Why does he write as if his audience have a mental age of about seven?
Ah, ok, yes I suppose ...
I seem to remember reading an analysis of his tweets in the run up to the 2016 election. They noticed the language started off relatively 'mature' and by the end was, seemingly, aimed at people with a reading age of around 11.
Thats Trumps genius connecting with low iq people.
It might be a flop in the same way some people got super excited by how 'few' people showed up for the Queue, as though hundreds of thousands of people doing it was not still an awful lot considering what the activity was, or how people sometimes denigrate this or that protest as having only 100k or 500k or whatever, out of 70m people, ignoring that, again, that is a lot of people to take time out to do it.
There's this yearning sometimes that takes even genuine points way too far. I'm a monarchist and it'd never even occur to me to watch it in a public place, no thank you. I'd be astonished if even 5% do.
I'll probably record it so I can watch it on fast forward. I'm more worried it won't be extravagant and silly enough because they are worried about how it looks during cost of living crisis, and the sense of privilege. Fact is you cannot hold a coronation without looking out of touch and a bit silly, so just go for it. Just think how Spanish republicans missed out on things to make fun of because their King just got handed a sash by his dad.
Even the King of Spain goes in a grand parade to his inauguration accompanied by cavalry (as indeed does the President of Italy to his)
To be honest an old horse drawn golden coach is the antithesis of being in touch
It may well be a very embarrassing event and certainly not a help in endearing the monarchy to the country
You are utterly wrong.
Since the late Queen the direction of travel, if you excuse the pun, is ever downwards in the polling
Where do you get that idea from? The polling for Charles, William and Kate is very strong.
It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.
The big question is why did Nicky S resign in the first place? Without an understanding of that, there's not much hope for her replacement. And the answer can't be that everything was wrong, or she shouldn't have stayed as long as she did.
(For example, 1990 was about the Poll Tax and Thatcher's decent into divaish madness. So Major was the right guy to pick because he solved both problems but left everything else broadly unchanged.)
It might be a flop in the same way some people got super excited by how 'few' people showed up for the Queue, as though hundreds of thousands of people doing it was not still an awful lot considering what the activity was, or how people sometimes denigrate this or that protest as having only 100k or 500k or whatever, out of 70m people, ignoring that, again, that is a lot of people to take time out to do it.
There's this yearning sometimes that takes even genuine points way too far. I'm a monarchist and it'd never even occur to me to watch it in a public place, no thank you. I'd be astonished if even 5% do.
I'll probably record it so I can watch it on fast forward. I'm more worried it won't be extravagant and silly enough because they are worried about how it looks during cost of living crisis, and the sense of privilege. Fact is you cannot hold a coronation without looking out of touch and a bit silly, so just go for it. Just think how Spanish republicans missed out on things to make fun of because their King just got handed a sash by his dad.
Even the King of Spain goes in a grand parade to his inauguration accompanied by cavalry (as indeed does the President of Italy to his)
To be honest an old horse drawn golden coach is the antithesis of being in touch
It may well be a very embarrassing event and certainly not a help in endearing the monarchy to the country
I don't buy into the notion that most people dislike pageantry, and expect Heads of State/Government to live like council tenants.
The inaugurations of the French and US Presidents are full of pageantry.
It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.
Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.
It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.
Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.
Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.
I'm going to be away for the Coronation; I've got three weeks off work, starting the last week of April
I'm seriously considering a big walk in Brittany - visiting the sites of the seven founder Saints (all from Wales and Cornwall)
It's a 350 mile trek, just to visit the seven places, not taking into account detours to see other interesting things on the way
I think I should go for it
The legend says that if you don't do this walk in your lifetime, you have to do it in the afterlife. But you can only walk one coffin length every seven years in the afterlife
It might be a flop in the same way some people got super excited by how 'few' people showed up for the Queue, as though hundreds of thousands of people doing it was not still an awful lot considering what the activity was, or how people sometimes denigrate this or that protest as having only 100k or 500k or whatever, out of 70m people, ignoring that, again, that is a lot of people to take time out to do it.
There's this yearning sometimes that takes even genuine points way too far. I'm a monarchist and it'd never even occur to me to watch it in a public place, no thank you. I'd be astonished if even 5% do.
I'll probably record it so I can watch it on fast forward. I'm more worried it won't be extravagant and silly enough because they are worried about how it looks during cost of living crisis, and the sense of privilege. Fact is you cannot hold a coronation without looking out of touch and a bit silly, so just go for it. Just think how Spanish republicans missed out on things to make fun of because their King just got handed a sash by his dad.
Even the King of Spain goes in a grand parade to his inauguration accompanied by cavalry (as indeed does the President of Italy to his)
To be honest an old horse drawn golden coach is the antithesis of being in touch
It may well be a very embarrassing event and certainly not a help in endearing the monarchy to the country
You are utterly wrong.
Since the late Queen the direction of travel, if you excuse the pun, is ever downwards in the polling
No it isn't. 18 Commonwealth realms became republics or got their own head of state in the late Queen's reign. There are only 15 Commonwealth realms left so even if they all ended the monarchy neither Charles nor William would have lost as many as the late Queen did. Elizabeth II did a good job but she she did undoubtedly leave the monarchy globally smaller than she inherited from her father.
In the UK around 2/3 still back retaining the monarchy
I back retaining the monarchy but expect there will be a continuous drip of support over the coming years as we are already seeing
We currently have King Charles and Queen Consort Camilla, this should be peak time for republicans, if they can't even get close to a majority now they have zero chance once William and Kate take over, especially given the alternative of President Blair or President Johnson
There would never be a president Blair or President Johnson.
A president Rowling - or similar - would win any ballot. cf; Ireland.
On every measure, J K Rowling would be a better head of state.
Say it ain’t so?
No, there almost certainly would be a President Blair or President Johnson. We are a P5 permanent UN Security Council member and member of the G7 and G20 not a small country like Ireland but equivalent to the US and France and would likely have a powerful directly elected President like them if we were a republic.
Even if we only had a ceremonial President elected by Parliament it would more likely be President Hague or President Ed Miliband than President Rowling (who is hated now by trans activists anyway). Even the current Irish President is an ex Labour politician
There is no obligation on UNSC member republics to have shitty executive presidencies, even if all four of them do. A country which has a hereditary monarchy, an even shittier arrangement, need not limit itself to climbing only one level up inside the sewage pipe. A British republic could have a presidency similar to the German one. The "you don't want a politician as head of state" bullshit was how the monarch managed to win the 1999 referendum in Australia, despite having a large republican majority. You may find it's worn a bit thin, HYUFD. There's nothing wrong with a President Miliband or Hague or Rowling. Bring it on. Doesn't scare anyone, so long as they're non-executive. Better than some addled old bastard who's there because of who is mother was, who wants to get biblically anointed, who seems to think he's the king of kings and the head of all religions, and who obviously hasn't acquired the art of speaking to servants even after seven decades of practice. The monarchy is making the country a fucking laughing stock.
It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.
It might be a flop in the same way some people got super excited by how 'few' people showed up for the Queue, as though hundreds of thousands of people doing it was not still an awful lot considering what the activity was, or how people sometimes denigrate this or that protest as having only 100k or 500k or whatever, out of 70m people, ignoring that, again, that is a lot of people to take time out to do it.
There's this yearning sometimes that takes even genuine points way too far. I'm a monarchist and it'd never even occur to me to watch it in a public place, no thank you. I'd be astonished if even 5% do.
I'll probably record it so I can watch it on fast forward. I'm more worried it won't be extravagant and silly enough because they are worried about how it looks during cost of living crisis, and the sense of privilege. Fact is you cannot hold a coronation without looking out of touch and a bit silly, so just go for it. Just think how Spanish republicans missed out on things to make fun of because their King just got handed a sash by his dad.
Even the King of Spain goes in a grand parade to his inauguration accompanied by cavalry (as indeed does the President of Italy to his)
To be honest an old horse drawn golden coach is the antithesis of being in touch
It may well be a very embarrassing event and certainly not a help in endearing the monarchy to the country
You are utterly wrong.
Since the late Queen the direction of travel, if you excuse the pun, is ever downwards in the polling
No it isn't. 18 Commonwealth realms became republics or got their own head of state in the late Queen's reign. There are only 15 Commonwealth realms left so even if they all ended the monarchy neither Charles nor William would have lost as many as the late Queen did. Elizabeth II did a good job but she she did undoubtedly leave the monarchy globally smaller than she inherited from her father.
In the UK around 2/3 still back retaining the monarchy
I back retaining the monarchy but expect there will be a continuous drip of support over the coming years as we are already seeing
We currently have King Charles and Queen Consort Camilla, this should be peak time for republicans, if they can't even get close to a majority now they have zero chance once William and Kate take over, especially given the alternative of President Blair or President Johnson
There would never be a president Blair or President Johnson.
A president Rowling - or similar - would win any ballot. cf; Ireland.
On every measure, J K Rowling would be a better head of state.
Say it ain’t so?
No, there almost certainly would be a President Blair or President Johnson. We are a P5 permanent UN Security Council member and member of the G7 and G20 not a small country like Ireland but equivalent to the US and France and would likely have a powerful directly elected President like them if we were a republic.
Even if we only had a ceremonial President elected by Parliament it would more likely be President Hague or President Ed Miliband than President Rowling (who is hated now by trans activists anyway). Even the current Irish President is an ex Labour politician
Depends entirely on how the drafting committee of the new English Republic see things. Republic Cymru will simply ask Llafor to nominate someone.
It might be a flop in the same way some people got super excited by how 'few' people showed up for the Queue, as though hundreds of thousands of people doing it was not still an awful lot considering what the activity was, or how people sometimes denigrate this or that protest as having only 100k or 500k or whatever, out of 70m people, ignoring that, again, that is a lot of people to take time out to do it.
There's this yearning sometimes that takes even genuine points way too far. I'm a monarchist and it'd never even occur to me to watch it in a public place, no thank you. I'd be astonished if even 5% do.
I'll probably record it so I can watch it on fast forward. I'm more worried it won't be extravagant and silly enough because they are worried about how it looks during cost of living crisis, and the sense of privilege. Fact is you cannot hold a coronation without looking out of touch and a bit silly, so just go for it. Just think how Spanish republicans missed out on things to make fun of because their King just got handed a sash by his dad.
Even the King of Spain goes in a grand parade to his inauguration accompanied by cavalry (as indeed does the President of Italy to his)
To be honest an old horse drawn golden coach is the antithesis of being in touch
It may well be a very embarrassing event and certainly not a help in endearing the monarchy to the country
You are utterly wrong.
Since the late Queen the direction of travel, if you excuse the pun, is ever downwards in the polling
No it isn't. 18 Commonwealth realms became republics or got their own head of state in the late Queen's reign. There are only 15 Commonwealth realms left so even if they all ended the monarchy neither Charles nor William would have lost as many as the late Queen did. Elizabeth II did a good job but she she did undoubtedly leave the monarchy globally smaller than she inherited from her father.
In the UK around 2/3 still back retaining the monarchy
I back retaining the monarchy but expect there will be a continuous drip of support over the coming years as we are already seeing
We currently have King Charles and Queen Consort Camilla, this should be peak time for republicans, if they can't even get close to a majority now they have zero chance once William and Kate take over, especially given the alternative of President Blair or President Johnson
There would never be a president Blair or President Johnson.
A president Rowling - or similar - would win any ballot. cf; Ireland.
On every measure, J K Rowling would be a better head of state.
Say it ain’t so?
No, there almost certainly would be a President Blair or President Johnson. We are a P5 permanent UN Security Council member and member of the G7 and G20 not a small country like Ireland but equivalent to the US and France and would likely have a powerful directly elected President like them if we were a republic.
Even if we only had a ceremonial President elected by Parliament it would more likely be President Hague or President Ed Miliband than President Rowling (who is hated now by trans activists anyway). Even the current Irish President is an ex Labour politician
There is no obligation on UNSC member republics to have shitty executive presidencies, even if all four of them do. A country which has a hereditary monarchy, an even shittier arrangement, need not limit itself to climbing only one level up inside the sewage pipe. A British republic could have a presidency similar to the German one. The "you don't want a politician as head of state" bullshit was how the monarch managed to win the 1999 referendum in Australia, despite having a large republican majority. Nothing wrong with a President Miliband or Hague or Rowling. Bring it on. Better than some old bastard who wants to get biblically anointed and seems to think he's the king of kings and the head of all religions. The monarchy is making the country a fucking laughing stock.
The award for the biggest pile of shite on here today has a winner.
That must have been an uncomfortable morning in the Sturgeon/Murrell kitchen as the SNP CEO pushed his resignation letter across the breakfast bar to his boss!
It might be a flop in the same way some people got super excited by how 'few' people showed up for the Queue, as though hundreds of thousands of people doing it was not still an awful lot considering what the activity was, or how people sometimes denigrate this or that protest as having only 100k or 500k or whatever, out of 70m people, ignoring that, again, that is a lot of people to take time out to do it.
There's this yearning sometimes that takes even genuine points way too far. I'm a monarchist and it'd never even occur to me to watch it in a public place, no thank you. I'd be astonished if even 5% do.
I'll probably record it so I can watch it on fast forward. I'm more worried it won't be extravagant and silly enough because they are worried about how it looks during cost of living crisis, and the sense of privilege. Fact is you cannot hold a coronation without looking out of touch and a bit silly, so just go for it. Just think how Spanish republicans missed out on things to make fun of because their King just got handed a sash by his dad.
Even the King of Spain goes in a grand parade to his inauguration accompanied by cavalry (as indeed does the President of Italy to his)
To be honest an old horse drawn golden coach is the antithesis of being in touch
It may well be a very embarrassing event and certainly not a help in endearing the monarchy to the country
You are utterly wrong.
Since the late Queen the direction of travel, if you excuse the pun, is ever downwards in the polling
No it isn't. 18 Commonwealth realms became republics or got their own head of state in the late Queen's reign. There are only 15 Commonwealth realms left so even if they all ended the monarchy neither Charles nor William would have lost as many as the late Queen did. Elizabeth II did a good job but she she did undoubtedly leave the monarchy globally smaller than she inherited from her father.
In the UK around 2/3 still back retaining the monarchy
I back retaining the monarchy but expect there will be a continuous drip of support over the coming years as we are already seeing
We currently have King Charles and Queen Consort Camilla, this should be peak time for republicans, if they can't even get close to a majority now they have zero chance once William and Kate take over, especially given the alternative of President Blair or President Johnson
There would never be a president Blair or President Johnson.
A president Rowling - or similar - would win any ballot. cf; Ireland.
On every measure, J K Rowling would be a better head of state.
Say it ain’t so?
No, there almost certainly would be a President Blair or President Johnson. We are a P5 permanent UN Security Council member and member of the G7 and G20 not a small country like Ireland but equivalent to the US and France and would likely have a powerful directly elected President like them if we were a republic.
Even if we only had a ceremonial President elected by Parliament it would more likely be President Hague or President Ed Miliband than President Rowling (who is hated now by trans activists anyway). Even the current Irish President is an ex Labour politician
Depends entirely on how the drafting committee of the new English Republic see things. Republic Cymru will simply ask Llafor to nominate someone.
So they would then most likely end up with President Kinnock, as if we didn't need any more reasons to keep the monarchy!
Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.
It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.
Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.
That's pretty pathetic actually.
Is it, given his past favourability ratings?
I think people are naturally rallying round. The significant thing though is the enduring popularity of William and Kate. The monarchy seems utterly secure for the foreseeable.
It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.
We can be sure she will not be filling her own bankbook as labour usually do , people her eknow what bad uns they are. Far better a bit of religion as a grifter.
Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.
That's pretty pathetic actually.
What is pathetic is you criticising the King for having only a 62% positive rating when the pathetic 2 main candidates of your pathetic party, Forbes and Yousaf, have just a 27% and 22% positive rating respectively in Scotland. Even in Scotland the King has double that at 52% positive.
I'm going to be away for the Coronation; I've got three weeks off work, starting the last week of April
I'm seriously considering a big walk in Brittany - visiting the sites of the seven founder Saints (all from Wales and Cornwall)
It's a 350 mile trek, just to visit the seven places, not taking into account detours to see other interesting things on the way
I think I should go for it
The legend says that if you don't do this walk in your lifetime, you have to do it in the afterlife. But you can only walk one coffin length every seven years in the afterlife
Bloody French tourist board, think up all sorts of shit to trap you there.
It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.
Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.
That's pretty pathetic actually.
Is it, given his past favourability ratings?
I think people are naturally rallying round. The significant thing though is the enduring popularity of William and Kate. The monarchy seems utterly secure for the foreseeable.
Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.
That's pretty pathetic actually.
What is pathetic is you criticising the King for having only a 62% positive rating when the pathetic 2 main candidates of your pathetic party, Forbes and Yousaf, have just a 27% and 22% positive rating respectively.
Notd relevant. You are comparing kings with elected officials, which you have spent all day denying is a valid comparison. And the institution of monarchy with divine right ought to have a *much* stronger consensus than 62 per cent ranging from 'great' to 'little better than meh'.
It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.
Her views on the SNP's record in office will be more than enough!
"Glen Sannox and Hull 802 were due online in the first half of 2018 when Ferguson Marine was under the control of tycoon Jim McColl, with one initially to serve Arran and the other to serve the Skye triangle routes to North Uist and Harris, but they are at least five years late. The last estimates suggested the costs of delivery has more than quadrupled compared to the original £97m cost."
But everyone got their bonuses for their astounding (well I am astounded by the outcome of their efforts, for one) efforts. Which is nice.
The launch of the ship in 2017 (six years before it will actually go into service),with painted on windows to make it look ready, seems so surreal.
In Scotland it just feels normal. We live in a Potemkin village.
It might be a flop in the same way some people got super excited by how 'few' people showed up for the Queue, as though hundreds of thousands of people doing it was not still an awful lot considering what the activity was, or how people sometimes denigrate this or that protest as having only 100k or 500k or whatever, out of 70m people, ignoring that, again, that is a lot of people to take time out to do it.
There's this yearning sometimes that takes even genuine points way too far. I'm a monarchist and it'd never even occur to me to watch it in a public place, no thank you. I'd be astonished if even 5% do.
I'll probably record it so I can watch it on fast forward. I'm more worried it won't be extravagant and silly enough because they are worried about how it looks during cost of living crisis, and the sense of privilege. Fact is you cannot hold a coronation without looking out of touch and a bit silly, so just go for it. Just think how Spanish republicans missed out on things to make fun of because their King just got handed a sash by his dad.
Even the King of Spain goes in a grand parade to his inauguration accompanied by cavalry (as indeed does the President of Italy to his)
To be honest an old horse drawn golden coach is the antithesis of being in touch
It may well be a very embarrassing event and certainly not a help in endearing the monarchy to the country
You are utterly wrong.
Since the late Queen the direction of travel, if you excuse the pun, is ever downwards in the polling
No it isn't. 18 Commonwealth realms became republics or got their own head of state in the late Queen's reign. There are only 15 Commonwealth realms left so even if they all ended the monarchy neither Charles nor William would have lost as many as the late Queen did. Elizabeth II did a good job but she she did undoubtedly leave the monarchy globally smaller than she inherited from her father.
In the UK around 2/3 still back retaining the monarchy
I back retaining the monarchy but expect there will be a continuous drip of support over the coming years as we are already seeing
We currently have King Charles and Queen Consort Camilla, this should be peak time for republicans, if they can't even get close to a majority now they have zero chance once William and Kate take over, especially given the alternative of President Blair or President Johnson
There would never be a president Blair or President Johnson.
A president Rowling - or similar - would win any ballot. cf; Ireland.
On every measure, J K Rowling would be a better head of state.
Say it ain’t so?
No, there almost certainly would be a President Blair or President Johnson. We are a P5 permanent UN Security Council member and member of the G7 and G20 not a small country like Ireland but equivalent to the US and France and would likely have a powerful directly elected President like them if we were a republic.
Even if we only had a ceremonial President elected by Parliament it would more likely be President Hague or President Ed Miliband than President Rowling (who is hated now by trans activists anyway). Even the current Irish President is an ex Labour politician
There is no obligation on UNSC member republics to have shitty executive presidencies, even if all four of them do. A country which has a hereditary monarchy, an even shittier arrangement, need not limit itself to climbing only one level up inside the sewage pipe. A British republic could have a presidency similar to the German one. The "you don't want a politician as head of state" bullshit was how the monarch managed to win the 1999 referendum in Australia, despite having a large republican majority. You may find it's worn a bit thin, HYUFD. There's nothing wrong with a President Miliband or Hague or Rowling. Bring it on. Doesn't scare anyone, so long as they're non-executive. Better than some addled old bastard who's there because of who is mother was, who wants to get biblically anointed, who seems to think he's the king of kings and the head of all religions, and who obviously hasn't acquired the art of speaking to servants even after seven decades of practice. The monarchy is making the country a fucking laughing stock.
The German President is a politician and ex leader of the SPD who only got the job as a consolation prize after Merkel beat him in 2009.
So yes I certainly prefer our monarchy to that rubbish, as do other nations with constitutional monarchies from Denmark to Spain, the Netherlands to Jordan and New Zealand to Canada and Japan to Norway
It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.
"Tartan Tory"....
You are forgetting that Labour is actually a right-wing party - and even more so if it is not to lose in England. SKS is a born again British nationalist and Brexiter, so that is going to be tricky.
I'm going to be away for the Coronation; I've got three weeks off work, starting the last week of April
I'm seriously considering a big walk in Brittany - visiting the sites of the seven founder Saints (all from Wales and Cornwall)
It's a 350 mile trek, just to visit the seven places, not taking into account detours to see other interesting things on the way
I think I should go for it
The legend says that if you don't do this walk in your lifetime, you have to do it in the afterlife. But you can only walk one coffin length every seven years in the afterlife
Bloody French tourist board, think up all sorts of shit to trap you there.
I think it was the Welsh (Colonies) who came up with it!
Staggering if true. This person has been on the money so far.
Has been 100% correct. Been on the cards for some time, just a case of when t helong knives would come out. All the patsies will be crapping themselves now.
It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.
"Tartan Tory"....
You are forgetting that Labour is actually a right-wing party - and even more so if it is not to lose in England. SKS is a born again British nationalist and Brexiter, so that is going to be tricky.
Forbes is right of Sunak let alone Starmer, the SNP will tear itself apart on that basis if she wins
I'm going to be away for the Coronation; I've got three weeks off work, starting the last week of April
I'm seriously considering a big walk in Brittany - visiting the sites of the seven founder Saints (all from Wales and Cornwall)
It's a 350 mile trek, just to visit the seven places, not taking into account detours to see other interesting things on the way
I think I should go for it
The legend says that if you don't do this walk in your lifetime, you have to do it in the afterlife. But you can only walk one coffin length every seven years in the afterlife
Bloody French tourist board, think up all sorts of shit to trap you there.
I think it was the Welsh (Colonies) who came up with it!
It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.
"Tartan Tory"....
All we need now is the return of the King over the water.
Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.
That's pretty pathetic actually.
What is pathetic is you criticising the King for having only a 62% positive rating when the pathetic 2 main candidates of your pathetic party, Forbes and Yousaf, have just a 27% and 22% positive rating respectively.
Notd relevant. You are comparing kings with elected officials, which you have spent all day denying is a valid comparison. And the institution of monarchy with divine right ought to have a *much* stronger consensus than 62 per cent ranging from 'great' to 'little better than meh'.
Nope, it is a valid comparison. The King is still far more popular than any senior politician and his son and the Princess of Wales even more so.
The fact we still have a few republican whingers who dislike the monarchy is largely irrelevant as they have little more support than the LDs got in 2010
It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.
"Tartan Tory"....
You are forgetting that Labour is actually a right-wing party - and even more so if it is not to lose in England. SKS is a born again British nationalist and Brexiter, so that is going to be tricky.
Forbes is right of Sunak let alone Starmer, the SNP will tear itself apart on that basis if she wins
How is she right of them? She's been in a key SNP ministry for years and that is well to the left of both of them by any standard.
It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.
"Tartan Tory"....
You are forgetting that Labour is actually a right-wing party - and even more so if it is not to lose in England. SKS is a born again British nationalist and Brexiter, so that is going to be tricky.
I think trying to argue that Keir Starmer, Angela Rayner, et al, are to the right of Kate Forbes would be a task that would defeat even Murray Foote.
It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.
"Tartan Tory"....
All we need now is the return of the King over the water.
It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.
"Tartan Tory"....
You are forgetting that Labour is actually a right-wing party - and even more so if it is not to lose in England. SKS is a born again British nationalist and Brexiter, so that is going to be tricky.
I think trying to argue that Keir Starmer, Angela Rayner, et al, are to the right of Kate Forbes would be a task that would defeat even Murray Foote.
You're looking at it from a London perspective.
It's the overall approach that counts. Trident, Brexit, and refusing referenda (after originally saying it was a decent thing to do) are pretty right wing in a Scottish context.
Also - the Greens in Scotland will take up the more leftie vote, which English Labour don't have to worry about.
It might be a flop in the same way some people got super excited by how 'few' people showed up for the Queue, as though hundreds of thousands of people doing it was not still an awful lot considering what the activity was, or how people sometimes denigrate this or that protest as having only 100k or 500k or whatever, out of 70m people, ignoring that, again, that is a lot of people to take time out to do it.
There's this yearning sometimes that takes even genuine points way too far. I'm a monarchist and it'd never even occur to me to watch it in a public place, no thank you. I'd be astonished if even 5% do.
I'll probably record it so I can watch it on fast forward. I'm more worried it won't be extravagant and silly enough because they are worried about how it looks during cost of living crisis, and the sense of privilege. Fact is you cannot hold a coronation without looking out of touch and a bit silly, so just go for it. Just think how Spanish republicans missed out on things to make fun of because their King just got handed a sash by his dad.
Even the King of Spain goes in a grand parade to his inauguration accompanied by cavalry (as indeed does the President of Italy to his)
To be honest an old horse drawn golden coach is the antithesis of being in touch
It may well be a very embarrassing event and certainly not a help in endearing the monarchy to the country
You are utterly wrong.
Since the late Queen the direction of travel, if you excuse the pun, is ever downwards in the polling
No it isn't. 18 Commonwealth realms became republics or got their own head of state in the late Queen's reign. There are only 15 Commonwealth realms left so even if they all ended the monarchy neither Charles nor William would have lost as many as the late Queen did. Elizabeth II did a good job but she she did undoubtedly leave the monarchy globally smaller than she inherited from her father.
In the UK around 2/3 still back retaining the monarchy
I back retaining the monarchy but expect there will be a continuous drip of support over the coming years as we are already seeing
We currently have King Charles and Queen Consort Camilla, this should be peak time for republicans, if they can't even get close to a majority now they have zero chance once William and Kate take over, especially given the alternative of President Blair or President Johnson
There would never be a president Blair or President Johnson.
A president Rowling - or similar - would win any ballot. cf; Ireland.
On every measure, J K Rowling would be a better head of state.
Say it ain’t so?
No, there almost certainly would be a President Blair or President Johnson. We are a P5 permanent UN Security Council member and member of the G7 and G20 not a small country like Ireland but equivalent to the US and France and would likely have a powerful directly elected President like them if we were a republic.
Even if we only had a ceremonial President elected by Parliament it would more likely be President Hague or President Ed Miliband than President Rowling (who is hated now by trans activists anyway). Even the current Irish President is an ex Labour politician
Depends entirely on how the drafting committee of the new English Republic see things. Republic Cymru will simply ask Llafor to nominate someone.
So they would then most likely end up with President Kinnock, as if we didn't need any more reasons to keep the monarchy!
It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.
"Tartan Tory"....
You are forgetting that Labour is actually a right-wing party - and even more so if it is not to lose in England. SKS is a born again British nationalist and Brexiter, so that is going to be tricky.
I think trying to argue that Keir Starmer, Angela Rayner, et al, are to the right of Kate Forbes would be a task that would defeat even Murray Foote.
You're looking at it from a London perspective.
It's the overall approach that counts. Trident, Brexit, and refusing referenda (after originally saying it was a decent thing to do) are pretty right wing in a Scottish context.
Also - the Greens in Scotland will take up the more leftie vote, which English Labour don't have to worry about.
They do, but not to the same extent. There were a few constituencies last time where the Green vote was larger than the Tory majority over Labour - eg North West Durham - but they're generally much less visible and less important than their Scottish counterparts.
It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.
"Tartan Tory"....
You are forgetting that Labour is actually a right-wing party - and even more so if it is not to lose in England. SKS is a born again British nationalist and Brexiter, so that is going to be tricky.
I think trying to argue that Keir Starmer, Angela Rayner, et al, are to the right of Kate Forbes would be a task that would defeat even Murray Foote.
You're looking at it from a London perspective.
It's the overall approach that counts. Trident, Brexit, and refusing referenda (after originally saying it was a decent thing to do) are pretty right wing in a Scottish context.
Also - the Greens in Scotland will take up the more leftie vote, which English Labour don't have to worry about.
They do, but not to the same extent. There were a few constituencies last time where the Green vote was larger than the Tory majority over Labour - eg North West Durham - but they're generally much less visible and less important than their Scottish counterparts.
On topic. Charles is always going to suffer by comparison because "Well, he's not the Queen, is he?"
It's likely William will get a boost because "Well, he's not King Charles, is he?"
I feel like Charles needs to find 'his thing'. Personally, along with @Leon, I feel the public is most aligned with Charles on architecture, so maybe he should be found a way get stuck into that somehow.
On topic. Charles is always going to suffer by comparison because "Well, he's not the Queen, is he?"
It's likely William will get a boost because "Well, he's not King Charles, is he?"
I feel like Charles needs to find 'his thing'. Personally, along with @Leon, I feel the public is most aligned with Charles on architecture, so maybe he should be found a way get stuck into that somehow.
Environment as well. He was for ecology long before it was fashionable.
I'm going to be away for the Coronation; I've got three weeks off work, starting the last week of April
I'm seriously considering a big walk in Brittany - visiting the sites of the seven founder Saints (all from Wales and Cornwall)
It's a 350 mile trek, just to visit the seven places, not taking into account detours to see other interesting things on the way
I think I should go for it
The legend says that if you don't do this walk in your lifetime, you have to do it in the afterlife. But you can only walk one coffin length every seven years in the afterlife
Bloody French tourist board, think up all sorts of shit to trap you there.
I think it was the Welsh (Colonies) who came up with it!
The Welsh are even worse.
I should know, I'm a Welshman.
When is St. Taffy's Day? And it is ok to wear a ramp instead of a leek?
The ramp being Appalachian equivalent/substitute, for example world-famous Ramp Festival of Richwood, West Virginia, one of a number held across the region.
One one notorious occasion, the editor of the local "West Virginia Hillbilly" (an equally notorious character) printed an edition of the paper with ramp-scented ink. And when the initial print run didn't seem sufficiently "fragrant" added more of essence of ramp.
As the ink dried, the odor increased expotentially. Resulting in several postal employee (are you getting this, Blanche?) in a railroad mail car, being overcome by the fumes. Was with some difficulty that the paper was able to retain it's postal privileges.
I'm going to be away for the Coronation; I've got three weeks off work, starting the last week of April
I'm seriously considering a big walk in Brittany - visiting the sites of the seven founder Saints (all from Wales and Cornwall)
It's a 350 mile trek, just to visit the seven places, not taking into account detours to see other interesting things on the way
I think I should go for it
The legend says that if you don't do this walk in your lifetime, you have to do it in the afterlife. But you can only walk one coffin length every seven years in the afterlife
Bloody French tourist board, think up all sorts of shit to trap you there.
I think it was the Welsh (Colonies) who came up with it!
The Welsh are even worse.
I should know, I'm a Welshman.
When is St. Taffy's Day? And it is ok to wear a ramp instead of a leek?
The ramp being Appalachian equivalent/substitute, for example world-famous Ramp Festival of Richwood, West Virginia, one of a number held across the region.
One one notorious occasion, the editor of the local "West Virginia Hillbilly" (an equally notorious character) printed an edition of the paper with ramp-scented ink. And when the initial print run didn't seem sufficiently "fragrant" added more of essence of ramp.
As the ink dried, the odor increased expotentially. Resulting in several postal employee (are you getting this, Blanche?) in a railroad mail car, being overcome by the fumes. Was with some difficulty that the paper was able to retain it's postal privileges.
St David, not St Taff. And traditionally we wear daffodils not leeks on that day,
It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.
"Tartan Tory"....
You are forgetting that Labour is actually a right-wing party - and even more so if it is not to lose in England. SKS is a born again British nationalist and Brexiter, so that is going to be tricky.
Going to be tricky to convince people that someone who is against gay marriage, wants a smaller state, and thinks George Osborne's economic programme was wonderful is more left wing than SKS.
On topic. Charles is always going to suffer by comparison because "Well, he's not the Queen, is he?"
It's likely William will get a boost because "Well, he's not King Charles, is he?"
I feel like Charles needs to find 'his thing'. Personally, along with @Leon, I feel the public is most aligned with Charles on architecture, so maybe he should be found a way get stuck into that somehow.
Speaking of Leon, I see he is no longer banned. Perhaps someone should tell him?
On topic. Charles is always going to suffer by comparison because "Well, he's not the Queen, is he?"
It's likely William will get a boost because "Well, he's not King Charles, is he?"
I feel like Charles needs to find 'his thing'. Personally, along with @Leon, I feel the public is most aligned with Charles on architecture, so maybe he should be found a way get stuck into that somehow.
Environment as well. He was for ecology long before it was fashionable.
Two political hot potatoes though, and getting hotter. Whatever one thinks of Poundbury it';s not what the big builders want to do, so far as I can see. And as climate change worsens ...
On topic. Charles is always going to suffer by comparison because "Well, he's not the Queen, is he?"
It's likely William will get a boost because "Well, he's not King Charles, is he?"
I feel like Charles needs to find 'his thing'. Personally, along with @Leon, I feel the public is most aligned with Charles on architecture, so maybe he should be found a way get stuck into that somehow.
He's already 74. His mum had had half a century in the role by this point. Getting "his thing" has maybe 20 years still as King, but at that age, does he have the energy? Dunno.
I'm going to be away for the Coronation; I've got three weeks off work, starting the last week of April
I'm seriously considering a big walk in Brittany - visiting the sites of the seven founder Saints (all from Wales and Cornwall)
It's a 350 mile trek, just to visit the seven places, not taking into account detours to see other interesting things on the way
I think I should go for it
The legend says that if you don't do this walk in your lifetime, you have to do it in the afterlife. But you can only walk one coffin length every seven years in the afterlife
Bloody French tourist board, think up all sorts of shit to trap you there.
I think it was the Welsh (Colonies) who came up with it!
The Welsh are even worse.
I should know, I'm a Welshman.
I was reading about Welsh/Roman Conan Meriadoc earlier
They say when he colonised Armorica he had all of the men killed, to be replaced by his soldiers
He then had his men cut out all the women's tongues so they couldn't tell anyone what had happened
Yes, really disappointing, that. I'm all for deterring players tackling recklessly, but I don't think Steward was even doing that - he was basically trying to protect himself. If the laws say that's a red card, the laws need looking at again. Not much point watching the rest of the game now. Well done to Ireland for winning the Grand Slam; just a shame I was denied 40 minutes of entertainment. I shall set about some Dadmin instead.
On topic. Charles is always going to suffer by comparison because "Well, he's not the Queen, is he?"
It's likely William will get a boost because "Well, he's not King Charles, is he?"
I feel like Charles needs to find 'his thing'. Personally, along with @Leon, I feel the public is most aligned with Charles on architecture, so maybe he should be found a way get stuck into that somehow.
Environment as well. He was for ecology long before it was fashionable.
What was the Queen's thing? I'd say it was basically being less awful than any other public figure. He could try that.
I'm going to be away for the Coronation; I've got three weeks off work, starting the last week of April
I'm seriously considering a big walk in Brittany - visiting the sites of the seven founder Saints (all from Wales and Cornwall)
It's a 350 mile trek, just to visit the seven places, not taking into account detours to see other interesting things on the way
I think I should go for it
The legend says that if you don't do this walk in your lifetime, you have to do it in the afterlife. But you can only walk one coffin length every seven years in the afterlife
Good to see you back AND planning a truly exciting endeavor. Esp. interested to see your proposed route includes & highlights Mont St. Michel.
Of which I happen to have a very nice, exterior-only model.
On topic. Charles is always going to suffer by comparison because "Well, he's not the Queen, is he?"
It's likely William will get a boost because "Well, he's not King Charles, is he?"
I feel like Charles needs to find 'his thing'. Personally, along with @Leon, I feel the public is most aligned with Charles on architecture, so maybe he should be found a way get stuck into that somehow.
Environment as well. He was for ecology long before it was fashionable.
What was the Queen's thing? I'd say it was basically being less awful than any other public figure. He could try that.
Just saw someone describe SNP departures an an Exodus, which makes perfect sense in a campaign which so far has featured Leviticus and Numbers prominently.
This scandal has clearly been building up for some time... was its Genesis Alex Salmond's resignation?
(If you can come up with a pun featuring Deuteronomy, you're a better man than I am.)
Not a pun, but an allusion:
Ol Deuteronomy's lived many lives No, I am tempted to say ninety-nine And her numerous progeny prospers and thrives And the village is proud of her in her decline
Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.
Given recent opinion polls that means about 40% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Not good.
I don't hold a massive candle for Charles, although I don't actively dislike him, but I am still a monarchist. I revered QEII at an almost religious level - duty was her byword and she was still trying to work 20 hours before she died.
It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.
"Tartan Tory"....
You are forgetting that Labour is actually a right-wing party - and even more so if it is not to lose in England. SKS is a born again British nationalist and Brexiter, so that is going to be tricky.
Forbes is right of Sunak let alone Starmer, the SNP will tear itself apart on that basis if she wins
How is she right of them? She's been in a key SNP ministry for years and that is well to the left of both of them by any standard.
Forbes is right of almost every politician bar JRM and Ann Widdecombe on social issues, let alone Starmer. Anti homosexual marriage, anti abortion, even anti women priests.
She backs lower tax and a smaller state too. I haven't seen her oppose Trident either
It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.
"Tartan Tory"....
You are forgetting that Labour is actually a right-wing party - and even more so if it is not to lose in England. SKS is a born again British nationalist and Brexiter, so that is going to be tricky.
I think trying to argue that Keir Starmer, Angela Rayner, et al, are to the right of Kate Forbes would be a task that would defeat even Murray Foote.
You're looking at it from a London perspective.
It's the overall approach that counts. Trident, Brexit, and refusing referenda (after originally saying it was a decent thing to do) are pretty right wing in a Scottish context.
Also - the Greens in Scotland will take up the more leftie vote, which English Labour don't have to worry about.
Sorry, don't buy it. I think like the rest of the UK, people in Scotland think where you end up on the left-right axis is determined primarily by your social and economic views. For instance, nobody, whether they live in Scotland or England thinks Mick Lynch is right wing even though he is a Brexiteer. I guess we'll see, but if Forbes becomes FM and pollsters ask voters to place her on the left-right axis they will position her to the right of SKS, Sarwar, Reeves etc.
Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.
That's pretty pathetic actually.
Is it, given his past favourability ratings?
I think people are naturally rallying round. The significant thing though is the enduring popularity of William and Kate. The monarchy seems utterly secure for the foreseeable.
That’s certainly how I interpret public opinion.
William and Kate will be very popular once they, eventually, accede to the throne.
On topic. Charles is always going to suffer by comparison because "Well, he's not the Queen, is he?"
It's likely William will get a boost because "Well, he's not King Charles, is he?"
I feel like Charles needs to find 'his thing'. Personally, along with @Leon, I feel the public is most aligned with Charles on architecture, so maybe he should be found a way get stuck into that somehow.
He's already 74. His mum had had half a century in the role by this point. Getting "his thing" has maybe 20 years still as King, but at that age, does he have the energy? Dunno.
His great-great-great grandfather Edward VI had virtually the identical challenge.
Which HE met partly in the field of fashion, as in "Edwardian" in contrast to "Victorian" in many ways beyond dress sense.
But most significantly in the (to coin a phrase) realm of diplomacy. As in EdVII's role in the creation of the Entente Cordiale.
Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.
That's pretty pathetic actually.
Is it, given his past favourability ratings?
I think people are naturally rallying round. The significant thing though is the enduring popularity of William and Kate. The monarchy seems utterly secure for the foreseeable.
That’s certainly how I interpret public opinion.
William and Kate will be very popular once they, eventually, accede to the throne.
That could be in 20 years time, mind.
Unless Charles turns out to be an incredibly unpopular King the monarchy will last till then. Out of the two main parties, only Labour might abolish the monarchy and - a bit like its position on Brexit right now - won't do so if they think it will lose them votes.
Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.
That's pretty pathetic actually.
Is it, given his past favourability ratings?
I think people are naturally rallying round. The significant thing though is the enduring popularity of William and Kate. The monarchy seems utterly secure for the foreseeable.
That’s certainly how I interpret public opinion.
William and Kate will be very popular once they, eventually, accede to the throne.
That could be in 20 years time, mind.
Unless Charles turns out to be an incredibly unpopular King the monarchy will last till then. Out of the two main parties, only Labour might abolish the monarchy and - a bit like its position on Brexit right now - won't do so if they think it will lose them votes.
Charles may abdicate in 10 years and retire to Highgrove and hand over to Camilla like the monarchs of Japan, the Netherlands and Spain have abdicated by their late 80s and handed over to their younger sons.
Even Labour voters want to keep the monarchy by 50% to 36%
Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.
That's pretty pathetic actually.
Is it, given his past favourability ratings?
I think people are naturally rallying round. The significant thing though is the enduring popularity of William and Kate. The monarchy seems utterly secure for the foreseeable.
That’s certainly how I interpret public opinion.
William and Kate will be very popular once they, eventually, accede to the throne.
That could be in 20 years time, mind.
Prince & Princess of Wales today, are in the same boat (but NOT yacht!) as their predecessors, namely the future King George V and Queen Mary.
Who of course proved to be very popular. AND who together established most of standards and expectations for the British monarchy that endure and persist into the dawn of the 3rd millennium.
Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.
That's pretty pathetic actually.
Is it, given his past favourability ratings?
I think people are naturally rallying round. The significant thing though is the enduring popularity of William and Kate. The monarchy seems utterly secure for the foreseeable.
That’s certainly how I interpret public opinion.
William and Kate will be very popular once they, eventually, accede to the throne.
That could be in 20 years time, mind.
Unless Charles turns out to be an incredibly unpopular King the monarchy will last till then. Out of the two main parties, only Labour might abolish the monarchy and - a bit like its position on Brexit right now - won't do so if they think it will lose them votes.
Charles may abdicate in 10 years and retire to Highgrove and hand over to Camilla like the monarchs of Japan, the Netherlands and Spain have abdicated by their late 80s and handed over to their younger sons.
Even Labour voters want to keep the monarchy by 50% to 36%
@iamliamkelly EXCL: BBC chairman Richard Sharp helped a friend — at whose wedding he was an usher — get a £1,000/day paid role advising the corporation on standards
Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.
That's pretty pathetic actually.
Is it, given his past favourability ratings?
I think people are naturally rallying round. The significant thing though is the enduring popularity of William and Kate. The monarchy seems utterly secure for the foreseeable.
That’s certainly how I interpret public opinion.
William and Kate will be very popular once they, eventually, accede to the throne.
That could be in 20 years time, mind.
Unless Charles turns out to be an incredibly unpopular King the monarchy will last till then. Out of the two main parties, only Labour might abolish the monarchy and - a bit like its position on Brexit right now - won't do so if they think it will lose them votes.
And to what end?
Few want to ditch the monarchy, and end almost 1,500 years of history and tradition, for the chance to choose another elected politician every four years and lose something that makes Britain distinctive and unique at the same time.
@iamliamkelly EXCL: BBC chairman Richard Sharp helped a friend — at whose wedding he was an usher — get a £1,000/day paid role advising the corporation on standards
Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.
That's pretty pathetic actually.
Is it, given his past favourability ratings?
I think people are naturally rallying round. The significant thing though is the enduring popularity of William and Kate. The monarchy seems utterly secure for the foreseeable.
That’s certainly how I interpret public opinion.
William and Kate will be very popular once they, eventually, accede to the throne.
That could be in 20 years time, mind.
Unless Charles turns out to be an incredibly unpopular King the monarchy will last till then. Out of the two main parties, only Labour might abolish the monarchy and - a bit like its position on Brexit right now - won't do so if they think it will lose them votes.
Charles may abdicate in 10 years and retire to Highgrove and hand over to Camilla like the monarchs of Japan, the Netherlands and Spain have abdicated by their late 80s and handed over to their younger sons.
Even Labour voters want to keep the monarchy by 50% to 36%
Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.
That's pretty pathetic actually.
Is it, given his past favourability ratings?
I think people are naturally rallying round. The significant thing though is the enduring popularity of William and Kate. The monarchy seems utterly secure for the foreseeable.
That’s certainly how I interpret public opinion.
William and Kate will be very popular once they, eventually, accede to the throne.
That could be in 20 years time, mind.
Unless Charles turns out to be an incredibly unpopular King the monarchy will last till then. Out of the two main parties, only Labour might abolish the monarchy and - a bit like its position on Brexit right now - won't do so if they think it will lose them votes.
And to what end?
Few want to ditch the monarchy, and end almost 1,500 years of history and tradition, for the chance to choose another elected politician every four years and lose something that makes Britain distinctive and unique at the same time.
Not going to happen.
Any descendents of Cromwell about to vote for? Even as a monarchist I'm a fan.
I'm going to be away for the Coronation; I've got three weeks off work, starting the last week of April
I'm seriously considering a big walk in Brittany - visiting the sites of the seven founder Saints (all from Wales and Cornwall)
It's a 350 mile trek, just to visit the seven places, not taking into account detours to see other interesting things on the way
I think I should go for it
The legend says that if you don't do this walk in your lifetime, you have to do it in the afterlife. But you can only walk one coffin length every seven years in the afterlife
Good to see you back AND planning a truly exciting endeavor. Esp. interested to see your proposed route includes & highlights Mont St. Michel.
Of which I happen to have a very nice, exterior-only model.
I definitely want to see Mont St Michel; if it weren't on the route I would have detoured
I'm planning to stick with my own coined rhyming idiomatic French hiking motto - "Je marche partout et je bois comme un trou" (I walk everywhere and I drink like a hole)
But will certainly extend my drinking from beer and wine (probably mostly Muscadet) to include Cidre, Chouchen and Lambig
Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.
That's pretty pathetic actually.
Is it, given his past favourability ratings?
I think people are naturally rallying round. The significant thing though is the enduring popularity of William and Kate. The monarchy seems utterly secure for the foreseeable.
That’s certainly how I interpret public opinion.
William and Kate will be very popular once they, eventually, accede to the throne.
That could be in 20 years time, mind.
Unless Charles turns out to be an incredibly unpopular King the monarchy will last till then. Out of the two main parties, only Labour might abolish the monarchy and - a bit like its position on Brexit right now - won't do so if they think it will lose them votes.
Charles may abdicate in 10 years and retire to Highgrove and hand over to Camilla like the monarchs of Japan, the Netherlands and Spain have abdicated by their late 80s and handed over to their younger sons.
Even Labour voters want to keep the monarchy by 50% to 36%
Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.
That's pretty pathetic actually.
Is it, given his past favourability ratings?
I think people are naturally rallying round. The significant thing though is the enduring popularity of William and Kate. The monarchy seems utterly secure for the foreseeable.
That’s certainly how I interpret public opinion.
William and Kate will be very popular once they, eventually, accede to the throne.
That could be in 20 years time, mind.
Unless Charles turns out to be an incredibly unpopular King the monarchy will last till then. Out of the two main parties, only Labour might abolish the monarchy and - a bit like its position on Brexit right now - won't do so if they think it will lose them votes.
Charles may abdicate in 10 years and retire to Highgrove and hand over to Camilla like the monarchs of Japan, the Netherlands and Spain have abdicated by their late 80s and handed over to their younger sons.
Even Labour voters want to keep the monarchy by 50% to 36%
Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.
That's pretty pathetic actually.
Is it, given his past favourability ratings?
I think people are naturally rallying round. The significant thing though is the enduring popularity of William and Kate. The monarchy seems utterly secure for the foreseeable.
That’s certainly how I interpret public opinion.
William and Kate will be very popular once they, eventually, accede to the throne.
That could be in 20 years time, mind.
Unless Charles turns out to be an incredibly unpopular King the monarchy will last till then. Out of the two main parties, only Labour might abolish the monarchy and - a bit like its position on Brexit right now - won't do so if they think it will lose them votes.
The possibility that a party capable of winning an election will stand on a ticket of either abolishing the monarchy or even holding a referendum on it does not arise in any foreseeable way.
No such party has even stood on a disestablishment ticket, which would be far less controversial.
Unnecessary policies which may lose elections don't happen. Except if you are T May in 2017.
@iamliamkelly EXCL: BBC chairman Richard Sharp helped a friend — at whose wedding he was an usher — get a £1,000/day paid role advising the corporation on standards
Comments
(For example, 1990 was about the Poll Tax and Thatcher's decent into divaish madness. So Major was the right guy to pick because he solved both problems but left everything else broadly unchanged.)
That's pretty pathetic actually.
I'm going to be away for the Coronation; I've got three weeks off work, starting the last week of April
I'm seriously considering a big walk in Brittany - visiting the sites of the seven founder Saints (all from Wales and Cornwall)
It's a 350 mile trek, just to visit the seven places, not taking into account detours to see other interesting things on the way
I think I should go for it
The legend says that if you don't do this walk in your lifetime, you have to do it in the afterlife. But you can only walk one coffin length every seven years in the afterlife
Republic Cymru will simply ask Llafor to nominate someone.
mandy rhodes@holyroodmandy
That must have been an uncomfortable morning in the Sturgeon/Murrell kitchen as the SNP CEO pushed his resignation letter across the breakfast bar to his boss!
https://twitter.com/holyroodmandy/status/1637065596725612566
Now that REALLY is PATHETIC!!!!!!!!
https://news.sky.com/story/snp-leadership-scottish-independence-support-at-just-39-poll-says-12832783
You are the sage of PB on all matters SNP
So yes I certainly prefer our monarchy to that rubbish, as do other nations with constitutional monarchies from Denmark to Spain, the Netherlands to Jordan and New Zealand to Canada and Japan to Norway
What will Tory MPs do ?
Failing to vote for sanctions if Johnson is found guilty would be a gift for the opposition.
I should know, I'm a Welshman.
Going to back the Dutch shunt to win tomorrow though.
The fact we still have a few republican whingers who dislike the monarchy is largely irrelevant as they have little more support than the LDs got in 2010
Ref might as well be wearing a green shirt.
TBF, I think we will all be rooting for them tomorrow!
Translation: "I know this is bullshit just as much as you do, but I have no option if I ever want to referee again".
It's the overall approach that counts. Trident, Brexit, and refusing referenda (after originally saying it was a decent thing to do) are pretty right wing in a Scottish context.
Also - the Greens in Scotland will take up the more leftie vote, which English Labour don't have to worry about.
I know you vote Plaid.
I'm rather happier than him!
He seems to have already forgotten that he won over seven grand on the PlacePot at Cheltenham on Thursday (from a £16 bet - 32 lines x 50p)
You wonder what he'd do with an Alpine...
alexmassie@alexmassie·58m
No real need to flee a ship that isn’t sinking because it’s never been afloat.
https://twitter.com/alexmassie/status/1637136443179950082
The Herald - "THE chief financial officer of Ferguson Marine who is engulfed in a row over £87,000 in bonus payments to managers has left the nationalised shipyard."
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/homenews/23395607.ferguson-marine-finance-chief-embroiled-bonus-payments-row-quits/
The ramp being Appalachian equivalent/substitute, for example world-famous Ramp Festival of Richwood, West Virginia, one of a number held across the region.
One one notorious occasion, the editor of the local "West Virginia Hillbilly" (an equally notorious character) printed an edition of the paper with ramp-scented ink. And when the initial print run didn't seem sufficiently "fragrant" added more of essence of ramp.
As the ink dried, the odor increased expotentially. Resulting in several postal employee (are you getting this, Blanche?) in a railroad mail car, being overcome by the fumes. Was with some difficulty that the paper was able to retain it's postal privileges.
They say when he colonised Armorica he had all of the men killed, to be replaced by his soldiers
He then had his men cut out all the women's tongues so they couldn't tell anyone what had happened
Not much point watching the rest of the game now. Well done to Ireland for winning the Grand Slam; just a shame I was denied 40 minutes of entertainment. I shall set about some Dadmin instead.
I hope Welsh Labour are watching closely*, realising the dangers of being in power for too long with minimal accountability.
*Yes I know they won't be.
Of which I happen to have a very nice, exterior-only model.
An entertaining qualifying session.
Ol Deuteronomy's lived many lives
No, I am tempted to say ninety-nine
And her numerous progeny prospers and thrives
And the village is proud of her in her decline
Until recently I’d argue that was true
I suspect many are similar to me.
She backs lower tax and a smaller state too. I haven't seen her oppose Trident either
I guess we'll see, but if Forbes becomes FM and pollsters ask voters to place her on the left-right axis they will position her to the right of SKS, Sarwar, Reeves etc.
That could be in 20 years time, mind.
Which HE met partly in the field of fashion, as in "Edwardian" in contrast to "Victorian" in many ways beyond dress sense.
But most significantly in the (to coin a phrase) realm of diplomacy. As in EdVII's role in the creation of the Entente Cordiale.
Even Labour voters want to keep the monarchy by 50% to 36%
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/leosln75nr/Internal_Royals_230111.pdf
Who of course proved to be very popular. AND who together established most of standards and expectations for the British monarchy that endure and persist into the dawn of the 3rd millennium.
EXCL: BBC chairman Richard Sharp helped a friend — at whose wedding he was an usher — get a £1,000/day paid role advising the corporation on standards
Story with the peerless @RosamundUrwin @HarryYorke1
https://twitter.com/iamliamkelly/status/1637155992143101954
Few want to ditch the monarchy, and end almost 1,500 years of history and tradition, for the chance to choose another elected politician every four years and lose something that makes Britain distinctive and unique at the same time.
Not going to happen.
Betting PostF1: If you followed my Perez to win each way tip at 7, I'd advocate laying at around 2.44-2.5 on Betfair.
I'll include this in the pre-race ramble to be posted tomorrow morning.
Maybe we could try for a BBC Chair who is not in the business of professional backhanders though.
He doesn't feel duty in the same way she did, but does feel hard done by in general.
I'm planning to stick with my own coined rhyming idiomatic French hiking motto - "Je marche partout et je bois comme un trou" (I walk everywhere and I drink like a hole)
But will certainly extend my drinking from beer and wine (probably mostly Muscadet) to include Cidre, Chouchen and Lambig
No such party has even stood on a disestablishment ticket, which would be far less controversial.
Unnecessary policies which may lose elections don't happen. Except if you are T May in 2017.
This is why the monarchy will remain.
I'm shocked. Shocked, I tell you,