Howdy, Stranger!

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

The Boris numbers in these comparisons with Rishi and Keir should be worrying for the Tories – polit

12345679»

Comments

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,774
    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:
    It isn't, it had 17 million viewers in the US, the superbowl had over 90 million. It is going down a storm with a few elitist coastal liberals, Middle America could not care less and Trump and his voters are openly hostile to the Sussexes
    Does Arizona count as "coastal liberals"?

    I've been asked more times about our Royal Family than at any time in the last 20 years.

    Don't worry fellow PBers, I explained that the whole thing was discrimination against gingers, and was nothing to do with race at all.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    edited March 2021
    Andy_JS said:

    In case you missed it, Barbados is supposed to become a republic later this year.

    Is it a done deal?
    Presumably. It seems to be a bit like Jamaica in that there's widespread agreement to do it, yet it keeps getting put off for some reason.

    The wiki page on Barbados says there was a Commission recommended becoming a republic in 1998, and the Labour Party there proposed that it receive 'early attention o fthe government' and introduced a bill in 2000. Then a referendum was plannedn in 2008, and the page is somewhat confusing on why this did not happen. Then in 2015 the PM of the Democratic Labour Party (not the same party) said they would move to a republic in 'the very near future', expected to coincide with 50th anniversary of independence in 2016, and that there was the 2/3 majority in parliament to do it in the senate, but not lower house (though since the Labour party were the opposition and back such a thing, not sure why it didn't happen). Now the Labour Party are proposing it again, and have a 2/3 in both houses to do it.

    So it will probably happen, and even though it'll be because it's been in the works for decades, I bet anything people make a connection with Harry and Megan's damaging reveleations.
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,960
    RobD said:

    Hopefully Mordaunt is re-promoted.
    Tracey Crouch back would be nice, too.
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:
    It isn't, it had 17 million viewers in the US, the superbowl had over 90 million. It is going down a storm with a few elitist coastal liberals, Middle America could not care less and Trump and his voters are openly hostile to the Sussexes
    You are seriously underestimating US viewership, as 17m was just audience for last night's TV broadcast, thus does NOT count internet, youtube, etc., etc. over the next days & weeks.

    And the pro-Meghan lobby is NOT just "a few elitist coastal liberals" because in fact large swaths of Middle America DO care, at least somewhat, and NOT all of them are Putinists, far from it. \

    Especially younger Americans and woman who are more likely to give a hoot about the whole business in the first place.

    So essentially repeat of the Lady Di experience (pre-crash) on this side of the Atlantic (and Pacific).

    Lady Di was popular across the partisan divide, Meghan isn't.

    The polling is clear, on both sides of the Atlantic if you are on the conservative right you dislike the Sussexes, if you are on the liberal left you like them.

    63% of UK Conservative voters sympathise more with the Royal Family and only 6% with the Sussexes, 23% of US Republican voters sympathise more with the Royal family and 17% more with the Sussexes.

    By contrast 36% of UK Labour voters sympathise more with the Sussexes and 18% with the Royal family, 44% of US Democratic party voters sympathise more with the Sussexes and only 10% more with the Royal family.

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2021/03/04/d9d4d/1

    https://today.yougov.com/topics/international/survey-results/daily/2021/03/05/d38f6/1
    Do you work for the Royal Family? It's weird how you refer to them, I know so little about the Royal Family I confess I had to Google Sussexes to realise who you were talking about
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072
    HYUFD said:

    23% of US Republican voters sympathise more with the Royal family

    23%? Big if true.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    edited March 2021
    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:
    It isn't, it had 17 million viewers in the US, the superbowl had over 90 million. It is going down a storm with a few elitist coastal liberals, Middle America could not care less and Trump and his voters are openly hostile to the Sussexes
    Does Arizona count as "coastal liberals"?

    I've been asked more times about our Royal Family than at any time in the last 20 years.

    Don't worry fellow PBers, I explained that the whole thing was discrimination against gingers, and was nothing to do with race at all.
    Coastal liberal is a state of mind, not geography. Like metropolitan liberals in the country.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,286

    Andy_JS said:

    In case you missed it, Barbados is supposed to become a republic later this year.

    Is it a done deal?
    Wiki quotes this source from last year:

    https://eu.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/celebrities/2020/09/16/queen-elizabeth-removed-barbados-head-state-barbados-says/5814409002/
    Strange because Jamaica was expected to be the first Caribbean country to become a republic.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:
    It isn't, it had 17 million viewers in the US, the superbowl had over 90 million. It is going down a storm with a few elitist coastal liberals, Middle America could not care less and Trump and his voters are openly hostile to the Sussexes
    You are seriously underestimating US viewership, as 17m was just audience for last night's TV broadcast, thus does NOT count internet, youtube, etc., etc. over the next days & weeks.

    And the pro-Meghan lobby is NOT just "a few elitist coastal liberals" because in fact large swaths of Middle America DO care, at least somewhat, and NOT all of them are Putinists, far from it. \

    Especially younger Americans and woman who are more likely to give a hoot about the whole business in the first place.

    So essentially repeat of the Lady Di experience (pre-crash) on this side of the Atlantic (and Pacific).

    Lady Di was popular across the partisan divide, Meghan isn't.

    The polling is clear, on both sides of the Atlantic if you are on the conservative right you dislike the Sussexes, if you are on the liberal left you like them.

    63% of UK Conservative voters sympathise more with the Royal Family and only 6% with the Sussexes, 23% of US Republican voters sympathise more with the Royal family and 17% more with the Sussexes.

    By contrast 36% of UK Labour voters sympathise more with the Sussexes and 18% with the Royal family, 44% of US Democratic party voters sympathise more with the Sussexes and only 10% more with the Royal family.

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2021/03/04/d9d4d/1

    https://today.yougov.com/topics/international/survey-results/daily/2021/03/05/d38f6/1
    Do you work for the Royal Family? It's weird how you refer to them, I know so little about the Royal Family I confess I had to Google Sussexes to realise who you were talking about
    Meghan is quite often referred to as Duchess of Sussex in the media, so that is quite surprising.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,243

    In case you missed it, Barbados is supposed to become a republic later this year.

    No doubt a Fenian plot!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    edited March 2021
    Leon said:

    The white shirt and sunglasses one is almost beyond belief, and the Wallis Simpson dress?!

    It's all on a new, meta-level.

    Talking of new levels, if someone was REALLY pissed at Harry over this, it is quite obvious what rumour they could verify. It would be devastating. This could all get quite explosive.
    That rumour if it is what I think it is certainly would be devastating for Harry if the cover up of it is confirmed and by association his wife, they are no longer of use to the royals and in fact openly hostile to them as of this evening
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 8,480
    edited March 2021
    Andy_JS said:

    Brendan O'Neill:

    "The Oprah chat came wrapped in blather about Meghan telling ‘her truth’. In reality this was a coronation of two leading members of the neo-aristocracy. Harry and Meghan have successfully positioned themselves as key figureheads of the new feudalism in which cultural power resides in the hands of small numbers of very wealthy people around Silicon Valley and Hollywood, and in which the little people’s role is to receive moral instruction from the likes of Facebook, Netflix, Oprah, Harry, Meghan… That’s the great irony of Harry and Meghan juxtaposing themselves to the monarchy, and being witlessly cheered on by the left for doing so: these two behave in a far more old-world monarchical fashion than the queen does."

    https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/03/08/the-unbearable-victim-complex-of-meghan-markle/

    Brendan O'Neill and Spiked are the literal personification of the British end of the culture war, having completed their bizarre journey from orthodox Marxism to extreme cultural reaction, so this black-and-white point of view is certain to be taken up by the American culture battlers too. I can see the social media clicks and advertising revenue in my mind's eye already.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,281
    Leon said:

    The white shirt and sunglasses one is almost beyond belief, and the Wallis Simpson dress?!

    It's all on a new, meta-level.

    Talking of new levels, if someone was REALLY pissed at Harry over this, it is quite obvious what rumour they could verify. It would be devastating. This could all get quite explosive.
    'They' could only verify it if it were true. I suspect it is not.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 46,268
    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:
    It isn't, it had 17 million viewers in the US, the superbowl had over 90 million. It is going down a storm with a few elitist coastal liberals, Middle America could not care less and Trump and his voters are openly hostile to the Sussexes
    Does Arizona count as "coastal liberals"?

    I've been asked more times about our Royal Family than at any time in the last 20 years.

    Don't worry fellow PBers, I explained that the whole thing was discrimination against gingers, and was nothing to do with race at all.
    Have you moved to Arizona, or just visiting?
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,243
    Andy_JS said:

    Brendan O'Neill:

    "The Oprah chat came wrapped in blather about Meghan telling ‘her truth’. In reality this was a coronation of two leading members of the neo-aristocracy. Harry and Meghan have successfully positioned themselves as key figureheads of the new feudalism in which cultural power resides in the hands of small numbers of very wealthy people around Silicon Valley and Hollywood, and in which the little people’s role is to receive moral instruction from the likes of Facebook, Netflix, Oprah, Harry, Meghan… That’s the great irony of Harry and Meghan juxtaposing themselves to the monarchy, and being witlessly cheered on by the left for doing so: these two behave in a far more old-world monarchical fashion than the queen does."

    https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/03/08/the-unbearable-victim-complex-of-meghan-markle/

    Perhaps PBers will share this with their pro-H&M offspring, and report the feedback?
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 3,336

    kle4 said:

    Isn't Canada a Dominion?

    Not since 1986, it's a Commonwealth Realm now. Along with Oz, NZ, PNG, Jamaica, etc.
    Ah, the good people of etcetera. Loyal, diverse and useful.
    Etc is another name for Wales right?
    Very humerous, boyo.
  • RobD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:
    It isn't, it had 17 million viewers in the US, the superbowl had over 90 million. It is going down a storm with a few elitist coastal liberals, Middle America could not care less and Trump and his voters are openly hostile to the Sussexes
    You are seriously underestimating US viewership, as 17m was just audience for last night's TV broadcast, thus does NOT count internet, youtube, etc., etc. over the next days & weeks.

    And the pro-Meghan lobby is NOT just "a few elitist coastal liberals" because in fact large swaths of Middle America DO care, at least somewhat, and NOT all of them are Putinists, far from it. \

    Especially younger Americans and woman who are more likely to give a hoot about the whole business in the first place.

    So essentially repeat of the Lady Di experience (pre-crash) on this side of the Atlantic (and Pacific).

    Lady Di was popular across the partisan divide, Meghan isn't.

    The polling is clear, on both sides of the Atlantic if you are on the conservative right you dislike the Sussexes, if you are on the liberal left you like them.

    63% of UK Conservative voters sympathise more with the Royal Family and only 6% with the Sussexes, 23% of US Republican voters sympathise more with the Royal family and 17% more with the Sussexes.

    By contrast 36% of UK Labour voters sympathise more with the Sussexes and 18% with the Royal family, 44% of US Democratic party voters sympathise more with the Sussexes and only 10% more with the Royal family.

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2021/03/04/d9d4d/1

    https://today.yougov.com/topics/international/survey-results/daily/2021/03/05/d38f6/1
    Do you work for the Royal Family? It's weird how you refer to them, I know so little about the Royal Family I confess I had to Google Sussexes to realise who you were talking about
    Meghan is quite often referred to as Duchess of Sussex in the media, so that is quite surprising.
    Believe it or not, it is possible to avoid the Royal Family entirely, I am being genuinely honest I didn't know that's who he was talking about
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789

    On the subject of monarchies vs republics, I have a feeling there could be another major constitutional crisis in France within the next few years.

    Why?
    A mixture of the laïcité debate, the failure of Macron's presidency and the normalisation of the far right.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,032

    On the subject of monarchies vs republics, I have a feeling there could be another major constitutional crisis in France within the next few years.

    You mean, a restoration of the monarchy?

    Serious longshot mate, although I'd dig it.

    I'm married to a Bulgarian monarchist.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 3,336
    RobD said:

    Hopefully Mordaunt is re-promoted.
    I'm sure she is still around, that's what Mordant means isn't it?, a fixer?
  • I've already got more involved than I ever wanted to, good night
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789

    On the subject of monarchies vs republics, I have a feeling there could be another major constitutional crisis in France within the next few years.

    You mean, a restoration of the monarchy?

    Serious longshot mate, although I'd dig it.

    I'm married to a Bulgarian monarchist.
    I don't think there's any chance of a restoration of the monarchy, but the collapse of the Fifth Republic is possible.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 5,997
    Endillion said:

    RobD said:

    Hopefully Mordaunt is re-promoted.
    Tracey Crouch back would be nice, too.
    Lady (Ruth) Davidson?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,047
    Leon said:

    The white shirt and sunglasses one is almost beyond belief, and the Wallis Simpson dress?!

    It's all on a new, meta-level.

    Talking of new levels, if someone was REALLY pissed at Harry over this, it is quite obvious what rumour they could verify. It would be devastating. This could all get quite explosive.
    I actually don't believe that one - at least I do see it, but facially he very much resembles Charles at times. And of course Earl Spencer is ginger so it's in the genes.

    Nose and way of scrunching face up here: https://www.cheatsheet.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Prince-William-Prince-Charles-and-Prince-Harry-on-vacation-640x407.jpg

    Eyes nose and mouth it seems very apparent to me.
    https://www.celebdirtylaundry.com/wp-content/uploads/royals-4.jpg
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    edited March 2021
    .

    RobD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:
    It isn't, it had 17 million viewers in the US, the superbowl had over 90 million. It is going down a storm with a few elitist coastal liberals, Middle America could not care less and Trump and his voters are openly hostile to the Sussexes
    You are seriously underestimating US viewership, as 17m was just audience for last night's TV broadcast, thus does NOT count internet, youtube, etc., etc. over the next days & weeks.

    And the pro-Meghan lobby is NOT just "a few elitist coastal liberals" because in fact large swaths of Middle America DO care, at least somewhat, and NOT all of them are Putinists, far from it. \

    Especially younger Americans and woman who are more likely to give a hoot about the whole business in the first place.

    So essentially repeat of the Lady Di experience (pre-crash) on this side of the Atlantic (and Pacific).

    Lady Di was popular across the partisan divide, Meghan isn't.

    The polling is clear, on both sides of the Atlantic if you are on the conservative right you dislike the Sussexes, if you are on the liberal left you like them.

    63% of UK Conservative voters sympathise more with the Royal Family and only 6% with the Sussexes, 23% of US Republican voters sympathise more with the Royal family and 17% more with the Sussexes.

    By contrast 36% of UK Labour voters sympathise more with the Sussexes and 18% with the Royal family, 44% of US Democratic party voters sympathise more with the Sussexes and only 10% more with the Royal family.

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2021/03/04/d9d4d/1

    https://today.yougov.com/topics/international/survey-results/daily/2021/03/05/d38f6/1
    Do you work for the Royal Family? It's weird how you refer to them, I know so little about the Royal Family I confess I had to Google Sussexes to realise who you were talking about
    Meghan is quite often referred to as Duchess of Sussex in the media, so that is quite surprising.
    Believe it or not, it is possible to avoid the Royal Family entirely, I am being genuinely honest I didn't know that's who he was talking about
    My point is it isn't at all weird how he is referring to them. If you haven't seen any of the countless articles in the past few years about the Duchess of Susses that's on you.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851
    Leon said:

    The white shirt and sunglasses one is almost beyond belief, and the Wallis Simpson dress?!

    It's all on a new, meta-level.

    Talking of new levels, if someone was REALLY pissed at Harry over this, it is quite obvious what rumour they could verify. It would be devastating. This could all get quite explosive.
    It's an utterly ridiculous juxta that only the dimmest could read anything into. I'm starting to think you are terminally dim despite the catchy prose style.

    White shirt and sunglasses. lol.

    The Ian Wright = Oprah Winfrey was a triumph of perception by comparison.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,072
    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    The white shirt and sunglasses one is almost beyond belief, and the Wallis Simpson dress?!

    It's all on a new, meta-level.

    Talking of new levels, if someone was REALLY pissed at Harry over this, it is quite obvious what rumour they could verify. It would be devastating. This could all get quite explosive.
    That rumour if it is what I think it is certainly would be devastating for Harry if the cover up of it is confirmed and by association his wife, they are no longer of use to the royals and in fact openly hostile to them as of this evening
    It wouldn't matter. Harry is famous in America because of his mum and the identity (or not) of his dad is not really relevant in the grand scheme of things.
  • Time_to_LeaveTime_to_Leave Posts: 2,547

    On the subject of monarchies vs republics, I have a feeling there could be another major constitutional crisis in France within the next few years.

    You mean, a restoration of the monarchy?

    Serious longshot mate, although I'd dig it.

    I'm married to a Bulgarian monarchist.
    I don't think there's any chance of a restoration of the monarchy, but the collapse of the Fifth Republic is possible.
    Any chance we can take back Normandy and Calais in the chaos?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    Andy_JS said:

    Andy_JS said:

    In case you missed it, Barbados is supposed to become a republic later this year.

    Is it a done deal?
    Wiki quotes this source from last year:

    https://eu.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/celebrities/2020/09/16/queen-elizabeth-removed-barbados-head-state-barbados-says/5814409002/
    Strange because Jamaica was expected to be the first Caribbean country to become a republic.
    Again, wikipedia, but it quotes polls as saying 55% want the country to be a republic, which is honestly not as much as I'd have assumed, though no doubt is 2-3 times the number who positively say keep the monarchy. It says in 2007 the winning PM said it would amend the constitution to replace the Queen, but didn't. The new PM for a different party in 2011 affirmed the commitment but lost in 2016 without having done it, and her successor also said they would introduce a bill to do it, but hadn't done so by the election in 2020, where the government says it 'remains a goal, but has not proposed a timeline for one'.

    So I think they are waiting for Her Majesty to die, though Barbados being first might presumably prompt them to make a move again.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,243

    Leon said:

    The white shirt and sunglasses one is almost beyond belief, and the Wallis Simpson dress?!

    It's all on a new, meta-level.

    Talking of new levels, if someone was REALLY pissed at Harry over this, it is quite obvious what rumour they could verify. It would be devastating. This could all get quite explosive.
    I actually don't believe that one - at least I do see it, but facially he very much resembles Charles at times. And of course Earl Spencer is ginger so it's in the genes.

    Nose and way of scrunching face up here: https://www.cheatsheet.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Prince-William-Prince-Charles-and-Prince-Harry-on-vacation-640x407.jpg

    Eyes nose and mouth it seems very apparent to me.
    https://www.celebdirtylaundry.com/wp-content/uploads/royals-4.jpg
    Keep getting this image in my head, of Charles, Harry & etc. (not Wales in this context) live on the "Marty Povich" show, waiting for the paternity test results . . .
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,922

    On the subject of monarchies vs republics, I have a feeling there could be another major constitutional crisis in France within the next few years.

    Queen Marine?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    kle4 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Andy_JS said:

    In case you missed it, Barbados is supposed to become a republic later this year.

    Is it a done deal?
    Wiki quotes this source from last year:

    https://eu.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/celebrities/2020/09/16/queen-elizabeth-removed-barbados-head-state-barbados-says/5814409002/
    Strange because Jamaica was expected to be the first Caribbean country to become a republic.
    Again, wikipedia, but it quotes polls as saying 55% want the country to be a republic, which is honestly not as much as I'd have assumed, though no doubt is 2-3 times the number who positively say keep the monarchy. It says in 2007 the winning PM said it would amend the constitution to replace the Queen, but didn't. The new PM for a different party in 2011 affirmed the commitment but lost in 2016 without having done it, and her successor also said they would introduce a bill to do it, but hadn't done so by the election in 2020, where the government says it 'remains a goal, but has not proposed a timeline for one'.

    So I think they are waiting for Her Majesty to die, though Barbados being first might presumably prompt them to make a move again.
    That is slightly ridiculous, umpteen nations became republics in the Queen's reign
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851

    Leon said:

    The white shirt and sunglasses one is almost beyond belief, and the Wallis Simpson dress?!

    It's all on a new, meta-level.

    Talking of new levels, if someone was REALLY pissed at Harry over this, it is quite obvious what rumour they could verify. It would be devastating. This could all get quite explosive.
    I actually don't believe that one - at least I do see it, but facially he very much resembles Charles at times. And of course Earl Spencer is ginger so it's in the genes.

    Nose and way of scrunching face up here: https://www.cheatsheet.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Prince-William-Prince-Charles-and-Prince-Harry-on-vacation-640x407.jpg

    Eyes nose and mouth it seems very apparent to me.
    https://www.celebdirtylaundry.com/wp-content/uploads/royals-4.jpg
    I do wonder about that particular rumour. OTOH it seems possible. BOTOH would it not have come out by now if it were true?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 46,268
    edited March 2021

    Leon said:

    The white shirt and sunglasses one is almost beyond belief, and the Wallis Simpson dress?!

    It's all on a new, meta-level.

    Talking of new levels, if someone was REALLY pissed at Harry over this, it is quite obvious what rumour they could verify. It would be devastating. This could all get quite explosive.
    'They' could only verify it if it were true. I suspect it is not.
    The reasoning behind doubting it - the dates don't fit - is not necessarily sound. I have heard from some quite authoritative people who believe the rumour might be true.

    I have no idea myself. But that rumour is definitely part of this toxic mix, it apparently caused great distress when Diana was alive, to her and to Harry
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,032

    Oprah just described Canada as a commonwealth of Britain.

    She obviously hasn't heard of the 1931 Statute of Westminster.

    She really said that?! This must be going out in Canada. Ouch.
    "Commonwealth of Britain" is to "British Commonwealth" as "Colored People" is to "People of Color"

    Canadians will know, that dinging an American for such a faux pas, is as ridiculous a criticizing a Brit for ignorance of the infield fly rule.
    Nah, loads of yanks think that Britain still rules Canada at some level because the Queen is on the money, there are statues and pictures everywhere, and she's still Queen there too.

    They don't understand.
    Well, the Queen's viceroy in Ottawa COULD tell the Prime Minister to take a hike, under certain circumstances. And has (just) within living memory.
    The Governor-General sounds impressive but is effectively now appointed on the advice of the Canadian PM and is always a Canadian.

    Of course, I wouldn't necessarily *object* to a bit of governing myself, should duty call, and my VMs are open.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,922

    On the subject of monarchies vs republics, I have a feeling there could be another major constitutional crisis in France within the next few years.

    You mean, a restoration of the monarchy?

    Serious longshot mate, although I'd dig it.

    I'm married to a Bulgarian monarchist.
    I don't think there's any chance of a restoration of the monarchy, but the collapse of the Fifth Republic is possible.
    Any chance we can take back Normandy and Calais in the chaos?
    Why stop there? Most of the country, including Paris, was occupied at various stages during the Hundred Years War!

  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,047
    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    The white shirt and sunglasses one is almost beyond belief, and the Wallis Simpson dress?!

    It's all on a new, meta-level.

    Talking of new levels, if someone was REALLY pissed at Harry over this, it is quite obvious what rumour they could verify. It would be devastating. This could all get quite explosive.
    It's an utterly ridiculous juxta that only the dimmest could read anything into. I'm starting to think you are terminally dim despite the catchy prose style.

    White shirt and sunglasses. lol.

    The Ian Wright = Oprah Winfrey was a triumph of perception by comparison.
    I've agreed with you on a couple of things today. I actually do think that Megan's joining the Royal family was easier for people to process mentally because she looks Caucasian.

    I also agree here - most of these clothes comparisons are ridiculous. I mean a black coat and hat - at what is presumably a memorial service? The 'white blouse, sunnies, hands on hips ready to solve Africa' is the only one where somehow I can imagine a flicker of intention. But we have no way of knowing.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    The white shirt and sunglasses one is almost beyond belief, and the Wallis Simpson dress?!

    It's all on a new, meta-level.

    Talking of new levels, if someone was REALLY pissed at Harry over this, it is quite obvious what rumour they could verify. It would be devastating. This could all get quite explosive.
    It's an utterly ridiculous juxta that only the dimmest could read anything into. I'm starting to think you are terminally dim despite the catchy prose style.

    White shirt and sunglasses. lol.

    The Ian Wright = Oprah Winfrey was a triumph of perception by comparison.
    The Wright-Oprah thing I would certainly grant you, but I don't think he's barking entirely up the wrong tree on the style of dress thing - just last week when seeing a random article on a US TV new site I saw the interview trailed with a headline about a 'subtle tribute to Diana' that would be in it. I didn't read it, but that sort of headline has not been uncommon (pretty sure it happens with Kate a whole bunch as well) on royal stories.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    The white shirt and sunglasses one is almost beyond belief, and the Wallis Simpson dress?!

    It's all on a new, meta-level.

    Talking of new levels, if someone was REALLY pissed at Harry over this, it is quite obvious what rumour they could verify. It would be devastating. This could all get quite explosive.
    That rumour if it is what I think it is certainly would be devastating for Harry if the cover up of it is confirmed and by association his wife, they are no longer of use to the royals and in fact openly hostile to them as of this evening
    It wouldn't matter. Harry is famous in America because of his mum and the identity (or not) of his dad is not really relevant in the grand scheme of things.
    It is not that, it is related to his personal conduct
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,032

    On the subject of monarchies vs republics, I have a feeling there could be another major constitutional crisis in France within the next few years.

    You mean, a restoration of the monarchy?

    Serious longshot mate, although I'd dig it.

    I'm married to a Bulgarian monarchist.
    I don't think there's any chance of a restoration of the monarchy, but the collapse of the Fifth Republic is possible.
    Any chance we can take back Normandy and Calais in the chaos?
    I'd prefer Aquitaine.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408

    kle4 said:

    Isn't Canada a Dominion?

    Not since 1986, it's a Commonwealth Realm now. Along with Oz, NZ, PNG, Jamaica, etc.
    Ah, the good people of etcetera. Loyal, diverse and useful.
    Etc is another name for Wales right?
    Very humerous, boyo.
    If any part of the UK was going to be etc I think we all know it would be Northern Ireland. Or how we refer to those bits not technically in the UK like the Isle of Man.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,243
    kle4 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    The white shirt and sunglasses one is almost beyond belief, and the Wallis Simpson dress?!

    It's all on a new, meta-level.

    Talking of new levels, if someone was REALLY pissed at Harry over this, it is quite obvious what rumour they could verify. It would be devastating. This could all get quite explosive.
    It's an utterly ridiculous juxta that only the dimmest could read anything into. I'm starting to think you are terminally dim despite the catchy prose style.

    White shirt and sunglasses. lol.

    The Ian Wright = Oprah Winfrey was a triumph of perception by comparison.
    The Wright-Oprah thing I would certainly grant you, but I don't think he's barking entirely up the wrong tree on the style of dress thing - just last week when seeing a random article on a US TV new site I saw the interview trailed with a headline about a 'subtle tribute to Diana' that would be in it. I didn't read it, but that sort of headline has not been uncommon (pretty sure it happens with Kate a whole bunch as well) on royal stories.
    The "subtle tribute" being the bracelet on Meghan's arm that was once worn by Diana.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 46,268

    Leon said:

    The white shirt and sunglasses one is almost beyond belief, and the Wallis Simpson dress?!

    It's all on a new, meta-level.

    Talking of new levels, if someone was REALLY pissed at Harry over this, it is quite obvious what rumour they could verify. It would be devastating. This could all get quite explosive.
    I actually don't believe that one - at least I do see it, but facially he very much resembles Charles at times. And of course Earl Spencer is ginger so it's in the genes.

    Nose and way of scrunching face up here: https://www.cheatsheet.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Prince-William-Prince-Charles-and-Prince-Harry-on-vacation-640x407.jpg

    Eyes nose and mouth it seems very apparent to me.
    https://www.celebdirtylaundry.com/wp-content/uploads/royals-4.jpg
    Also, this: Harry looks a lot like the Duke of Ed as a young man

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/the-photo-that-puts-an-end-to-ugly-rumour-about-prince-harry/GYWQFI56AXCE7C5SDFAFYV3CZ4/


    However, there are particular photos of Hewitt and Harry, which, when set together, would make anyone wonder


    https://twitter.com/ChrisJHudson/status/1368595840886013952?s=20
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,032

    On the subject of monarchies vs republics, I have a feeling there could be another major constitutional crisis in France within the next few years.

    You mean, a restoration of the monarchy?

    Serious longshot mate, although I'd dig it.

    I'm married to a Bulgarian monarchist.
    I don't think there's any chance of a restoration of the monarchy, but the collapse of the Fifth Republic is possible.
    Yes, it's possible.

    The French are always revolting.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,712
    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Andy_JS said:
    It isn't, it had 17 million viewers in the US, the superbowl had over 90 million. It is going down a storm with a few elitist coastal liberals, Middle America could not care less and Trump and his voters are openly hostile to the Sussexes
    Does Arizona count as "coastal liberals"?

    I've been asked more times about our Royal Family than at any time in the last 20 years.

    Don't worry fellow PBers, I explained that the whole thing was discrimination against gingers, and was nothing to do with race at all.
    Americans made their decision to get rid of our monarchy 3 centuries ago anyway, they don't care when we dislike many of their Presidents so in turn we should not give a toss what they think about our royal family
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,243
    NEW THRED
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Andy_JS said:

    In case you missed it, Barbados is supposed to become a republic later this year.

    Is it a done deal?
    Wiki quotes this source from last year:

    https://eu.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/celebrities/2020/09/16/queen-elizabeth-removed-barbados-head-state-barbados-says/5814409002/
    Strange because Jamaica was expected to be the first Caribbean country to become a republic.
    Again, wikipedia, but it quotes polls as saying 55% want the country to be a republic, which is honestly not as much as I'd have assumed, though no doubt is 2-3 times the number who positively say keep the monarchy. It says in 2007 the winning PM said it would amend the constitution to replace the Queen, but didn't. The new PM for a different party in 2011 affirmed the commitment but lost in 2016 without having done it, and her successor also said they would introduce a bill to do it, but hadn't done so by the election in 2020, where the government says it 'remains a goal, but has not proposed a timeline for one'.

    So I think they are waiting for Her Majesty to die, though Barbados being first might presumably prompt them to make a move again.
    That is slightly ridiculous, umpteen nations became republics in the Queen's reign
    They have, so I cannot think of why when they want to do it they are waiting, but there has to be some reason, even a silly one. Sure, one term maybe you can say there were other things to be getting on with, but they could have fitted it in by now, what's the hold up?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,047
    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    The white shirt and sunglasses one is almost beyond belief, and the Wallis Simpson dress?!

    It's all on a new, meta-level.

    Talking of new levels, if someone was REALLY pissed at Harry over this, it is quite obvious what rumour they could verify. It would be devastating. This could all get quite explosive.
    I actually don't believe that one - at least I do see it, but facially he very much resembles Charles at times. And of course Earl Spencer is ginger so it's in the genes.

    Nose and way of scrunching face up here: https://www.cheatsheet.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Prince-William-Prince-Charles-and-Prince-Harry-on-vacation-640x407.jpg

    Eyes nose and mouth it seems very apparent to me.
    https://www.celebdirtylaundry.com/wp-content/uploads/royals-4.jpg
    I do wonder about that particular rumour. OTOH it seems possible. BOTOH would it not have come out by now if it were true?
    To my eyes, he resembles HRH far more closely than the other. Also, doing a quick image search, that gentleman appears to have brown eyes. Brown eyes are a dominant gene - there's a very good chance he would have passed those on if it were true. Whereas blue-eyed parents can only have blue eyed children.
  • CatManCatMan Posts: 2,722
    edited March 2021

    On the subject of monarchies vs republics, I have a feeling there could be another major constitutional crisis in France within the next few years.

    You mean, a restoration of the monarchy?

    Serious longshot mate, although I'd dig it.

    I'm married to a Bulgarian monarchist.
    I don't think there's any chance of a restoration of the monarchy, but the collapse of the Fifth Republic is possible.
    Any chance we can take back Normandy and Calais in the chaos?
    Only if we give half of England back to Denmark
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 14,772
    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    The white shirt and sunglasses one is almost beyond belief, and the Wallis Simpson dress?!

    It's all on a new, meta-level.

    Talking of new levels, if someone was REALLY pissed at Harry over this, it is quite obvious what rumour they could verify. It would be devastating. This could all get quite explosive.
    It's an utterly ridiculous juxta that only the dimmest could read anything into. I'm starting to think you are terminally dim despite the catchy prose style.

    White shirt and sunglasses. lol.

    The Ian Wright = Oprah Winfrey was a triumph of perception by comparison.
    Presumably we can ask GPT-3 to go through archive photos of Diana and Kate. If it's as ridiculous as you say then it shouldn't be too hard to find a bunch of uncannily similar outfits.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,840

    Oprah just described Canada as a commonwealth of Britain.

    She obviously hasn't heard of the 1931 Statute of Westminster.

    She really said that?! This must be going out in Canada. Ouch.
    "Commonwealth of Britain" is to "British Commonwealth" as "Colored People" is to "People of Color"

    Canadians will know, that dinging an American for such a faux pas, is as ridiculous a criticizing a Brit for ignorance of the infield fly rule.
    Nah, loads of yanks think that Britain still rules Canada at some level because the Queen is on the money, there are statues and pictures everywhere, and she's still Queen there too.

    They don't understand.
    Well, the Queen's viceroy in Ottawa COULD tell the Prime Minister to take a hike, under certain circumstances. And has (just) within living memory.
    The Governor-General sounds impressive but is effectively now appointed on the advice of the Canadian PM and is always a Canadian.

    Of course, I wouldn't necessarily *object* to a bit of governing myself, should duty call, and my VMs are open.
    Indeed. The post is vacant after Julie Payette resigned after "bullying staff to tears."
    So you're in with a chance.
    Remember to watch that temper though ;)
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,922

    This thread has been cancelled!

  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,047
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    The white shirt and sunglasses one is almost beyond belief, and the Wallis Simpson dress?!

    It's all on a new, meta-level.

    Talking of new levels, if someone was REALLY pissed at Harry over this, it is quite obvious what rumour they could verify. It would be devastating. This could all get quite explosive.
    I actually don't believe that one - at least I do see it, but facially he very much resembles Charles at times. And of course Earl Spencer is ginger so it's in the genes.

    Nose and way of scrunching face up here: https://www.cheatsheet.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Prince-William-Prince-Charles-and-Prince-Harry-on-vacation-640x407.jpg

    Eyes nose and mouth it seems very apparent to me.
    https://www.celebdirtylaundry.com/wp-content/uploads/royals-4.jpg
    Also, this: Harry looks a lot like the Duke of Ed as a young man

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/the-photo-that-puts-an-end-to-ugly-rumour-about-prince-harry/GYWQFI56AXCE7C5SDFAFYV3CZ4/


    However, there are particular photos of Hewitt and Harry, which, when set together, would make anyone wonder


    https://twitter.com/ChrisJHudson/status/1368595840886013952?s=20
    I think they look quite different there - despite the identical facial expression.

  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,032
    dixiedean said:

    Oprah just described Canada as a commonwealth of Britain.

    She obviously hasn't heard of the 1931 Statute of Westminster.

    She really said that?! This must be going out in Canada. Ouch.
    "Commonwealth of Britain" is to "British Commonwealth" as "Colored People" is to "People of Color"

    Canadians will know, that dinging an American for such a faux pas, is as ridiculous a criticizing a Brit for ignorance of the infield fly rule.
    Nah, loads of yanks think that Britain still rules Canada at some level because the Queen is on the money, there are statues and pictures everywhere, and she's still Queen there too.

    They don't understand.
    Well, the Queen's viceroy in Ottawa COULD tell the Prime Minister to take a hike, under certain circumstances. And has (just) within living memory.
    The Governor-General sounds impressive but is effectively now appointed on the advice of the Canadian PM and is always a Canadian.

    Of course, I wouldn't necessarily *object* to a bit of governing myself, should duty call, and my VMs are open.
    Indeed. The post is vacant after Julie Payette resigned after "bullying staff to tears."
    So you're in with a chance.
    Remember to watch that temper though ;)
    I've never bullied anyone, or had anyone quit on me, so I might have a chance!
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851

    Andy_JS said:

    Brendan O'Neill:

    "The Oprah chat came wrapped in blather about Meghan telling ‘her truth’. In reality this was a coronation of two leading members of the neo-aristocracy. Harry and Meghan have successfully positioned themselves as key figureheads of the new feudalism in which cultural power resides in the hands of small numbers of very wealthy people around Silicon Valley and Hollywood, and in which the little people’s role is to receive moral instruction from the likes of Facebook, Netflix, Oprah, Harry, Meghan… That’s the great irony of Harry and Meghan juxtaposing themselves to the monarchy, and being witlessly cheered on by the left for doing so: these two behave in a far more old-world monarchical fashion than the queen does."

    https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/03/08/the-unbearable-victim-complex-of-meghan-markle/

    Brendan O'Neill and Spiked are the literal personification of the British end of the culture war, having completed their bizarre journey from orthodox Marxism to extreme cultural reaction, so this black-and-white point of view is certain to be taken up by the American culture battlers too. I can see the social media clicks and advertising revenue in my mind's eye already.
    He writes well but it's a bit read one read all. Same phrases every time. I think AI could knock out a passable O'Neil piece no problem at all.

    But more interesting is WTF is driving the anger and vitriol? It's like he's been done an immense personal wrong by the "liberal left". Like maybe his parents were sold into slavery by them or something and they've never even apologized.

    Beats me.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    The white shirt and sunglasses one is almost beyond belief, and the Wallis Simpson dress?!

    It's all on a new, meta-level.

    Talking of new levels, if someone was REALLY pissed at Harry over this, it is quite obvious what rumour they could verify. It would be devastating. This could all get quite explosive.
    It's an utterly ridiculous juxta that only the dimmest could read anything into. I'm starting to think you are terminally dim despite the catchy prose style.

    White shirt and sunglasses. lol.

    The Ian Wright = Oprah Winfrey was a triumph of perception by comparison.
    Presumably we can ask GPT-3 to go through archive photos of Diana and Kate. If it's as ridiculous as you say then it shouldn't be too hard to find a bunch of uncannily similar outfits.
    They're not uncannily similar. And no that doesn't follow anyway.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851
    kle4 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    The white shirt and sunglasses one is almost beyond belief, and the Wallis Simpson dress?!

    It's all on a new, meta-level.

    Talking of new levels, if someone was REALLY pissed at Harry over this, it is quite obvious what rumour they could verify. It would be devastating. This could all get quite explosive.
    It's an utterly ridiculous juxta that only the dimmest could read anything into. I'm starting to think you are terminally dim despite the catchy prose style.

    White shirt and sunglasses. lol.

    The Ian Wright = Oprah Winfrey was a triumph of perception by comparison.
    The Wright-Oprah thing I would certainly grant you, but I don't think he's barking entirely up the wrong tree on the style of dress thing - just last week when seeing a random article on a US TV new site I saw the interview trailed with a headline about a 'subtle tribute to Diana' that would be in it. I didn't read it, but that sort of headline has not been uncommon (pretty sure it happens with Kate a whole bunch as well) on royal stories.
    But the inference is a studied and creepy copying of exact looks.

    It's not there to my eye. Not even close.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    kinabalu said:

    With you there - if you mean bad as in give me a break what a stretch!
    But they both wore black dresses and a poppy.

    Why would two women in the UK ever be pictured dressed in black wearing a poppy?

    Oh ...
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    The white shirt and sunglasses one is almost beyond belief, and the Wallis Simpson dress?!

    It's all on a new, meta-level.

    Talking of new levels, if someone was REALLY pissed at Harry over this, it is quite obvious what rumour they could verify. It would be devastating. This could all get quite explosive.
    It's an utterly ridiculous juxta that only the dimmest could read anything into. I'm starting to think you are terminally dim despite the catchy prose style.

    White shirt and sunglasses. lol.

    The Ian Wright = Oprah Winfrey was a triumph of perception by comparison.
    I've agreed with you on a couple of things today. I actually do think that Megan's joining the Royal family was easier for people to process mentally because she looks Caucasian.

    I also agree here - most of these clothes comparisons are ridiculous. I mean a black coat and hat - at what is presumably a memorial service? The 'white blouse, sunnies, hands on hips ready to solve Africa' is the only one where somehow I can imagine a flicker of intention. But we have no way of knowing.
    Right. And to be influenced is different to precise and calculated aping. It's Meghan hate. And I'm no fan btw.

    On the other point, hats off for expressing it more clearly and concisely than I managed to.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 14,772
    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Brendan O'Neill:

    "The Oprah chat came wrapped in blather about Meghan telling ‘her truth’. In reality this was a coronation of two leading members of the neo-aristocracy. Harry and Meghan have successfully positioned themselves as key figureheads of the new feudalism in which cultural power resides in the hands of small numbers of very wealthy people around Silicon Valley and Hollywood, and in which the little people’s role is to receive moral instruction from the likes of Facebook, Netflix, Oprah, Harry, Meghan… That’s the great irony of Harry and Meghan juxtaposing themselves to the monarchy, and being witlessly cheered on by the left for doing so: these two behave in a far more old-world monarchical fashion than the queen does."

    https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/03/08/the-unbearable-victim-complex-of-meghan-markle/

    Brendan O'Neill and Spiked are the literal personification of the British end of the culture war, having completed their bizarre journey from orthodox Marxism to extreme cultural reaction, so this black-and-white point of view is certain to be taken up by the American culture battlers too. I can see the social media clicks and advertising revenue in my mind's eye already.
    He writes well but it's a bit read one read all. Same phrases every time. I think AI could knock out a passable O'Neil piece no problem at all.

    But more interesting is WTF is driving the anger and vitriol? It's like he's been done an immense personal wrong by the "liberal left". Like maybe his parents were sold into slavery by them or something and they've never even apologized.

    Beats me.
    They failed to follow him when he, and the rest of Living Marxism were on the Left. They failed him, and now he will have his revenge.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 14,772
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    The white shirt and sunglasses one is almost beyond belief, and the Wallis Simpson dress?!

    It's all on a new, meta-level.

    Talking of new levels, if someone was REALLY pissed at Harry over this, it is quite obvious what rumour they could verify. It would be devastating. This could all get quite explosive.
    It's an utterly ridiculous juxta that only the dimmest could read anything into. I'm starting to think you are terminally dim despite the catchy prose style.

    White shirt and sunglasses. lol.

    The Ian Wright = Oprah Winfrey was a triumph of perception by comparison.
    Presumably we can ask GPT-3 to go through archive photos of Diana and Kate. If it's as ridiculous as you say then it shouldn't be too hard to find a bunch of uncannily similar outfits.
    They're not uncannily similar. And no that doesn't follow anyway.
    When I use the word "if" it's actually because I'm genuinely uncertain as to the outcome.

    It wouldn't surprise me if it ended up being inevitable that you would find many matched outfits between Kate and Diana, given the number they both must have worn publicly. So then it becomes a fake coincidence.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851

    kinabalu said:

    With you there - if you mean bad as in give me a break what a stretch!
    But they both wore black dresses and a poppy.

    Why would two women in the UK ever be pictured dressed in black wearing a poppy?

    Oh ...
    This issue throws us together, Philip. Should make the most of it.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 18,094

    Endillion said:

    RobD said:

    Hopefully Mordaunt is re-promoted.
    Tracey Crouch back would be nice, too.
    Lady (Ruth) Davidson?
    RD to the Scottish Office.

    That could be fun, with the power to "direct" Devolved Ministers :smiley:
This discussion has been closed.