last night. Anyone who has watched Eurovision in the last fifteen years knows that the final scores swing wildly in the last ten minutes. The public almost always trump the juries.

    (*but not as flabbergasted as I was by HYFUD’s Victorian ethno-gobbledegook. He was called a racist, and the epithet was justified.)
    No it wasn't, just left liberal throwing out accusations of racism to anyone whose facts they disagree with.

    It was a European song contest, so no surprise virtually all the countries that took part last night were nations of majority ethnic European origin
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,966

    dixiedean said:

    Interesting stuff re Monarchy.
    The deference has gone already I feel. As has much of the overt fawning.
    We are now three weeks from the Jubilee.
    I don't see a single decoration or sign that it is taking place anywhere.
    I may have been a kid then, but ISTR the 1977 one and the wedding of Charles and Di being front and centre of the Nation's activity for months beforehand.
    Meanwhile. Yet another mass shooting in America. Racially motivated by a teenager. So commonplace it passes without comment.
    Deep sighs.

    Edit. I see it was linked to as I typed that.

    We will get a much better understanding of the monarchy's place in the great scheme of things once the Queen is no longer with us. She does unite the vast majority of us. Down here in Sidmouth there are plans for a street party and celebrations, but it is noticeable (and understandable) how backward looking and nostalgic they are. The monarchy has a lot to tell us about our past. Its big challenge is to be part of our future. Saying its better than President Johnson or Blair does not really cut the mustard, because it doesn't have to be President Johnson or Blair instead of King William.

    Yes.
    However King William may not happen for 25 years or more.
    There is an assumption he'll completely modernise the institution or bring it in to the modern world, etc., etc.
    Except. He'll be an old man when he gets the gig most probably.
  • Options
    StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Lord Frost would be a perfectly capable PM however I highly doubt he could give up a seat in the Lords to fight a by election he might well lose to the Liberal Democrats for a miniscule chance of PM for which there is currently no vacancy and won't be on the Tory side unless the PM resigns or is removed by a VONC

    He is the last person the conservative party need just now
    Chris Chope is still around.
    He is standing down at GE24
    Is he? He’s missing from my list. Do you have a source?

    MPs to have announced retirement at next GE:

    Nigel Adams, Con, Selby & Ainsty
    Crispin Blunt, Con, Reigate
    Charles Walker, Con, Broxbourne
    Margaret Beckett, Lab, Derby South
    Paul Blomfield, Lab, Sheffield Central
    Ben Bradshaw, Lab, Exeter
    Alex Cunningham, Lab, Stockton North
    Kate Green, Lab, Stretford and Urmston
    Harriet Harman, Lab, Camberwell & Peckham
    Margaret Hodge, Lab, Barking
    Barry Sheerman, Lab, Huddersfield
    Alan Whitehead, Lab, Southampton Test
    Rosie Winterton, Lab, Doncaster Central

    Douglas Ross, Con, Moray

    Wayne David, Lab, Caerphilly
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,756
    edited May 2022

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Lord Frost would be a perfectly capable PM however I highly doubt he could give up a seat in the Lords to fight a by election he might well lose to the Liberal Democrats for a miniscule chance of PM for which there is currently no vacancy and won't be on the Tory side unless the PM resigns or is removed by a VONC

    He is the last person the conservative party need just now
    Chris Chope is still around.
    He is standing down at GE24
    Is he? He’s missing from my list. Do you have a source?

    MPs to have announced retirement at next GE:

    Nigel Adams, Con, Selby & Ainsty
    Crispin Blunt, Con, Reigate
    Charles Walker, Con, Broxbourne
    Margaret Beckett, Lab, Derby South
    Paul Blomfield, Lab, Sheffield Central
    Ben Bradshaw, Lab, Exeter
    Alex Cunningham, Lab, Stockton North
    Kate Green, Lab, Stretford and Urmston
    Harriet Harman, Lab, Camberwell & Peckham
    Margaret Hodge, Lab, Barking
    Barry Sheerman, Lab, Huddersfield
    Alan Whitehead, Lab, Southampton Test
    Rosie Winterton, Lab, Doncaster Central

    Douglas Ross, Con, Moray

    Wayne David, Lab, Caerphilly
    [deleted]
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    edited May 2022
    Charles needs to get rid of the outdated military peacock gear and lose the Trumpian gold bling behind him.

    If he wants a military look, he should wear Zelenskys green T-shirt and read the speech on Twitter from the street.

    I am not entirely unserious.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,005

    Probably conducted before Wills & Kate's epochal visit to Glasgow.



    https://tinyurl.com/nhzp2vhy

    It is in attitudes to the monarchy that it is easiest to understand England as being a foreign country. When you see how some folk have a Pavlovian response to certain signals it is common for your Scots jaw to drop. What are they on?!

    I would never boo them. I never boo anybody. I just ignore them, as far as that is possible when your wife is a raving monarchist 😉

    The crisis is fast approaching. In England, not in Scotland.
    You live in Sweden, which of course also has a constitutional monarchy
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,297

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Lord Frost would be a perfectly capable PM however I highly doubt he could give up a seat in the Lords to fight a by election he might well lose to the Liberal Democrats for a miniscule chance of PM for which there is currently no vacancy and won't be on the Tory side unless the PM resigns or is removed by a VONC

    He is the last person the conservative party need just now
    Chris Chope is still around.
    He is standing down at GE24
    Is he? He’s missing from my list. Do you have a source?

    MPs to have announced retirement at next GE:

    Nigel Adams, Con, Selby & Ainsty
    Crispin Blunt, Con, Reigate
    Charles Walker, Con, Broxbourne
    Margaret Beckett, Lab, Derby South
    Paul Blomfield, Lab, Sheffield Central
    Ben Bradshaw, Lab, Exeter
    Alex Cunningham, Lab, Stockton North
    Kate Green, Lab, Stretford and Urmston
    Harriet Harman, Lab, Camberwell & Peckham
    Margaret Hodge, Lab, Barking
    Barry Sheerman, Lab, Huddersfield
    Alan Whitehead, Lab, Southampton Test
    Rosie Winterton, Lab, Doncaster Central

    Douglas Ross, Con, Moray

    Wayne David, Lab, Caerphilly
    Sorry my mistake - I confused him with Crispin Blunt
  • Options
    StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I'd be interested to know how Stuart thinks the UK entry in Eurovision managed to come second.

    Worse than that — Britain usurped Sweden who were expected (by the betting markets) to come second to Ukraine.
    FPT - my point was that Ukraine were too short in the betting markets and it was cheap to lay them at 1/3 before the judges voting results came in, where they underperformed expectations.

    Sometimes you take a value loser and there's always a price that makes that worthwhile - would you have backed them even at 1.05, for example, before any votes came in?

    I didn't do this last night as I totally misread how the public votes worked on top of the judges - but I'd definitely consider doing it again on the basis that markets do overrreact, sometimes get it wrong and can be surprisingly slow to correct.
    I was flabbergasted* by your error last night. Anyone who has watched Eurovision in the last fifteen years knows that the final scores swing wildly in the last ten minutes. The public almost always trump the juries.

    (*but not as flabbergasted as I was by HYFUD’s Victorian ethno-gobbledegook. He was called a racist, and the epithet was justified.)
    No it wasn't, just left liberal throwing out accusations of racism to anyone whose facts they disagree with.

    It was a European song contest, so no surprise virtually all the countries that took part last night were nations of majority ethnic European origin
    OMG. Living proof that some people never learn.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,005
    kamski said:

    According to this article in Scientific American everyone alive today had identical ancestors at a point "somewhere between 5300 and 2200 B.C."

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.scientificamerican.com/article/humans-are-all-more-closely-related-than-we-commonly-think/?amp=true

    Also

    "Beginning in 1492, “you begin to see the European genes flowing in every direction until our estimates are that there are no people in South America today who don’t have European ancestry.”

    So still plenty of room for Eurovision to expand!

    Most people in South America are Mestizos ie of mixed indigenous and European origin to varying degrees.

    Only in Argentina, Chile and Uruguay are the majority of the population of ethnic European origin
  • Options
    StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    HYUFD said:

    Probably conducted before Wills & Kate's epochal visit to Glasgow.



    https://tinyurl.com/nhzp2vhy

    It is in attitudes to the monarchy that it is easiest to understand England as being a foreign country. When you see how some folk have a Pavlovian response to certain signals it is common for your Scots jaw to drop. What are they on?!

    I would never boo them. I never boo anybody. I just ignore them, as far as that is possible when your wife is a raving monarchist 😉

    The crisis is fast approaching. In England, not in Scotland.
    You live in Sweden, which of course also has a constitutional monarchy
    A likeable one. Which was a refreshing novelty.
  • Options
    kjhkjh Posts: 10,631
    kamski said:

    According to this article in Scientific American everyone alive today had identical ancestors at a point "somewhere between 5300 and 2200 B.C."

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.scientificamerican.com/article/humans-are-all-more-closely-related-than-we-commonly-think/?amp=true

    Also

    "Beginning in 1492, “you begin to see the European genes flowing in every direction until our estimates are that there are no people in South America today who don’t have European ancestry.”

    So still plenty of room for Eurovision to expand!

    Excellent article. I do like Rutherford who is referenced in it. Anyone who has thought about the grain of rice on a chess board square story shouldn't be surprised by it. @hyufd should read it.
  • Options
    StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    HYUFD said:

    kamski said:

    According to this article in Scientific American everyone alive today had identical ancestors at a point "somewhere between 5300 and 2200 B.C."

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.scientificamerican.com/article/humans-are-all-more-closely-related-than-we-commonly-think/?amp=true

    Also

    "Beginning in 1492, “you begin to see the European genes flowing in every direction until our estimates are that there are no people in South America today who don’t have European ancestry.”

    So still plenty of room for Eurovision to expand!

    Most people in South America are Mestizos ie of mixed indigenous and European origin to varying degrees.

    Only in Argentina, Chile and Uruguay are the majority of the population of ethnic European origin
    Nurse!

    He’s been chewing toadstools for breakfast again.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,756
    HYUFD said:

    Probably conducted before Wills & Kate's epochal visit to Glasgow.



    https://tinyurl.com/nhzp2vhy

    It is in attitudes to the monarchy that it is easiest to understand England as being a foreign country. When you see how some folk have a Pavlovian response to certain signals it is common for your Scots jaw to drop. What are they on?!

    I would never boo them. I never boo anybody. I just ignore them, as far as that is possible when your wife is a raving monarchist 😉

    The crisis is fast approaching. In England, not in Scotland.
    You live in Sweden, which of course also has a constitutional monarchy
    Rather a different one. THey don't claim to be boss of the Lutheran church, for a start. Or go around the world in their spine pads and solar topis pretending to have an empire.
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,548
    Morning all.

    TSE puns normally deserve lifetime exile on the Isle of Portland, or perhaps Thanet. But this title - OK.

    Not sure if Rockall is available. Is the UK claim not unrecignised by Ireland on the basis of proximity?

    (Rockall being closer to the UK than to Ireland.)
  • Options
    StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Lord Frost would be a perfectly capable PM however I highly doubt he could give up a seat in the Lords to fight a by election he might well lose to the Liberal Democrats for a miniscule chance of PM for which there is currently no vacancy and won't be on the Tory side unless the PM resigns or is removed by a VONC

    He is the last person the conservative party need just now
    Chris Chope is still around.
    He is standing down at GE24
    Is he? He’s missing from my list. Do you have a source?

    MPs to have announced retirement at next GE:

    Nigel Adams, Con, Selby & Ainsty
    Crispin Blunt, Con, Reigate
    Charles Walker, Con, Broxbourne
    Margaret Beckett, Lab, Derby South
    Paul Blomfield, Lab, Sheffield Central
    Ben Bradshaw, Lab, Exeter
    Alex Cunningham, Lab, Stockton North
    Kate Green, Lab, Stretford and Urmston
    Harriet Harman, Lab, Camberwell & Peckham
    Margaret Hodge, Lab, Barking
    Barry Sheerman, Lab, Huddersfield
    Alan Whitehead, Lab, Southampton Test
    Rosie Winterton, Lab, Doncaster Central

    Douglas Ross, Con, Moray

    Wayne David, Lab, Caerphilly
    Sorry my mistake - I confused him with Crispin Blunt
    Nae bother.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    The best thing Charles could do is lose the military stuff and tailored suits that looks absurd on him and lean into his environmentalism persona cultivating an image as a David Attenborough sage type. It has the advantage of appearing to be closer to his actual interest and contemporary to boot.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,005

    Unless 18-24 year-olds change their minds, the monarchy may well be coming to an end within the next 50 years.
    https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1525732004515430402

    Unless 18 to 24 year olds change their minds we would have Labour governments for all eternity and would have one now given 18 to 24s have voted Labour at every UK general election since 1983!
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,611
    Really big, possibly decisive battle about to start.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1525652686120550400
    Ukraine prepares for the massive Russian attack in Luhansk Oblast to encircle Severodonetsk.
    Russian troops are preparing new attempts to cross the Siverskyi Donets river. They have brought 2,500 different vehicles & tanks of reinforcements - Oblast Head
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,937

    It is almost impossible to imagine a worse choice for Prime Minister than Boris Johnson, but David Frost could be it. A man of no achievement with a sub-mediocre mind with no political experience and no support base of any kind beyond the comment pages of the Telegraph would be an absolute disaster. Not even the Taliban Tories would be so stupid, would they?

    "It is almost impossible to imagine a worse choice for Prime Minister than Boris Johnson"

    It is far, far from impossible. Labour's candidate for the 2019 GE is an example: particularly given the two crises that have faced the country since then. Corbyn would have been disastrous with both the Covid crisis and the Ukrainian War. The former we did not do too badly at, nor well; but on the latter we've done very well indeed IMO.

    And we came very near having PM Corbyn during both of these.

    I'd hope both parties consider this and try to get leaders who are more competent than Johnson or Corbyn.

    I always thought that Johnson was the better choice than Corbyn, but now I am not so sure. Labour MPs at least sought to remove Corbyn and would have had a lot of control over him if he had got into office. I am not sure they would have played along with him undoing the UK's democracy in the way that Tory MPs have allowed Johnson to do.

    I suspect that Corbyn's handling of Covid would have produced similar overall results to Johnson's. And Ukraine would have seen him toppled.

    "I suspect that Corbyn's handling of Covid would have produced similar overall results to Johnson's. "

    Why do you suspect that? He has refused to say if he has been vaccinated. It was vital for politicians to encourage as many people as possible to get vaccinated, which was why we saw politicians publicising getting vaccinated once it was their turn. Corbyn sadly has quite a following in a demographic where (AIUI) vaccination rates are lower, and his unequivocally saying that he had been vaccinated would have helped.

    I'm also unsure how well he would have tackled vaccine procurement, given the inclusion of big pharma (boo, hiss).

    "And Ukraine would have seen him toppled."

    Which would have been too late to help Ukraine.

    The UK would have locked down far earlier under Corbyn and a lot more would have been spent on ensuring people on low incomes did not have to go to work while the pandemic raged. Care homes would also have been better looked after. Vaccine procurement would certainly have been an issue, but the roll-out would have happened against a backdrop of fewer initial deaths.

    Corbyn would have had to have stopped sending help to Ukraine as he would have inherited a situation where it was happening, so it would have been an issue from Day One of his premiership.

    Of course, he would have been a desperately poor PM and he should never have been offered as a choice. Having seen Johnson's performance over the last two and a half years - and in particular his attacks on our democracy and the rule of law - I just don't think Corbyn would have been worse.
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,548
    edited May 2022

    dixiedean said:

    Interesting stuff re Monarchy.
    The deference has gone already I feel. As has much of the overt fawning.
    We are now three weeks from the Jubilee.
    I don't see a single decoration or sign that it is taking place anywhere.
    I may have been a kid then, but ISTR the 1977 one and the wedding of Charles and Di being front and centre of the Nation's activity for months beforehand.
    Meanwhile. Yet another mass shooting in America. Racially motivated by a teenager. So commonplace it passes without comment.
    Deep sighs.

    Edit. I see it was linked to as I typed that.

    We will get a much better understanding of the monarchy's place in the great scheme of things once the Queen is no longer with us. She does unite the vast majority of us. Down here in Sidmouth there are plans for a street party and celebrations, but it is noticeable (and understandable) how backward looking and nostalgic they are. The monarchy has a lot to tell us about our past. Its big challenge is to be part of our future. Saying its better than President Johnson or Blair does not really cut the mustard, because it doesn't have to be President Johnson or Blair instead of King William.

    As I see it the loss is that President is that it politicises areas of national life / symbolism that are better outside politics.

    And ' doesn't cut the mustard' is a weak argument without a specific proposal.

    I wonder if Prince Charles will surprise? He's something of a divergent thinker.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    HYUFD said:

    Unless 18-24 year-olds change their minds, the monarchy may well be coming to an end within the next 50 years.
    https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1525732004515430402

    Unless 18 to 24 year olds change their minds we would have Labour governments for all eternity and would have one now given 18 to 24s have voted Labour at every UK general election since 1983!
    Supported, but not voted. That’s a big difference. The oldies vote.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,756
    MattW said:

    Morning all.

    TSE puns normally deserve lifetime exile on the Isle of Portland, or perhaps Thanet. But this title - OK.

    Not sure if Rockall is available. Is the UK claim not unrecignised by Ireland on the basis of proximity?

    (Rockall being closer to the UK than to Ireland.)

    Sgeir Rocail is indeed disputed between UK and Ireland. And it's not as if the UK got round to claiming it before 1955, when they got twitchy about their missile range launching from Benbecula.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,983
    Mr. Observer, I'll take a damned fool over a far left man who is present, but not involved.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,005

    Good morning

    On topic, Frost is the last person the conservative party need as a leader at this time of great insensitivity over NIP, actually that should read at 'anytime'

    On the monarchy, the queen has been the glue that has held it together over 7 decades but that is coming to an end and the monarchy with it's archaic traditions will have to go through colossal change to make itself relevant to modern day UK

    Deference in all its forms should be abolished, as should all the parading around in military uniforms with lots of meaningless medals on display.

    At the state opening of Parliament, Charles looked and sounded like a very old man and he is not the future

    I do believe William and Kate understand just how rapidly this change is coming and I expect in fairly quick time we will see a much reduced monarchy no longer touring with great pomp and ceremony the commonwealth countries, nor any more bowing or walking backwards in deference, and the end of ridiculous military dressing up

    I do believe most would accept a less formal, more modern monarchy, as I cannot see many wanting a republic with a President Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, Nadine Dories, JRM or ANO

    Parading around with big military processions with lots of medals happens in republics too, see China, Russia, North Korea and indeed France at Bastille Day or Trump's military parade
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,756
    Jonathan said:

    The best thing Charles could do is lose the military stuff and tailored suits that looks absurd on him and lean into his environmentalism persona cultivating an image as a David Attenborough sage type. It has the advantage of appearing to be closer to his actual interest and contemporary to boot.

    Hug a few trees on telly as well. It would actually be a useful intervention in current politics - he's not going to stop intervening now anyway.
  • Options
    StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    Jonathan said:

    The best thing Charles could do is lose the military stuff and tailored suits that looks absurd on him and lean into his environmentalism persona cultivating an image as a David Attenborough sage type. It has the advantage of appearing to be closer to his actual interest and contemporary to boot.

    Very few people don’t look like twats in military uniform. A prime example being that video someone posted of the material recovered from a captured Russian lieutenant’s mobile phone. The one who looked like he was 14 and didn’t know what to do when you come under fire. Compulsory viewing.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,937
    HYUFD said:

    Unless 18-24 year-olds change their minds, the monarchy may well be coming to an end within the next 50 years.
    https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1525732004515430402

    Unless 18 to 24 year olds change their minds we would have Labour governments for all eternity and would have one now given 18 to 24s have voted Labour at every UK general election since 1983!

    Yep - and they change their minds because they tend to get on the property ladder and start feeling the benefits of the system as it is. Maybe the same thing will happen for today's young people but it looks far less certain than it has done in the past.

  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,005
    Carnyx said:

    Good morning

    On topic, Frost is the last person the conservative party need as a leader at this time of great insensitivity over NIP, actually that should read at 'anytime'

    On the monarchy, the queen has been the glue that has held it together over 7 decades but that is coming to an end and the monarchy with it's archaic traditions will have to go through colossal change to make itself relevant to modern day UK

    Deference in all its forms should be abolished, as should all the parading around in military uniforms with lots of meaningless medals on display.

    At the state opening of Parliament, Charles looked and sounded like a very old man and he is not the future

    I do believe William and Kate understand just how rapidly this change is coming and I expect in fairly quick time we will see a much reduced monarchy no longer touring with great pomp and ceremony the commonwealth countries, nor any more bowing or walking backwards in deference, and the end of ridiculous military dressing up

    I do believe most would accept a less formal, more modern monarchy, as I cannot see many wanting a republic with a President Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, Nadine Dories, JRM or ANO

    Good grief, that's positively radical.

    "Deaference ... should be abolished." That'll upset some on PB. And no mention of Divine Right of Kings, even. Or the C of E.
    BigG does not always vote Tory unlike me
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,297
    Ed Miliband on Sophie Ridge demanding the windfall tax and also to insulate 1 million homes a year

    Sophie came back and said the windfall tax would raise 2 billion but you want to borrow 14 times that every year to insulate homes

    This attitude by labour to huge borrowings is the principal reason I just do not trust them with the economy
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,756
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Good morning

    On topic, Frost is the last person the conservative party need as a leader at this time of great insensitivity over NIP, actually that should read at 'anytime'

    On the monarchy, the queen has been the glue that has held it together over 7 decades but that is coming to an end and the monarchy with it's archaic traditions will have to go through colossal change to make itself relevant to modern day UK

    Deference in all its forms should be abolished, as should all the parading around in military uniforms with lots of meaningless medals on display.

    At the state opening of Parliament, Charles looked and sounded like a very old man and he is not the future

    I do believe William and Kate understand just how rapidly this change is coming and I expect in fairly quick time we will see a much reduced monarchy no longer touring with great pomp and ceremony the commonwealth countries, nor any more bowing or walking backwards in deference, and the end of ridiculous military dressing up

    I do believe most would accept a less formal, more modern monarchy, as I cannot see many wanting a republic with a President Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, Nadine Dories, JRM or ANO

    Good grief, that's positively radical.

    "Deaference ... should be abolished." That'll upset some on PB. And no mention of Divine Right of Kings, even. Or the C of E.
    BigG does not always vote Tory unlike me
    *blinks in surprise, having heard stories about Plaid Cymru*
  • Options
    StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    Carnyx said:

    MattW said:

    Morning all.

    TSE puns normally deserve lifetime exile on the Isle of Portland, or perhaps Thanet. But this title - OK.

    Not sure if Rockall is available. Is the UK claim not unrecignised by Ireland on the basis of proximity?

    (Rockall being closer to the UK than to Ireland.)

    Sgeir Rocail is indeed disputed between UK and Ireland. And it's not as if the UK got round to claiming it before 1955, when they got twitchy about their missile range launching from Benbecula.
    Not quite true. It was generally assumed to be an off lying islet of Harris/St Kilda. Legally part of Inverness-shire isn’t it?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,005

    dixiedean said:

    Interesting stuff re Monarchy.
    The deference has gone already I feel. As has much of the overt fawning.
    We are now three weeks from the Jubilee.
    I don't see a single decoration or sign that it is taking place anywhere.
    I may have been a kid then, but ISTR the 1977 one and the wedding of Charles and Di being front and centre of the Nation's activity for months beforehand.
    Meanwhile. Yet another mass shooting in America. Racially motivated by a teenager. So commonplace it passes without comment.
    Deep sighs.

    Edit. I see it was linked to as I typed that.

    We will get a much better understanding of the monarchy's place in the great scheme of things once the Queen is no longer with us. She does unite the vast majority of us. Down here in Sidmouth there are plans for a street party and celebrations, but it is noticeable (and understandable) how backward looking and nostalgic they are. The monarchy has a lot to tell us about our past. Its big challenge is to be part of our future. Saying its better than President Johnson or Blair does not really cut the mustard, because it doesn't have to be President Johnson or Blair instead of King William.

    It has to be a party political politician however who half the country will hate, see France and the USA
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,756
    HYUFD said:

    Good morning

    On topic, Frost is the last person the conservative party need as a leader at this time of great insensitivity over NIP, actually that should read at 'anytime'

    On the monarchy, the queen has been the glue that has held it together over 7 decades but that is coming to an end and the monarchy with it's archaic traditions will have to go through colossal change to make itself relevant to modern day UK

    Deference in all its forms should be abolished, as should all the parading around in military uniforms with lots of meaningless medals on display.

    At the state opening of Parliament, Charles looked and sounded like a very old man and he is not the future

    I do believe William and Kate understand just how rapidly this change is coming and I expect in fairly quick time we will see a much reduced monarchy no longer touring with great pomp and ceremony the commonwealth countries, nor any more bowing or walking backwards in deference, and the end of ridiculous military dressing up

    I do believe most would accept a less formal, more modern monarchy, as I cannot see many wanting a republic with a President Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, Nadine Dories, JRM or ANO

    Parading around with big military processions with lots of medals happens in republics too, see China, Russia, North Korea and indeed France at Bastille Day or Trump's military parade
    You holding up Mr Trump as a model for the UK head of state?
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,756

    Carnyx said:

    MattW said:

    Morning all.

    TSE puns normally deserve lifetime exile on the Isle of Portland, or perhaps Thanet. But this title - OK.

    Not sure if Rockall is available. Is the UK claim not unrecignised by Ireland on the basis of proximity?

    (Rockall being closer to the UK than to Ireland.)

    Sgeir Rocail is indeed disputed between UK and Ireland. And it's not as if the UK got round to claiming it before 1955, when they got twitchy about their missile range launching from Benbecula.
    Not quite true. It was generally assumed to be an off lying islet of Harris/St Kilda. Legally part of Inverness-shire isn’t it?
    Wiki says part of Harris (we don't have Invernessshire as a legal entity now, but yes, it would be the same thing).

  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750

    Michael Gove wants the Lords relocated to “other parts of the UK”. Wick, your day has come!

    An idea that pops its head up every now and then (it was threatened during May's term IIRC) but never with any coherent reasoning for why splitting the legislature location would achieve anything.

    It certainly wouldn't address London dominance. Its scale is so disproportionate to the rest of the country that is inevitable.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,297
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Good morning

    On topic, Frost is the last person the conservative party need as a leader at this time of great insensitivity over NIP, actually that should read at 'anytime'

    On the monarchy, the queen has been the glue that has held it together over 7 decades but that is coming to an end and the monarchy with it's archaic traditions will have to go through colossal change to make itself relevant to modern day UK

    Deference in all its forms should be abolished, as should all the parading around in military uniforms with lots of meaningless medals on display.

    At the state opening of Parliament, Charles looked and sounded like a very old man and he is not the future

    I do believe William and Kate understand just how rapidly this change is coming and I expect in fairly quick time we will see a much reduced monarchy no longer touring with great pomp and ceremony the commonwealth countries, nor any more bowing or walking backwards in deference, and the end of ridiculous military dressing up

    I do believe most would accept a less formal, more modern monarchy, as I cannot see many wanting a republic with a President Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, Nadine Dories, JRM or ANO

    Good grief, that's positively radical.

    "Deaference ... should be abolished." That'll upset some on PB. And no mention of Divine Right of Kings, even. Or the C of E.
    BigG does not always vote Tory unlike me
    You vote for Plaid
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,005
    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    Interesting stuff re Monarchy.
    The deference has gone already I feel. As has much of the overt fawning.
    We are now three weeks from the Jubilee.
    I don't see a single decoration or sign that it is taking place anywhere.
    I may have been a kid then, but ISTR the 1977 one and the wedding of Charles and Di being front and centre of the Nation's activity for months beforehand.
    Meanwhile. Yet another mass shooting in America. Racially motivated by a teenager. So commonplace it passes without comment.
    Deep sighs.

    Edit. I see it was linked to as I typed that.

    We will get a much better understanding of the monarchy's place in the great scheme of things once the Queen is no longer with us. She does unite the vast majority of us. Down here in Sidmouth there are plans for a street party and celebrations, but it is noticeable (and understandable) how backward looking and nostalgic they are. The monarchy has a lot to tell us about our past. Its big challenge is to be part of our future. Saying its better than President Johnson or Blair does not really cut the mustard, because it doesn't have to be President Johnson or Blair instead of King William.

    Yes.
    However King William may not happen for 25 years or more.
    There is an assumption he'll completely modernise the institution or bring it in to the modern world, etc., etc.
    Except. He'll be an old man when he gets the gig most probably.
    Most likely he will get the gig in his 50s, well before retirement age, Charles even if he survives into his 90s will likely abdicate after that and retire to Highgrove with Camilla. Having done it he has no desire to do it forever unlike his mother
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,966
    HYUFD said:

    Unless 18-24 year-olds change their minds, the monarchy may well be coming to an end within the next 50 years.
    https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1525732004515430402

    Unless 18 to 24 year olds change their minds we would have Labour governments for all eternity and would have one now given 18 to 24s have voted Labour at every UK general election since 1983!
    However. Observe the all UK figures instead.
    There is a substantial minority who think the Monarchy should come to an end soon.
    Ultra Monarchists could lift their heads from their grovelling and reflect exactly why that should be so?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,005

    HYUFD said:

    Heathener said:

    The funny thing about the Mail's reactionary outrage is that it will make it more of a 'thing' to boo the royals.

    They really do shoot themselves in the foot.

    I find it interesting though. I'm not sure I would boo William but I get this sense at the moment that reminds me so much of 1992-7. During that time there was this same reactionary 'Back to Basics' guff and outrage from the right wing press. The same Nasty Party rearing its ugly head. But all the while the country was getting ready to move on.

    Times they are a changing.

    No it doesn't at all, just shows the fact that Liverpool is the most socialist city in the UK after Glasgow and does not have a single Tory MP. Indeed every MP in Liverpool is Labour and there are no Tory councillors in Liverpool either despite the Tory landslide in the rest of the UK in 2019
    Utter nonsense

    Liverpool supporters come from across the globe
    The majority of the supporters booing yesterday will have been Labour voting leftwing socialists from Liverpool
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,297
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Heathener said:

    The funny thing about the Mail's reactionary outrage is that it will make it more of a 'thing' to boo the royals.

    They really do shoot themselves in the foot.

    I find it interesting though. I'm not sure I would boo William but I get this sense at the moment that reminds me so much of 1992-7. During that time there was this same reactionary 'Back to Basics' guff and outrage from the right wing press. The same Nasty Party rearing its ugly head. But all the while the country was getting ready to move on.

    Times they are a changing.

    No it doesn't at all, just shows the fact that Liverpool is the most socialist city in the UK after Glasgow and does not have a single Tory MP. Indeed every MP in Liverpool is Labour and there are no Tory councillors in Liverpool either despite the Tory landslide in the rest of the UK in 2019
    Utter nonsense

    Liverpool supporters come from across the globe
    The majority of the supporters booing yesterday will have been Labour voting leftwing socialists from Liverpool
    You really do not have a clue
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,937
    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Interesting stuff re Monarchy.
    The deference has gone already I feel. As has much of the overt fawning.
    We are now three weeks from the Jubilee.
    I don't see a single decoration or sign that it is taking place anywhere.
    I may have been a kid then, but ISTR the 1977 one and the wedding of Charles and Di being front and centre of the Nation's activity for months beforehand.
    Meanwhile. Yet another mass shooting in America. Racially motivated by a teenager. So commonplace it passes without comment.
    Deep sighs.

    Edit. I see it was linked to as I typed that.

    We will get a much better understanding of the monarchy's place in the great scheme of things once the Queen is no longer with us. She does unite the vast majority of us. Down here in Sidmouth there are plans for a street party and celebrations, but it is noticeable (and understandable) how backward looking and nostalgic they are. The monarchy has a lot to tell us about our past. Its big challenge is to be part of our future. Saying its better than President Johnson or Blair does not really cut the mustard, because it doesn't have to be President Johnson or Blair instead of King William.

    It has to be a party political politician however who half the country will hate, see France and the USA

    It doesn't have to be. May countries have low-profile presidents who seem to be acceptable to large strands of political opinion.

  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,005
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Probably conducted before Wills & Kate's epochal visit to Glasgow.



    https://tinyurl.com/nhzp2vhy

    Yet only 36% of Scots want Scotland to become a republic when the Queen dies rather than have Prince Charles as King.

    About 60% of UK voters overall want the monarchy to continue with King Charles IIIrd
    Who cares about the rest of the UK, to adopt a phrase? Scotland is a separate kingdom with its own crown. HMtQ had to come up to Edinburgh to claim it. HMG was too cheapskate to pay for a coronation, though.
    The Scottish Crown was united with the English Crown in 1605.

    The Queen is head of state of Scotland as much as England as much as the UK government remains the supreme power over Scotland as much as England too
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,756

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Interesting stuff re Monarchy.
    The deference has gone already I feel. As has much of the overt fawning.
    We are now three weeks from the Jubilee.
    I don't see a single decoration or sign that it is taking place anywhere.
    I may have been a kid then, but ISTR the 1977 one and the wedding of Charles and Di being front and centre of the Nation's activity for months beforehand.
    Meanwhile. Yet another mass shooting in America. Racially motivated by a teenager. So commonplace it passes without comment.
    Deep sighs.

    Edit. I see it was linked to as I typed that.

    We will get a much better understanding of the monarchy's place in the great scheme of things once the Queen is no longer with us. She does unite the vast majority of us. Down here in Sidmouth there are plans for a street party and celebrations, but it is noticeable (and understandable) how backward looking and nostalgic they are. The monarchy has a lot to tell us about our past. Its big challenge is to be part of our future. Saying its better than President Johnson or Blair does not really cut the mustard, because it doesn't have to be President Johnson or Blair instead of King William.

    It has to be a party political politician however who half the country will hate, see France and the USA

    It doesn't have to be. May countries have low-profile presidents who seem to be acceptable to large strands of political opinion.

    I wonder who would win in a vote - David Attenborough or Charles Mountbatten-Windsor.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Lord Frost would be a perfectly capable PM however I highly doubt he could give up a seat in the Lords to fight a by election he might well lose to the Liberal Democrats for a miniscule chance of PM for which there is currently no vacancy and won't be on the Tory side unless the PM resigns or is removed by a VONC

    Does a peer have to resign before fighting an election to the HoC? Or can he see what happens first?
    Good question. I suspect the latter, as even if a candidate is ineligible and this emerges before, say, a count, said count must still go ahead.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,756

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Heathener said:

    The funny thing about the Mail's reactionary outrage is that it will make it more of a 'thing' to boo the royals.

    They really do shoot themselves in the foot.

    I find it interesting though. I'm not sure I would boo William but I get this sense at the moment that reminds me so much of 1992-7. During that time there was this same reactionary 'Back to Basics' guff and outrage from the right wing press. The same Nasty Party rearing its ugly head. But all the while the country was getting ready to move on.

    Times they are a changing.

    No it doesn't at all, just shows the fact that Liverpool is the most socialist city in the UK after Glasgow and does not have a single Tory MP. Indeed every MP in Liverpool is Labour and there are no Tory councillors in Liverpool either despite the Tory landslide in the rest of the UK in 2019
    Utter nonsense

    Liverpool supporters come from across the globe
    The majority of the supporters booing yesterday will have been Labour voting leftwing socialists from Liverpool
    You really do not have a clue
    Quite. Labour is socialist?
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,611
    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I'd be interested to know how Stuart thinks the UK entry in Eurovision managed to come second.

    Worse than that — Britain usurped Sweden who were expected (by the betting markets) to come second to Ukraine.
    FPT - my point was that Ukraine were too short in the betting markets and it was cheap to lay them at 1/3 before the judges voting results came in, where they underperformed expectations.

    Sometimes you take a value loser and there's always a price that makes that worthwhile - would you have backed them even at 1.05, for example, before any votes came in?

    I didn't do this last night as I totally misread how the public votes worked on top of the judges - but I'd definitely consider doing it again on the basis that markets do overrreact, sometimes get it wrong and can be surprisingly slow to correct.
    I was flabbergasted* by your error last night. Anyone who has watched Eurovision in the last fifteen years knows that the final scores swing wildly in the last ten minutes. The public almost always trump the juries.

    (*but not as flabbergasted as I was by HYFUD’s Victorian ethno-gobbledegook. He was called a racist, and the epithet was justified.)
    No it wasn't, just left liberal throwing out accusations of racism to anyone whose facts they disagree with.

    It was a European song contest, so no surprise virtually all the countries that took part last night were nations of majority ethnic European origin
    Ethnology is about cultures, not genes, which is what you seemed to be on about.
    In the internet age, there no reason not to include anyone, if they’re sufficiently foolish.
  • Options
    RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,226
    HYUFD said:

    Heathener said:

    The funny thing about the Mail's reactionary outrage is that it will make it more of a 'thing' to boo the royals.

    They really do shoot themselves in the foot.

    I find it interesting though. I'm not sure I would boo William but I get this sense at the moment that reminds me so much of 1992-7. During that time there was this same reactionary 'Back to Basics' guff and outrage from the right wing press. The same Nasty Party rearing its ugly head. But all the while the country was getting ready to move on.

    Times they are a changing.

    No it doesn't at all, just shows the fact that Liverpool is the most socialist city in the UK after Glasgow and does not have a single Tory MP. Indeed every MP in Liverpool is Labour and there are no Tory councillors in Liverpool either despite the Tory landslide in the rest of the UK in 2019
    Liverpool - the city, the people - feel a visceral outrage towards the establishment due to the Hillsborough cover-up. Thats all it is. As "the most socialist city in the UK" they had a LibDem council recently.

    So its not socialism, you can't make simplistic sneering comments like that. Or you can, if you want to fuel their justified hate for your lot.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750
    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    Interesting stuff re Monarchy.
    The deference has gone already I feel. As has much of the overt fawning.
    We are now three weeks from the Jubilee.
    I don't see a single decoration or sign that it is taking place anywhere.
    I may have been a kid then, but ISTR the 1977 one and the wedding of Charles and Di being front and centre of the Nation's activity for months beforehand.
    Meanwhile. Yet another mass shooting in America. Racially motivated by a teenager. So commonplace it passes without comment.
    Deep sighs.

    Edit. I see it was linked to as I typed that.

    We will get a much better understanding of the monarchy's place in the great scheme of things once the Queen is no longer with us. She does unite the vast majority of us. Down here in Sidmouth there are plans for a street party and celebrations, but it is noticeable (and understandable) how backward looking and nostalgic they are. The monarchy has a lot to tell us about our past. Its big challenge is to be part of our future. Saying its better than President Johnson or Blair does not really cut the mustard, because it doesn't have to be President Johnson or Blair instead of King William.

    Yes.
    However King William may not happen for 25 years or more.
    There is an assumption he'll completely modernise the institution or bring it in to the modern world, etc., etc.
    Except. He'll be an old man when he gets the gig most probably.
    Yes, I think any modernisation has already happened or will happen with Charles (who I expect will listen very closely to William).
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,005
    edited May 2022

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Interesting stuff re Monarchy.
    The deference has gone already I feel. As has much of the overt fawning.
    We are now three weeks from the Jubilee.
    I don't see a single decoration or sign that it is taking place anywhere.
    I may have been a kid then, but ISTR the 1977 one and the wedding of Charles and Di being front and centre of the Nation's activity for months beforehand.
    Meanwhile. Yet another mass shooting in America. Racially motivated by a teenager. So commonplace it passes without comment.
    Deep sighs.

    Edit. I see it was linked to as I typed that.

    We will get a much better understanding of the monarchy's place in the great scheme of things once the Queen is no longer with us. She does unite the vast majority of us. Down here in Sidmouth there are plans for a street party and celebrations, but it is noticeable (and understandable) how backward looking and nostalgic they are. The monarchy has a lot to tell us about our past. Its big challenge is to be part of our future. Saying its better than President Johnson or Blair does not really cut the mustard, because it doesn't have to be President Johnson or Blair instead of King William.

    It has to be a party political politician however who half the country will hate, see France and the USA

    It doesn't have to be. May countries have low-profile presidents who seem to be acceptable to large strands of political opinion.

    Countries generally relatively small not permanent members of the UN Security Council with nuclear weapons who are also top 10 economies in the G7 and G20 like the UK.

    If we were a republic we would have to have a grand imperial Presidency like that of the USA and France to reflect our power in the world and our current President would be President Johnson who would reside at Buckingham Palace and be head of the armed forces.

    Low profile ceremonial Presidents like those in Germany or Ireland or Israel are also pointless, they have no more power than constitutional monarchs but nobody has heard of them outside their own nation so they do not even fulfil their role of advertising the nation like the Queen
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,611
    .
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Good morning

    On topic, Frost is the last person the conservative party need as a leader at this time of great insensitivity over NIP, actually that should read at 'anytime'

    On the monarchy, the queen has been the glue that has held it together over 7 decades but that is coming to an end and the monarchy with it's archaic traditions will have to go through colossal change to make itself relevant to modern day UK

    Deference in all its forms should be abolished, as should all the parading around in military uniforms with lots of meaningless medals on display.

    At the state opening of Parliament, Charles looked and sounded like a very old man and he is not the future

    I do believe William and Kate understand just how rapidly this change is coming and I expect in fairly quick time we will see a much reduced monarchy no longer touring with great pomp and ceremony the commonwealth countries, nor any more bowing or walking backwards in deference, and the end of ridiculous military dressing up

    I do believe most would accept a less formal, more modern monarchy, as I cannot see many wanting a republic with a President Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, Nadine Dories, JRM or ANO

    Good grief, that's positively radical.

    "Deaference ... should be abolished." That'll upset some on PB. And no mention of Divine Right of Kings, even. Or the C of E.
    BigG does not always vote Tory unlike me
    Perhaps because he thinks before he votes ?
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,756
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Interesting stuff re Monarchy.
    The deference has gone already I feel. As has much of the overt fawning.
    We are now three weeks from the Jubilee.
    I don't see a single decoration or sign that it is taking place anywhere.
    I may have been a kid then, but ISTR the 1977 one and the wedding of Charles and Di being front and centre of the Nation's activity for months beforehand.
    Meanwhile. Yet another mass shooting in America. Racially motivated by a teenager. So commonplace it passes without comment.
    Deep sighs.

    Edit. I see it was linked to as I typed that.

    We will get a much better understanding of the monarchy's place in the great scheme of things once the Queen is no longer with us. She does unite the vast majority of us. Down here in Sidmouth there are plans for a street party and celebrations, but it is noticeable (and understandable) how backward looking and nostalgic they are. The monarchy has a lot to tell us about our past. Its big challenge is to be part of our future. Saying its better than President Johnson or Blair does not really cut the mustard, because it doesn't have to be President Johnson or Blair instead of King William.

    It has to be a party political politician however who half the country will hate, see France and the USA

    It doesn't have to be. May countries have low-profile presidents who seem to be acceptable to large strands of political opinion.

    Countries generally relatively small not permanent members of the UN Security Council with nuclear weapons who are also top 10 economies in the G7 and G20 like the UK.

    If we were a republic we would have to have a grand imperial Presidency like that of the USA and France to reflect our power in the world and our current President would be President Johnson who would reside at Buckingham Palace and be head of the armed forces
    UKi s 9th and sliding. 23rd on GDP. I'd be surprised if it was even No 11 by the time the crown is cancelled.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,297
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Interesting stuff re Monarchy.
    The deference has gone already I feel. As has much of the overt fawning.
    We are now three weeks from the Jubilee.
    I don't see a single decoration or sign that it is taking place anywhere.
    I may have been a kid then, but ISTR the 1977 one and the wedding of Charles and Di being front and centre of the Nation's activity for months beforehand.
    Meanwhile. Yet another mass shooting in America. Racially motivated by a teenager. So commonplace it passes without comment.
    Deep sighs.

    Edit. I see it was linked to as I typed that.

    We will get a much better understanding of the monarchy's place in the great scheme of things once the Queen is no longer with us. She does unite the vast majority of us. Down here in Sidmouth there are plans for a street party and celebrations, but it is noticeable (and understandable) how backward looking and nostalgic they are. The monarchy has a lot to tell us about our past. Its big challenge is to be part of our future. Saying its better than President Johnson or Blair does not really cut the mustard, because it doesn't have to be President Johnson or Blair instead of King William.

    It has to be a party political politician however who half the country will hate, see France and the USA

    It doesn't have to be. May countries have low-profile presidents who seem to be acceptable to large strands of political opinion.

    Countries generally relatively small not permanent members of the UN Security Council with nuclear weapons who are also top 10 economies in the G7 and G20 like the UK.

    If we were a republic we would have to have a grand imperial Presidency like that of the USA and France to reflect our power in the world and our current President would be President Johnson who would reside at Buckingham Palace and be head of the armed forces
    You live in a fantasy world
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,966

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Heathener said:

    The funny thing about the Mail's reactionary outrage is that it will make it more of a 'thing' to boo the royals.

    They really do shoot themselves in the foot.

    I find it interesting though. I'm not sure I would boo William but I get this sense at the moment that reminds me so much of 1992-7. During that time there was this same reactionary 'Back to Basics' guff and outrage from the right wing press. The same Nasty Party rearing its ugly head. But all the while the country was getting ready to move on.

    Times they are a changing.

    No it doesn't at all, just shows the fact that Liverpool is the most socialist city in the UK after Glasgow and does not have a single Tory MP. Indeed every MP in Liverpool is Labour and there are no Tory councillors in Liverpool either despite the Tory landslide in the rest of the UK in 2019
    Utter nonsense

    Liverpool supporters come from across the globe
    The majority of the supporters booing yesterday will have been Labour voting leftwing socialists from Liverpool
    You really do not have a clue
    Indeed.
    The very idea most Liverpool fans come from the City is one of the best I've heard.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Interesting stuff re Monarchy.
    The deference has gone already I feel. As has much of the overt fawning.
    We are now three weeks from the Jubilee.
    I don't see a single decoration or sign that it is taking place anywhere.
    I may have been a kid then, but ISTR the 1977 one and the wedding of Charles and Di being front and centre of the Nation's activity for months beforehand.
    Meanwhile. Yet another mass shooting in America. Racially motivated by a teenager. So commonplace it passes without comment.
    Deep sighs.

    Edit. I see it was linked to as I typed that.

    We will get a much better understanding of the monarchy's place in the great scheme of things once the Queen is no longer with us. She does unite the vast majority of us. Down here in Sidmouth there are plans for a street party and celebrations, but it is noticeable (and understandable) how backward looking and nostalgic they are. The monarchy has a lot to tell us about our past. Its big challenge is to be part of our future. Saying its better than President Johnson or Blair does not really cut the mustard, because it doesn't have to be President Johnson or Blair instead of King William.

    It has to be a party political politician however who half the country will hate, see France and the USA

    It doesn't have to be. May countries have low-profile presidents who seem to be acceptable to large strands of political opinion.

    True. I've never really understood the idea of symbolic presidents that are elected, since if in a party contest they obviously back one side, but places get just fine. Personally I feel if we're sticking with symbolic head of state as a model we may as well retain the current system. If we want a more democratic head of state it should meaningfully alter things.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,611
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Interesting stuff re Monarchy.
    The deference has gone already I feel. As has much of the overt fawning.
    We are now three weeks from the Jubilee.
    I don't see a single decoration or sign that it is taking place anywhere.
    I may have been a kid then, but ISTR the 1977 one and the wedding of Charles and Di being front and centre of the Nation's activity for months beforehand.
    Meanwhile. Yet another mass shooting in America. Racially motivated by a teenager. So commonplace it passes without comment.
    Deep sighs.

    Edit. I see it was linked to as I typed that.

    We will get a much better understanding of the monarchy's place in the great scheme of things once the Queen is no longer with us. She does unite the vast majority of us. Down here in Sidmouth there are plans for a street party and celebrations, but it is noticeable (and understandable) how backward looking and nostalgic they are. The monarchy has a lot to tell us about our past. Its big challenge is to be part of our future. Saying its better than President Johnson or Blair does not really cut the mustard, because it doesn't have to be President Johnson or Blair instead of King William.

    It has to be a party political politician however who half the country will hate, see France and the USA

    It doesn't have to be. May countries have low-profile presidents who seem to be acceptable to large strands of political opinion.

    I wonder who would win in a vote - David Attenborough or Charles Mountbatten-Windsor.
    Unfortunately the former is almost exactly the same age as Charles’ mum.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,335

    Unless 18-24 year-olds change their minds, the monarchy may well be coming to an end within the next 50 years.
    https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1525732004515430402

    This is simply familiarity bias.

    Once Charles and William actually start performing the role of monarch, and it becomes normalised, then 'support for the monarchy' will trend back up to its longstanding mean.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,005
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Heathener said:

    The funny thing about the Mail's reactionary outrage is that it will make it more of a 'thing' to boo the royals.

    They really do shoot themselves in the foot.

    I find it interesting though. I'm not sure I would boo William but I get this sense at the moment that reminds me so much of 1992-7. During that time there was this same reactionary 'Back to Basics' guff and outrage from the right wing press. The same Nasty Party rearing its ugly head. But all the while the country was getting ready to move on.

    Times they are a changing.

    No it doesn't at all, just shows the fact that Liverpool is the most socialist city in the UK after Glasgow and does not have a single Tory MP. Indeed every MP in Liverpool is Labour and there are no Tory councillors in Liverpool either despite the Tory landslide in the rest of the UK in 2019
    Utter nonsense

    Liverpool supporters come from across the globe
    The majority of the supporters booing yesterday will have been Labour voting leftwing socialists from Liverpool
    You really do not have a clue
    Quite. Labour is socialist?
    Of course it is EVERY MP in Liverpool is Labour, elected when Corbyn was leader and there is not even a single Tory councillor there
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,756

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Interesting stuff re Monarchy.
    The deference has gone already I feel. As has much of the overt fawning.
    We are now three weeks from the Jubilee.
    I don't see a single decoration or sign that it is taking place anywhere.
    I may have been a kid then, but ISTR the 1977 one and the wedding of Charles and Di being front and centre of the Nation's activity for months beforehand.
    Meanwhile. Yet another mass shooting in America. Racially motivated by a teenager. So commonplace it passes without comment.
    Deep sighs.

    Edit. I see it was linked to as I typed that.

    We will get a much better understanding of the monarchy's place in the great scheme of things once the Queen is no longer with us. She does unite the vast majority of us. Down here in Sidmouth there are plans for a street party and celebrations, but it is noticeable (and understandable) how backward looking and nostalgic they are. The monarchy has a lot to tell us about our past. Its big challenge is to be part of our future. Saying its better than President Johnson or Blair does not really cut the mustard, because it doesn't have to be President Johnson or Blair instead of King William.

    It has to be a party political politician however who half the country will hate, see France and the USA

    It doesn't have to be. May countries have low-profile presidents who seem to be acceptable to large strands of political opinion.

    Countries generally relatively small not permanent members of the UN Security Council with nuclear weapons who are also top 10 economies in the G7 and G20 like the UK.

    If we were a republic we would have to have a grand imperial Presidency like that of the USA and France to reflect our power in the world and our current President would be President Johnson who would reside at Buckingham Palace and be head of the armed forces
    You live in a fantasy world
    The way things are officially planned by MoD, a decent parade with about 24 tanks plus other stuff and the Red Arrows would take up a very large part of the active UK armed forces - and that is ignoring stuff down for maintenance and major overhaul/upgrading.

    It'd be like a 1952 Coronation Review of the Fleet and RAF *every year*.

  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,005
    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Unless 18-24 year-olds change their minds, the monarchy may well be coming to an end within the next 50 years.
    https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1525732004515430402

    Unless 18 to 24 year olds change their minds we would have Labour governments for all eternity and would have one now given 18 to 24s have voted Labour at every UK general election since 1983!
    However. Observe the all UK figures instead.
    There is a substantial minority who think the Monarchy should come to an end soon.
    Ultra Monarchists could lift their heads from their grovelling and reflect exactly why that should be so?
    Yes leftwing socialists make up about a third of the UK population and are also Republicans. No surprise there, who cares, certainly not me, they can be ignored as on everything else
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,667
    kjh said:

    kamski said:

    According to this article in Scientific American everyone alive today had identical ancestors at a point "somewhere between 5300 and 2200 B.C."

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.scientificamerican.com/article/humans-are-all-more-closely-related-than-we-commonly-think/?amp=true

    Also

    "Beginning in 1492, “you begin to see the European genes flowing in every direction until our estimates are that there are no people in South America today who don’t have European ancestry.”

    So still plenty of room for Eurovision to expand!

    Excellent article. I do like Rutherford who is referenced in it. Anyone who has thought about the grain of rice on a chess board square story shouldn't be surprised by it. @hyufd should read it.
    +1 for Rutherford - his book "A Brief History of Everyone Who Ever Lived: The Stories in Our Genes" is very good and covers the same point about our common ancestors.
  • Options
    RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,226

    Unless 18-24 year-olds change their minds, the monarchy may well be coming to an end within the next 50 years.
    https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1525732004515430402

    This is simply familiarity bias.

    Once Charles and William actually start performing the role of monarch, and it becomes normalised, then 'support for the monarchy' will trend back up to its longstanding mean.
    If the firm has a clue Charles will pass and stick William on the throne. A geriatric King Chuck could be the end of things from their perspective.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,335
    dixiedean said:

    Interesting stuff re Monarchy.
    The deference has gone already I feel. As has much of the overt fawning.
    We are now three weeks from the Jubilee.
    I don't see a single decoration or sign that it is taking place anywhere.
    I may have been a kid then, but ISTR the 1977 one and the wedding of Charles and Di being front and centre of the Nation's activity for months beforehand.
    Meanwhile. Yet another mass shooting in America. Racially motivated by a teenager. So commonplace it passes without comment.
    Deep sighs.

    Edit. I see it was linked to as I typed that.

    This has literally happened at every jubilee: silver, gold, diamond.. "it's not relevant", "no-one cares", "it will be a washout" etc.

    And then it happens, it's amazing and everyone enjoys it and remembers it.
  • Options
    pm215pm215 Posts: 936

    HYUFD said:


    It has to be a party political politician however who half the country will hate, see France and the USA

    It doesn't have to be. May countries have low-profile presidents who seem to be acceptable to large strands of political opinion.
    Yes, I've never quite understood the "head of state would be another politician" point. But then I don't really understand the point of the 'head of state' position in the first place -- we have a monarch for historical reasons, not because somebody drew up a national org chart and decided it was a necessary role to fill. If we decide to quietly pension off the monarchy (which seems unlikely to me), what exactly would we gain from putting some other person in that role rather than just parcelling out the things they did to the PM, ambassadors, high-ranking civil servants and various other establishment types?
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,756
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Heathener said:

    The funny thing about the Mail's reactionary outrage is that it will make it more of a 'thing' to boo the royals.

    They really do shoot themselves in the foot.

    I find it interesting though. I'm not sure I would boo William but I get this sense at the moment that reminds me so much of 1992-7. During that time there was this same reactionary 'Back to Basics' guff and outrage from the right wing press. The same Nasty Party rearing its ugly head. But all the while the country was getting ready to move on.

    Times they are a changing.

    No it doesn't at all, just shows the fact that Liverpool is the most socialist city in the UK after Glasgow and does not have a single Tory MP. Indeed every MP in Liverpool is Labour and there are no Tory councillors in Liverpool either despite the Tory landslide in the rest of the UK in 2019
    Utter nonsense

    Liverpool supporters come from across the globe
    The majority of the supporters booing yesterday will have been Labour voting leftwing socialists from Liverpool
    You really do not have a clue
    Quite. Labour is socialist?
    Of course it is EVERY MP in Liverpool is Labour, elected when Corbyn was leader and there is not even a single Tory councillor there
    Doesn't mean they are socialists. It's a long tine since Mr Hatton.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,005
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Good morning

    On topic, Frost is the last person the conservative party need as a leader at this time of great insensitivity over NIP, actually that should read at 'anytime'

    On the monarchy, the queen has been the glue that has held it together over 7 decades but that is coming to an end and the monarchy with it's archaic traditions will have to go through colossal change to make itself relevant to modern day UK

    Deference in all its forms should be abolished, as should all the parading around in military uniforms with lots of meaningless medals on display.

    At the state opening of Parliament, Charles looked and sounded like a very old man and he is not the future

    I do believe William and Kate understand just how rapidly this change is coming and I expect in fairly quick time we will see a much reduced monarchy no longer touring with great pomp and ceremony the commonwealth countries, nor any more bowing or walking backwards in deference, and the end of ridiculous military dressing up

    I do believe most would accept a less formal, more modern monarchy, as I cannot see many wanting a republic with a President Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, Nadine Dories, JRM or ANO

    Good grief, that's positively radical.

    "Deaference ... should be abolished." That'll upset some on PB. And no mention of Divine Right of Kings, even. Or the C of E.
    BigG does not always vote Tory unlike me
    *blinks in surprise, having heard stories about Plaid Cymru*
    I voted for every Tory candidate on the ballot paper
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,966
    kle4 said:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    Interesting stuff re Monarchy.
    The deference has gone already I feel. As has much of the overt fawning.
    We are now three weeks from the Jubilee.
    I don't see a single decoration or sign that it is taking place anywhere.
    I may have been a kid then, but ISTR the 1977 one and the wedding of Charles and Di being front and centre of the Nation's activity for months beforehand.
    Meanwhile. Yet another mass shooting in America. Racially motivated by a teenager. So commonplace it passes without comment.
    Deep sighs.

    Edit. I see it was linked to as I typed that.

    We will get a much better understanding of the monarchy's place in the great scheme of things once the Queen is no longer with us. She does unite the vast majority of us. Down here in Sidmouth there are plans for a street party and celebrations, but it is noticeable (and understandable) how backward looking and nostalgic they are. The monarchy has a lot to tell us about our past. Its big challenge is to be part of our future. Saying its better than President Johnson or Blair does not really cut the mustard, because it doesn't have to be President Johnson or Blair instead of King William.

    Yes.
    However King William may not happen for 25 years or more.
    There is an assumption he'll completely modernise the institution or bring it in to the modern world, etc., etc.
    Except. He'll be an old man when he gets the gig most probably.
    Yes, I think any modernisation has already happened or will happen with Charles (who I expect will listen very closely to William).
    It's a process of evolution isn't it?
    It's happening very slowly already. And has always happened anyways.
    Having a Monarchy simply doesn't mean it is this Monarchy preserved in aspic.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,756

    dixiedean said:

    Interesting stuff re Monarchy.
    The deference has gone already I feel. As has much of the overt fawning.
    We are now three weeks from the Jubilee.
    I don't see a single decoration or sign that it is taking place anywhere.
    I may have been a kid then, but ISTR the 1977 one and the wedding of Charles and Di being front and centre of the Nation's activity for months beforehand.
    Meanwhile. Yet another mass shooting in America. Racially motivated by a teenager. So commonplace it passes without comment.
    Deep sighs.

    Edit. I see it was linked to as I typed that.

    This has literally happened at every jubilee: silver, gold, diamond.. "it's not relevant", "no-one cares", "it will be a washout" etc.

    And then it happens, it's amazing and everyone enjoys it and remembers it.
    Beg to differ. Or maybe it depends where you live. The last jubilee was almost nonexistent in Scotland - I think the only street parties were in Red Morningside/Barnton and certain parts of Lanarkshire.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750
    HYUFD said:

    Good morning

    On topic, Frost is the last person the conservative party need as a leader at this time of great insensitivity over NIP, actually that should read at 'anytime'

    On the monarchy, the queen has been the glue that has held it together over 7 decades but that is coming to an end and the monarchy with it's archaic traditions will have to go through colossal change to make itself relevant to modern day UK

    Deference in all its forms should be abolished, as should all the parading around in military uniforms with lots of meaningless medals on display.

    At the state opening of Parliament, Charles looked and sounded like a very old man and he is not the future

    I do believe William and Kate understand just how rapidly this change is coming and I expect in fairly quick time we will see a much reduced monarchy no longer touring with great pomp and ceremony the commonwealth countries, nor any more bowing or walking backwards in deference, and the end of ridiculous military dressing up

    I do believe most would accept a less formal, more modern monarchy, as I cannot see many wanting a republic with a President Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, Nadine Dories, JRM or ANO

    Parading around with big military processions with lots of medals happens in republics too, see China, Russia, North Korea and indeed France at Bastille Day or Trump's military parade
    I'm not sure your choice of republics is most effective (NK is in any case de facto a hereditary monarchy with direct reference to being led by the Kim bloodline), but it is true plenty of republics engage in grand pageantry and involve plenty of ceremonial deference toward the president. I dont think those are key reasons to end the monarchy. Were I so inclined I'd stick with the equality arguement.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,005
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Probably conducted before Wills & Kate's epochal visit to Glasgow.



    https://tinyurl.com/nhzp2vhy

    It is in attitudes to the monarchy that it is easiest to understand England as being a foreign country. When you see how some folk have a Pavlovian response to certain signals it is common for your Scots jaw to drop. What are they on?!

    I would never boo them. I never boo anybody. I just ignore them, as far as that is possible when your wife is a raving monarchist 😉

    The crisis is fast approaching. In England, not in Scotland.
    You live in Sweden, which of course also has a constitutional monarchy
    Rather a different one. THey don't claim to be boss of the Lutheran church, for a start. Or go around the world in their spine pads and solar topis pretending to have an empire.
    The Lutheran Church was the established church in Sweden until recently and the monarch has to be a member of it
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,756
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Good morning

    On topic, Frost is the last person the conservative party need as a leader at this time of great insensitivity over NIP, actually that should read at 'anytime'

    On the monarchy, the queen has been the glue that has held it together over 7 decades but that is coming to an end and the monarchy with it's archaic traditions will have to go through colossal change to make itself relevant to modern day UK

    Deference in all its forms should be abolished, as should all the parading around in military uniforms with lots of meaningless medals on display.

    At the state opening of Parliament, Charles looked and sounded like a very old man and he is not the future

    I do believe William and Kate understand just how rapidly this change is coming and I expect in fairly quick time we will see a much reduced monarchy no longer touring with great pomp and ceremony the commonwealth countries, nor any more bowing or walking backwards in deference, and the end of ridiculous military dressing up

    I do believe most would accept a less formal, more modern monarchy, as I cannot see many wanting a republic with a President Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, Nadine Dories, JRM or ANO

    Good grief, that's positively radical.

    "Deaference ... should be abolished." That'll upset some on PB. And no mention of Divine Right of Kings, even. Or the C of E.
    BigG does not always vote Tory unlike me
    *blinks in surprise, having heard stories about Plaid Cymru*
    I voted for every Tory candidate on the ballot paper
    And then PC. That is not "always voting Tory", as you claim. It is "sometimes voting Tory."
  • Options
    RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,226
    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Unless 18-24 year-olds change their minds, the monarchy may well be coming to an end within the next 50 years.
    https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1525732004515430402

    Unless 18 to 24 year olds change their minds we would have Labour governments for all eternity and would have one now given 18 to 24s have voted Labour at every UK general election since 1983!
    However. Observe the all UK figures instead.
    There is a substantial minority who think the Monarchy should come to an end soon.
    Ultra Monarchists could lift their heads from their grovelling and reflect exactly why that should be so?
    Yes leftwing socialists make up about a third of the UK population and are also Republicans. No surprise there, who cares, certainly not me, they can be ignored as on everything else
    It truly is baffling. "I'm the only Tory in the village" who doesn't have a clue what his party actually believes in. One third of the population "can be ignored"?

    Ignored?

    Remember how Harold Macmillan campaigned on how many hundreds of thousands of council houses his government had built? Or even Thatcher with help to buy to bring the "ignored" on board? Or her appointing commissions to pour investment into post-industrial areas, Liverpool being one of them?

    Ignored? You are a laughable pitiable fool of a politician. Perfect for the crooked lying corrupt Conservative party of today. Congratulations.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,005
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Heathener said:

    The funny thing about the Mail's reactionary outrage is that it will make it more of a 'thing' to boo the royals.

    They really do shoot themselves in the foot.

    I find it interesting though. I'm not sure I would boo William but I get this sense at the moment that reminds me so much of 1992-7. During that time there was this same reactionary 'Back to Basics' guff and outrage from the right wing press. The same Nasty Party rearing its ugly head. But all the while the country was getting ready to move on.

    Times they are a changing.

    No it doesn't at all, just shows the fact that Liverpool is the most socialist city in the UK after Glasgow and does not have a single Tory MP. Indeed every MP in Liverpool is Labour and there are no Tory councillors in Liverpool either despite the Tory landslide in the rest of the UK in 2019
    Utter nonsense

    Liverpool supporters come from across the globe
    The majority of the supporters booing yesterday will have been Labour voting leftwing socialists from Liverpool
    You really do not have a clue
    Quite. Labour is socialist?
    Of course it is EVERY MP in Liverpool is Labour, elected when Corbyn was leader and there is not even a single Tory councillor there
    Doesn't mean they are socialists. It's a long tine since Mr Hatton.
    Of course they are, if you voted for Corbyn Labour in 2019 you are a Socialist
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750
    edited May 2022
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Interesting stuff re Monarchy.
    The deference has gone already I feel. As has much of the overt fawning.
    We are now three weeks from the Jubilee.
    I don't see a single decoration or sign that it is taking place anywhere.
    I may have been a kid then, but ISTR the 1977 one and the wedding of Charles and Di being front and centre of the Nation's activity for months beforehand.
    Meanwhile. Yet another mass shooting in America. Racially motivated by a teenager. So commonplace it passes without comment.
    Deep sighs.

    Edit. I see it was linked to as I typed that.

    We will get a much better understanding of the monarchy's place in the great scheme of things once the Queen is no longer with us. She does unite the vast majority of us. Down here in Sidmouth there are plans for a street party and celebrations, but it is noticeable (and understandable) how backward looking and nostalgic they are. The monarchy has a lot to tell us about our past. Its big challenge is to be part of our future. Saying its better than President Johnson or Blair does not really cut the mustard, because it doesn't have to be President Johnson or Blair instead of King William.

    It has to be a party political politician however who half the country will hate, see France and the USA

    It doesn't have to be. May countries have low-profile presidents who seem to be acceptable to large strands of political opinion.

    Countries generally relatively small not permanent members of the UN Security Council with nuclear weapons who are also top 10 economies in the G7 and G20 like the UK.

    If we were a republic we would have to have a grand imperial Presidency like that of the USA and France to reflect our power in the world and our current President would be President Johnson who would reside at Buckingham Palace and be head of the armed forces
    UKi s 9th and sliding. 23rd on GDP. I'd be surprised if it was even No 11 by the time the crown is cancelled.
    Still seems pretty significant as far economies go to me. Cant stay in the very top rank forever.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,756
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Probably conducted before Wills & Kate's epochal visit to Glasgow.



    https://tinyurl.com/nhzp2vhy

    It is in attitudes to the monarchy that it is easiest to understand England as being a foreign country. When you see how some folk have a Pavlovian response to certain signals it is common for your Scots jaw to drop. What are they on?!

    I would never boo them. I never boo anybody. I just ignore them, as far as that is possible when your wife is a raving monarchist 😉

    The crisis is fast approaching. In England, not in Scotland.
    You live in Sweden, which of course also has a constitutional monarchy
    Rather a different one. THey don't claim to be boss of the Lutheran church, for a start. Or go around the world in their spine pads and solar topis pretending to have an empire.
    The Lutheran Church was the established church in Sweden until recently and the monarch has to be a member of it
    Good for them - disestablishing it. And you aren't HMtQ are you, just cos you are a member of the C of E?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,005

    Unless 18-24 year-olds change their minds, the monarchy may well be coming to an end within the next 50 years.
    https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1525732004515430402

    This is simply familiarity bias.

    Once Charles and William actually start performing the role of monarch, and it becomes normalised, then 'support for the monarchy' will trend back up to its longstanding mean.
    If the firm has a clue Charles will pass and stick William on the throne. A geriatric King Chuck could be the end of things from their perspective.
    Rubbish, 60% of voters have a favorable view of Prince Charles now

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/12/02/public-opinion-prince-charles-improves-latest-roya
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,756
    kle4 said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Interesting stuff re Monarchy.
    The deference has gone already I feel. As has much of the overt fawning.
    We are now three weeks from the Jubilee.
    I don't see a single decoration or sign that it is taking place anywhere.
    I may have been a kid then, but ISTR the 1977 one and the wedding of Charles and Di being front and centre of the Nation's activity for months beforehand.
    Meanwhile. Yet another mass shooting in America. Racially motivated by a teenager. So commonplace it passes without comment.
    Deep sighs.

    Edit. I see it was linked to as I typed that.

    We will get a much better understanding of the monarchy's place in the great scheme of things once the Queen is no longer with us. She does unite the vast majority of us. Down here in Sidmouth there are plans for a street party and celebrations, but it is noticeable (and understandable) how backward looking and nostalgic they are. The monarchy has a lot to tell us about our past. Its big challenge is to be part of our future. Saying its better than President Johnson or Blair does not really cut the mustard, because it doesn't have to be President Johnson or Blair instead of King William.

    It has to be a party political politician however who half the country will hate, see France and the USA

    It doesn't have to be. May countries have low-profile presidents who seem to be acceptable to large strands of political opinion.

    Countries generally relatively small not permanent members of the UN Security Council with nuclear weapons who are also top 10 economies in the G7 and G20 like the UK.

    If we were a republic we would have to have a grand imperial Presidency like that of the USA and France to reflect our power in the world and our current President would be President Johnson who would reside at Buckingham Palace and be head of the armed forces
    UKi s 9th and sliding. 23rd on GDP. I'd be surprised if it was even No 11 by the time the crown is cancelled.
    Still seems pretty significant as far economies go to me. Cant stay in the very top rank forever.
    Oh, quite, but it's not "worldbeating" or "big imperial kingdom with nukes".
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,966

    dixiedean said:

    Interesting stuff re Monarchy.
    The deference has gone already I feel. As has much of the overt fawning.
    We are now three weeks from the Jubilee.
    I don't see a single decoration or sign that it is taking place anywhere.
    I may have been a kid then, but ISTR the 1977 one and the wedding of Charles and Di being front and centre of the Nation's activity for months beforehand.
    Meanwhile. Yet another mass shooting in America. Racially motivated by a teenager. So commonplace it passes without comment.
    Deep sighs.

    Edit. I see it was linked to as I typed that.

    This has literally happened at every jubilee: silver, gold, diamond.. "it's not relevant", "no-one cares", "it will be a washout" etc.

    And then it happens, it's amazing and everyone enjoys it and remembers it.
    I remember the silver.
    Gold, diamond?
    Not a clue
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607

    Unless 18-24 year-olds change their minds, the monarchy may well be coming to an end within the next 50 years.
    https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1525732004515430402

    This is simply familiarity bias.

    Once Charles and William actually start performing the role of monarch, and it becomes normalised, then 'support for the monarchy' will trend back up to its longstanding mean.
    I think for William and Kate that's true, the public, largely, seem unconvinced by Charles. If the republicans want to win they'll go for it around 5 or 6 years into Charles' reign, I don't see him being a particularly popular monarch with anyone under 60.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,335

    Good morning

    On topic, Frost is the last person the conservative party need as a leader at this time of great insensitivity over NIP, actually that should read at 'anytime'

    On the monarchy, the queen has been the glue that has held it together over 7 decades but that is coming to an end and the monarchy with it's archaic traditions will have to go through colossal change to make itself relevant to modern day UK

    Deference in all its forms should be abolished, as should all the parading around in military uniforms with lots of meaningless medals on display.

    At the state opening of Parliament, Charles looked and sounded like a very old man and he is not the future

    I do believe William and Kate understand just how rapidly this change is coming and I expect in fairly quick time we will see a much reduced monarchy no longer touring with great pomp and ceremony the commonwealth countries, nor any more bowing or walking backwards in deference, and the end of ridiculous military dressing up

    I do believe most would accept a less formal, more modern monarchy, as I cannot see many wanting a republic with a President Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, Nadine Dories, JRM or ANO

    You do talk rot.

    All of that pomp, ceremony and dressing up is precisely what people want.

    King William keeping his head down, only popping up occasionally in a lounge suit, would be so boring that people would vote for a republic just for elections to make things a tad more interesting.

    Monarchy comes with all the trimmings or there's no point in having the monarchy.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750
    dixiedean said:

    kle4 said:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    Interesting stuff re Monarchy.
    The deference has gone already I feel. As has much of the overt fawning.
    We are now three weeks from the Jubilee.
    I don't see a single decoration or sign that it is taking place anywhere.
    I may have been a kid then, but ISTR the 1977 one and the wedding of Charles and Di being front and centre of the Nation's activity for months beforehand.
    Meanwhile. Yet another mass shooting in America. Racially motivated by a teenager. So commonplace it passes without comment.
    Deep sighs.

    Edit. I see it was linked to as I typed that.

    We will get a much better understanding of the monarchy's place in the great scheme of things once the Queen is no longer with us. She does unite the vast majority of us. Down here in Sidmouth there are plans for a street party and celebrations, but it is noticeable (and understandable) how backward looking and nostalgic they are. The monarchy has a lot to tell us about our past. Its big challenge is to be part of our future. Saying its better than President Johnson or Blair does not really cut the mustard, because it doesn't have to be President Johnson or Blair instead of King William.

    Yes.
    However King William may not happen for 25 years or more.
    There is an assumption he'll completely modernise the institution or bring it in to the modern world, etc., etc.
    Except. He'll be an old man when he gets the gig most probably.
    Yes, I think any modernisation has already happened or will happen with Charles (who I expect will listen very closely to William).
    It's a process of evolution isn't it?
    It's happening very slowly already. And has always happened anyways.
    Having a Monarchy simply doesn't mean it is this Monarchy preserved in aspic.
    Quite. Part of its success has been acting as though it's a preservation but it's not. Has the evolution gone far enough to preserve it? In the UK I think it probably has, it's on the right path.

    On the jubilee people are right they are always poo poohed, but even so I think there is something in the talk this time of lack of interest.

    I think that might be as it's not been that long since the last one, and it feeling a bit weird when the Queen oscso obviously fragile.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850

    dixiedean said:

    Interesting stuff re Monarchy.
    The deference has gone already I feel. As has much of the overt fawning.
    We are now three weeks from the Jubilee.
    I don't see a single decoration or sign that it is taking place anywhere.
    I may have been a kid then, but ISTR the 1977 one and the wedding of Charles and Di being front and centre of the Nation's activity for months beforehand.
    Meanwhile. Yet another mass shooting in America. Racially motivated by a teenager. So commonplace it passes without comment.
    Deep sighs.

    Edit. I see it was linked to as I typed that.

    This has literally happened at every jubilee: silver, gold, diamond.. "it's not relevant", "no-one cares", "it will be a washout" etc.

    And then it happens, it's amazing and everyone enjoys it and remembers it.
    Yes. Exactly the same was being said back in 2002 and 2012. There were are few things I'm sure of in politics, but one of them is that the monarchy will still be around in 50 years time, regardless of the views of Liverpool football fans.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,756
    MaxPB said:

    Unless 18-24 year-olds change their minds, the monarchy may well be coming to an end within the next 50 years.
    https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1525732004515430402

    This is simply familiarity bias.

    Once Charles and William actually start performing the role of monarch, and it becomes normalised, then 'support for the monarchy' will trend back up to its longstanding mean.
    I think for William and Kate that's true, the public, largely, seem unconvinced by Charles. If the republicans want to win they'll go for it around 5 or 6 years into Charles' reign, I don't see him being a particularly popular monarch with anyone under 60.
    And he can seriously alienate many if he intervenes more obviously in politics and legislation. It's already caused some grief in Scotland - the SG being something of a whipping boy in an impossible position because it's tried to maintain some sort of protocol and confidence over this when opposition pols have jumped on it (understandably).
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,297

    Good morning

    On topic, Frost is the last person the conservative party need as a leader at this time of great insensitivity over NIP, actually that should read at 'anytime'

    On the monarchy, the queen has been the glue that has held it together over 7 decades but that is coming to an end and the monarchy with it's archaic traditions will have to go through colossal change to make itself relevant to modern day UK

    Deference in all its forms should be abolished, as should all the parading around in military uniforms with lots of meaningless medals on display.

    At the state opening of Parliament, Charles looked and sounded like a very old man and he is not the future

    I do believe William and Kate understand just how rapidly this change is coming and I expect in fairly quick time we will see a much reduced monarchy no longer touring with great pomp and ceremony the commonwealth countries, nor any more bowing or walking backwards in deference, and the end of ridiculous military dressing up

    I do believe most would accept a less formal, more modern monarchy, as I cannot see many wanting a republic with a President Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, Nadine Dories, JRM or ANO

    You do talk rot.

    All of that pomp, ceremony and dressing up is precisely what people want.

    King William keeping his head down, only popping up occasionally in a lounge suit, would be so boring that people would vote for a republic just for elections to make things a tad more interesting.

    Monarchy comes with all the trimmings or there's no point in having the monarchy.
    I would gently suggest it is not rot but the pathway the monarchy will follow post HMQ
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,335
    edited May 2022
    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    Interesting stuff re Monarchy.
    The deference has gone already I feel. As has much of the overt fawning.
    We are now three weeks from the Jubilee.
    I don't see a single decoration or sign that it is taking place anywhere.
    I may have been a kid then, but ISTR the 1977 one and the wedding of Charles and Di being front and centre of the Nation's activity for months beforehand.
    Meanwhile. Yet another mass shooting in America. Racially motivated by a teenager. So commonplace it passes without comment.
    Deep sighs.

    Edit. I see it was linked to as I typed that.

    We will get a much better understanding of the monarchy's place in the great scheme of things once the Queen is no longer with us. She does unite the vast majority of us. Down here in Sidmouth there are plans for a street party and celebrations, but it is noticeable (and understandable) how backward looking and nostalgic they are. The monarchy has a lot to tell us about our past. Its big challenge is to be part of our future. Saying its better than President Johnson or Blair does not really cut the mustard, because it doesn't have to be President Johnson or Blair instead of King William.

    Yes.
    However King William may not happen for 25 years or more.
    There is an assumption he'll completely modernise the institution or bring it in to the modern world, etc., etc.
    Except. He'll be an old man when he gets the gig most probably.
    That was often the norm in the past of course.

    I'd expect William on the throne between the ages of about 60-65 so he should have a good 20 years.

    Prince George will then be a similar position when he takes over.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850

    Good morning

    On topic, Frost is the last person the conservative party need as a leader at this time of great insensitivity over NIP, actually that should read at 'anytime'

    On the monarchy, the queen has been the glue that has held it together over 7 decades but that is coming to an end and the monarchy with it's archaic traditions will have to go through colossal change to make itself relevant to modern day UK

    Deference in all its forms should be abolished, as should all the parading around in military uniforms with lots of meaningless medals on display.

    At the state opening of Parliament, Charles looked and sounded like a very old man and he is not the future

    I do believe William and Kate understand just how rapidly this change is coming and I expect in fairly quick time we will see a much reduced monarchy no longer touring with great pomp and ceremony the commonwealth countries, nor any more bowing or walking backwards in deference, and the end of ridiculous military dressing up

    I do believe most would accept a less formal, more modern monarchy, as I cannot see many wanting a republic with a President Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, Nadine Dories, JRM or ANO

    You do talk rot.

    All of that pomp, ceremony and dressing up is precisely what people want.

    King William keeping his head down, only popping up occasionally in a lounge suit, would be so boring that people would vote for a republic just for elections to make things a tad more interesting.

    Monarchy comes with all the trimmings or there's no point in having the monarchy.
    Obviously, people like pomp, and ceremony and honours. Otherwise, Republics wouldn't have them.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750

    Unless 18-24 year-olds change their minds, the monarchy may well be coming to an end within the next 50 years.
    https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1525732004515430402

    This is simply familiarity bias.

    Once Charles and William actually start performing the role of monarch, and it becomes normalised, then 'support for the monarchy' will trend back up to its longstanding mean.
    Lack of enthusiasm for the institution is a potential issue long term. But the outcome of such if it happens could merely be apathy, rather than change. Even places that have wanted to ditch it often haven't, perhaps partially as it can always wait for another day and is it worth the hassle to change.
  • Options
    moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,244
    HYUFD said:

    Unless 18-24 year-olds change their minds, the monarchy may well be coming to an end within the next 50 years.
    https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1525732004515430402

    This is simply familiarity bias.

    Once Charles and William actually start performing the role of monarch, and it becomes normalised, then 'support for the monarchy' will trend back up to its longstanding mean.
    If the firm has a clue Charles will pass and stick William on the throne. A geriatric King Chuck could be the end of things from their perspective.
    Rubbish, 60% of voters have a favorable view of Prince Charles now

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/12/02/public-opinion-prince-charles-improves-latest-roya
    Charles seems a gentle enough old fella. Was ahead of the mainstream on things like global warming.

    Really though the monarchy is just bizarre. Some odd concept of having someone at the top just because they can trace their genes back to Cerdic, even though we probably all could if we were happy to flip between maternal and paternal lines in the records. Let’s face it, the number of illegitimate children thrown in the mix makes it a farce anyway.

    Let Charles be the epilogue for the Queen’s long reign, with the goal of calling it a day after him.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,194
    edited May 2022

    Peter Hitchens can occasionally surprise:-

    I ask those of you who pray to put in a few words this Sunday for Julian Assange, threatened with extradition to the USA for the noncrime of embarrassing Uncle Sam. Home Secretary Priti Patel must decide by Wednesday whether to let him be taken away to what will almost certainly be a very grim fate, or refuse. I do very much urge her to refuse.
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-10816875/PETER-HITCHENS-Progressives-whod-wreck-Tiger-Heads-school-admit-theyre-wrong.html

    I would be utterly shocked if Priti declines the US request. Had she been HS back in the day, Gary McKinnon would, more likely than not, currently be in solitary confinement at Terra Haute.

    Now Assange is an odious man who to an extent deserves most of what is coming to him. Perhaps just not in the USA.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,335
    kle4 said:

    dixiedean said:

    kle4 said:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    Interesting stuff re Monarchy.
    The deference has gone already I feel. As has much of the overt fawning.
    We are now three weeks from the Jubilee.
    I don't see a single decoration or sign that it is taking place anywhere.
    I may have been a kid then, but ISTR the 1977 one and the wedding of Charles and Di being front and centre of the Nation's activity for months beforehand.
    Meanwhile. Yet another mass shooting in America. Racially motivated by a teenager. So commonplace it passes without comment.
    Deep sighs.

    Edit. I see it was linked to as I typed that.

    We will get a much better understanding of the monarchy's place in the great scheme of things once the Queen is no longer with us. She does unite the vast majority of us. Down here in Sidmouth there are plans for a street party and celebrations, but it is noticeable (and understandable) how backward looking and nostalgic they are. The monarchy has a lot to tell us about our past. Its big challenge is to be part of our future. Saying its better than President Johnson or Blair does not really cut the mustard, because it doesn't have to be President Johnson or Blair instead of King William.

    Yes.
    However King William may not happen for 25 years or more.
    There is an assumption he'll completely modernise the institution or bring it in to the modern world, etc., etc.
    Except. He'll be an old man when he gets the gig most probably.
    Yes, I think any modernisation has already happened or will happen with Charles (who I expect will listen very closely to William).
    It's a process of evolution isn't it?
    It's happening very slowly already. And has always happened anyways.
    Having a Monarchy simply doesn't mean it is this Monarchy preserved in aspic.
    Quite. Part of its success has been acting as though it's a preservation but it's not. Has the evolution gone far enough to preserve it? In the UK I think it probably has, it's on the right path.

    On the jubilee people are right they are always poo poohed, but even so I think there is something in the talk this time of lack of interest.

    I think that might be as it's not been that long since the last one, and it feeling a bit weird when the Queen oscso obviously fragile.
    Yes, I think people are shy of this one because they worry about the Queen's health and they're starting to realize she's mortal and aren't sure what comes next.

    I do feel much better about Charles now than I did 10 years ago now. And it's clear he'll be backed up from Day One by William.

    I think that's a solid team.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,335
    MaxPB said:

    Unless 18-24 year-olds change their minds, the monarchy may well be coming to an end within the next 50 years.
    https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1525732004515430402

    This is simply familiarity bias.

    Once Charles and William actually start performing the role of monarch, and it becomes normalised, then 'support for the monarchy' will trend back up to its longstanding mean.
    I think for William and Kate that's true, the public, largely, seem unconvinced by Charles. If the republicans want to win they'll go for it around 5 or 6 years into Charles' reign, I don't see him being a particularly popular monarch with anyone under 60.
    I'm not sure actually. He seems quite popular on walkabouts with people of all backgrounds and ages.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,005
    edited May 2022



    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    Interesting stuff re Monarchy.
    The deference has gone already I feel. As has much of the overt fawning.
    We are now three weeks from the Jubilee.
    I don't see a single decoration or sign that it is taking place anywhere.
    I may have been a kid then, but ISTR the 1977 one and the wedding of Charles and Di being front and centre of the Nation's activity for months beforehand.
    Meanwhile. Yet another mass shooting in America. Racially motivated by a teenager. So commonplace it passes without comment.
    Deep sighs.

    Edit. I see it was linked to as I typed that.

    We will get a much better understanding of the monarchy's place in the great scheme of things once the Queen is no longer with us. She does unite the vast majority of us. Down here in Sidmouth there are plans for a street party and celebrations, but it is noticeable (and understandable) how backward looking and nostalgic they are. The monarchy has a lot to tell us about our past. Its big challenge is to be part of our future. Saying its better than President Johnson or Blair does not really cut the mustard, because it doesn't have to be President Johnson or Blair instead of King William.

    Yes.
    However King William may not happen for 25 years or more.
    There is an assumption he'll completely modernise the institution or bring it in to the modern world, etc., etc.
    Except. He'll be an old man when he gets the gig most probably.
    That was often the norm in the past of course.

    I'd expect William on the throne between the ages of about 60-65 so he should have a good 20 years.

    Prince George will then be a similar position when he takes over.
    Charles as I said will abdicate in his 80s if he survives that long and retire to Highrove, he has no desire to do it to death like his mother.

    So William will likely be King in his 50s, much like the current King of Spain or the Netherlands or Emperor of Japan who became monarch in their late 40s or 50s and all of whose parents abdicated as monarch but are still alive.

    See also Pope Benedict who retired as Pope before he hit 90 and was succeeded by Pope Francis unlike his predecessor John Paul II who died in office
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,966
    Sean_F said:

    dixiedean said:

    Interesting stuff re Monarchy.
    The deference has gone already I feel. As has much of the overt fawning.
    We are now three weeks from the Jubilee.
    I don't see a single decoration or sign that it is taking place anywhere.
    I may have been a kid then, but ISTR the 1977 one and the wedding of Charles and Di being front and centre of the Nation's activity for months beforehand.
    Meanwhile. Yet another mass shooting in America. Racially motivated by a teenager. So commonplace it passes without comment.
    Deep sighs.

    Edit. I see it was linked to as I typed that.

    This has literally happened at every jubilee: silver, gold, diamond.. "it's not relevant", "no-one cares", "it will be a washout" etc.

    And then it happens, it's amazing and everyone enjoys it and remembers it.
    Yes. Exactly the same was being said back in 2002 and 2012. There were are few things I'm sure of in politics, but one of them is that the monarchy will still be around in 50 years time, regardless of the views of Liverpool football fans.
    See that's interesting. I remember 2012 vividly.
    It was the Olympics. I can't recall a Jubilee at all.
    Perhaps Monarchists turn up, street party with like-minded folk, have a wonderful time with a lifetime of memories to treasure, and assume everyone else is doing the same?
    I presume we had a Bank Holiday? I guess I went to the beach if it didn't rain.
This discussion has been closed.