Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Just 7% would vote for The Queen to be our Head of State – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited March 21 in General
imageJust 7% would vote for The Queen to be our Head of State – politicalbetting.com

Only a quarter of voters would vote for a Royal

Read the full story here

«13456710

Comments

  • Man, I really have enjoyed writing both these weekend threads.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 7,798

    Man, I really have enjoyed writing both these weekend threads.

    I don't doubt it.

    Of course, this question is a hypothetical which rather bypasses the necessary precondition: should the Queen be replaced to begin with?

    There are plenty of good arguments to be made in favour of a republic, but it is a niche interest and likely to remain so. Sorry.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 65,092
    Today's numbers show if we have the supplies we can booster/variant dose in 2 months tops
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 27,086
    edited March 21
    Pulpstar said:

    Today's numbers show if we have the supplies we can booster/variant dose in 2 months tops

    It's coming. All of this EU stuff is a distraction. There's no change for the UK.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 39,695
    Shhhh - don't tell the EU......
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 39,695
    King Boris in with a shot.....
  • Pulpstar said:

    Today's numbers show if we have the supplies we can booster/variant dose in 2 months tops

    Thoughts and prayers for antivaxxers.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 7,798
    Wow!

    Hopefully if we are going to be stuck with a pathetic trickle of first doses during April, then at least this might mean that the over 50s have pretty well all been cleared out by the end of the month and the over 40s can then be done at speed in May - assuming there aren't yet more problems heading our way...
  • RobDRobD Posts: 53,035
    Corbyn is the second choice among Labour voters? lol
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 27,086

    Wow!

    Hopefully if we are going to be stuck with a pathetic trickle of first doses during April, then at least this might mean that the over 50s have pretty well all been cleared out by the end of the month and the over 40s can then be done at speed in May - assuming there aren't yet more problems heading our way...
    Under 50s will get first doses in April. The pause is just to ensure that we don't have a shortage for second jabs, once we're sure it's not a problem we will see appointments reopen.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 83,578
    edited March 21
    This has to be one of the most infuriating thread headers I have ever read on PB, though no surprise from a republican, Liberal, non Tory like TSE.

    First of course TSE completely ignores the fact the first choice for Head of State amongst all voters is Prince William, who is next but one to the throne anyway. He also fails to mention the Queen is second choice for Conservative voters after William and third choice for voters overall.

    He also completely ignores the fact that Sir David Attenborough, a knight of the realm no less, beats Jeremy Corbyn as Labour voters preferred Head of State, a far more significant story I would have thought.

    Second, the whole point of having a royal, hereditary head of state is you don't elect it and as long as we have a Tory government there will not be a referendum on the monarchy, it might have been a possibility had the republican Corbyn won but now even Starmer backs a reformed monarchy. As was shown in the 1999 Australian referendum which monarchists won 55% to 45% for republicans it would be perfectly possible for the monarchy to win such a referendum but it would almost certainly only happen under a Labour government in the UK.

    I also dispute the census will show we are a non Christian country, I expect a plurality at least to say they are Christians and Christians to come ahead of those defining themselves as non religious or members of other religions.

    The monarch has been the Supreme Governor of the Church of England since the Reformation, before that the head of our established Church was the Pope, coincidentally who is still Head of State of the Vatican City anyway as well as being head of the Catholic Church worldwide
  • Leon said:

    Man, I really have enjoyed writing both these weekend threads.

    Your headline is nonsense. The people were asked, who would you have as head of state if we replaced the Queen?

    7% love the Queen so much they want to replace her with... The Queen
    So 93% wouldn't vote for The Queen.

    Stick to dildos as numbers really isn't your thing.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 5,008
    Just goes to show that if you want a Head of State enjoying broad public support, politically neutral, non divisive - basically all the ideal criteria for representing the UK abroad and being a unifying figure in times of crisis...

    that having that imposed through birth rather than chosen by the people has a lot going for it...
  • LeonLeon Posts: 4,727
    That is an incredible number

    The equivalent in India would be 16 million in a day
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 5,008
    Numbers only seem to add up to about 70.

    How can "nobody" be an option for "all those expressing a preference"?
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 2,784
    Given the scenario, I'm surprised anyone would vote for HM. It would be a sure fire way of setting up a repeat election in the fairly near future.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 4,727

    Leon said:

    Man, I really have enjoyed writing both these weekend threads.

    Your headline is nonsense. The people were asked, who would you have as head of state if we replaced the Queen?

    7% love the Queen so much they want to replace her with... The Queen
    So 93% wouldn't vote for The Queen.

    Stick to dildos as numbers really isn't your thing.
    I know this was a (rather laborious) attempt to troll us on your behalf, but it is remarkable that when specifically told The Queen is Going, Who Replaces Her? - some just say... The Queen. The Queen Replaces The Queen.

    lol.
  • alex_ said:

    Numbers only seem to add up to about 70.

    How can "nobody" be an option for "all those expressing a preference"?

    There are other people listed that don't make it onto the main graphic.

    https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/98804zp4rw/Elected head of state.pdf
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 10,316
    "Rape trials in Scotland could be heard without a jury - and other proposals to give sex-crime survivors more support

    A review of how Scottish courts deal with sexual assault cases has suggested that a specialist court is set up for such trials."

    https://news.sky.com/story/rape-victims-retraumatised-by-criminal-justice-system-senior-judge-says-12252521
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 39,928
    I expect in truth the monarchy will continue after the queen but with less importance

    And is it the 1st April

    https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/1373594027879186433?s=19
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 39,695
    edited March 21
    Leon said:

    That is an incredible number

    The equivalent in India would be 16 million in a day
    The equivalent in France would be 850,000.

    Germany, 1.095m
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 26,402
    edited March 21
    mm
    HYUFD said:

    This has to be one of the most infuriating thread headers I have ever read on PB, though no surprise from a republican, Liberal, non Tory like TSE.



  • alex_alex_ Posts: 5,008
    MaxPB said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Today's numbers show if we have the supplies we can booster/variant dose in 2 months tops

    It's coming. All of this EU stuff is a distraction. There's no change for the UK.
    There will be a slow down in April. We know that. In fact these numbers are confirming it.

    Because about a week before the news about the "leaked letter to the BBC" was splashed all over the news, there was a "leaked letter" to the Guardian stating that we would be pushing 6-7million a week by the end of March. At which point there was expected to be a drop off.

    Indeed we even talked about it on here quite a lot! Which is why last week's story was so absurd as an "exclusive". Is LauraK claiming she never reads the Guardian?
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 1,474
    What percentage of people voted for "yer maw"?
  • Time_to_LeaveTime_to_Leave Posts: 2,108
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Man, I really have enjoyed writing both these weekend threads.

    Your headline is nonsense. The people were asked, who would you have as head of state if we replaced the Queen?

    7% love the Queen so much they want to replace her with... The Queen
    So 93% wouldn't vote for The Queen.

    Stick to dildos as numbers really isn't your thing.
    I know this was a (rather laborious) attempt to troll us on your behalf, but it is remarkable that when specifically told The Queen is Going, Who Replaces Her? - some just say... The Queen. The Queen Replaces The Queen.

    lol.
    There’s a dark sci-fi story in that. In the end we place her brain dead corpse on life support to retain a veneer of life, and she is Queen forever.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 3,387
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Man, I really have enjoyed writing both these weekend threads.

    Your headline is nonsense. The people were asked, who would you have as head of state if we replaced the Queen?

    7% love the Queen so much they want to replace her with... The Queen
    So 93% wouldn't vote for The Queen.

    Stick to dildos as numbers really isn't your thing.
    I know this was a (rather laborious) attempt to troll us on your behalf, but it is remarkable that when specifically told The Queen is Going, Who Replaces Her? - some just say... The Queen. The Queen Replaces The Queen.

    lol.
    One wonders what the list would look like if we set up the position of head of state as a year king concept :)

    I suspect from comments here in the past certain national team managers might look a bit nervous
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 27,086
    alex_ said:

    MaxPB said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Today's numbers show if we have the supplies we can booster/variant dose in 2 months tops

    It's coming. All of this EU stuff is a distraction. There's no change for the UK.
    There will be a slow down in April. We know that. In fact these numbers are confirming it.

    Because about a week before the news about the "leaked letter to the BBC" was splashed all over the news, there was a "leaked letter" to the Guardian stating that we would be pushing 6-7million a week by the end of March. At which point there was expected to be a drop off.

    Indeed we even talked about it on here quite a lot! Which is why last week's story was so absurd as an "exclusive". Is LauraK claiming she never reads the Guardian?
    But even the slowdown will be 3-4m doses per week. It's going to be a huge number, just not as much as March.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 5,008
    AnneJGP said:

    Given the scenario, I'm surprised anyone would vote for HM. It would be a sure fire way of setting up a repeat election in the fairly near future.

    Then again, lots of people obviously don't know how old David Attenborough is. Was Boaty McBoatface on the ballot.

    Still, under the planned FPTP election it will be William.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 1,474

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Man, I really have enjoyed writing both these weekend threads.

    Your headline is nonsense. The people were asked, who would you have as head of state if we replaced the Queen?

    7% love the Queen so much they want to replace her with... The Queen
    So 93% wouldn't vote for The Queen.

    Stick to dildos as numbers really isn't your thing.
    I know this was a (rather laborious) attempt to troll us on your behalf, but it is remarkable that when specifically told The Queen is Going, Who Replaces Her? - some just say... The Queen. The Queen Replaces The Queen.

    lol.
    There’s a dark sci-fi story in that. In the end we place her brain dead corpse on life support to retain a veneer of life, and she is Queen forever.
    I said before we could probably just deepfake her for the couple of speeches a year that she normally makes.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 5,008
    ydoethur said:

    The argument of the thread header falls rather flat on its face when you look at who the most popular actual choice is.

    If given the option, the Royals might take the money and run.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 7,079
    Very surprising that as many as 4% would vote for TSE as head of state.

    I had no idea politicalbetting.com was so influential.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 39,695
    MaxPB said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Today's numbers show if we have the supplies we can booster/variant dose in 2 months tops

    It's coming. All of this EU stuff is a distraction. There's no change for the UK.
    There was a batch of 1.3m that had to be retested. Assuming that passes re-inspection, that is a quarter of the 5m gap from India filled.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 4,727

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Man, I really have enjoyed writing both these weekend threads.

    Your headline is nonsense. The people were asked, who would you have as head of state if we replaced the Queen?

    7% love the Queen so much they want to replace her with... The Queen
    So 93% wouldn't vote for The Queen.

    Stick to dildos as numbers really isn't your thing.
    I know this was a (rather laborious) attempt to troll us on your behalf, but it is remarkable that when specifically told The Queen is Going, Who Replaces Her? - some just say... The Queen. The Queen Replaces The Queen.

    lol.
    There’s a dark sci-fi story in that. In the end we place her brain dead corpse on life support to retain a veneer of life, and she is Queen forever.
    I said before we could probably just deepfake her for the couple of speeches a year that she normally makes.
    GPT3 could easily do the Queen. Doddle
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 1,474
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Man, I really have enjoyed writing both these weekend threads.

    Your headline is nonsense. The people were asked, who would you have as head of state if we replaced the Queen?

    7% love the Queen so much they want to replace her with... The Queen
    So 93% wouldn't vote for The Queen.

    Stick to dildos as numbers really isn't your thing.
    I know this was a (rather laborious) attempt to troll us on your behalf, but it is remarkable that when specifically told The Queen is Going, Who Replaces Her? - some just say... The Queen. The Queen Replaces The Queen.

    lol.
    There’s a dark sci-fi story in that. In the end we place her brain dead corpse on life support to retain a veneer of life, and she is Queen forever.
    I said before we could probably just deepfake her for the couple of speeches a year that she normally makes.
    GPT3 could easily do the Queen. Doddle
    I'm kind of hoping we can go a lot further now and basically have her popping up at key moments in history over the next 1,000 years to let future generations know, it's all ok, it's all part of the plan. Hari Seldon her.
  • ydoethur said:

    The argument of the thread header falls rather flat on its face when you look at who the most popular actual choice is.

    Nah, I address that.

    I suspect in any election campaign the Royals would see their polling collapse as they wouldn’t survive the robustness of an election campaign.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 39,695
    Suspect this may sound the death knell for the traditional Congolese greeting of rubbing alternate temples together:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-56474855

  • TresTres Posts: 381

    Man, I really have enjoyed writing both these weekend threads.

    I don't doubt it.

    Of course, this question is a hypothetical which rather bypasses the necessary precondition: should the Queen be replaced to begin with?

    There are plenty of good arguments to be made in favour of a republic, but it is a niche interest and likely to remain so. Sorry.
    Just wait till we get King Charles III or whatever he is going to call himself.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 39,695

    ydoethur said:

    The argument of the thread header falls rather flat on its face when you look at who the most popular actual choice is.

    Nah, I address that.

    I suspect in any election campaign the Royals would see their polling collapse as they wouldn’t survive the robustness of an election campaign.
    Because going out on the meet and greet is so alien to them. *eye-roll*

    (Although the heckling might make Prince Andrew break out into a sweat in the rather unlikely situation of him being the candidate....)
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 9,242
    Attenborough I get as the nations favourite granddad but why is Fry a clear second in the non royal politician category? He is very clever and sometimes funny but hardly suited to the role?
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 1,474

    ydoethur said:

    The argument of the thread header falls rather flat on its face when you look at who the most popular actual choice is.

    Nah, I address that.

    I suspect in any election campaign the Royals would see their polling collapse as they wouldn’t survive the robustness of an election campaign.
    The Queen's speech at Christmas could just be relabelled as a party political broadcast on behalf of the Royal Family.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 83,578
    edited March 21
    SNP now not only heading for no majority but at risk of falling below its pre Brexit 2016 Holyrood vote and seat share in what would be a humiliation for Sturgeon a la May 2017 after the huge poll leads she had just a few months ago.

    Latest Holyrood poll today has SNP on 46% on the constituency vote and 39% on the list compared to the 46.5% it got on the constituency vote and 41.7% it got on the list in 2016

    https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1373625695474180096?s=20
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 39,695
    ydoethur said:

    The argument of the thread header falls rather flat on its face when you look at who the most popular actual choice is.

    Still, a bit of a kick in the nuts for Charles...
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 5,008

    ydoethur said:

    The argument of the thread header falls rather flat on its face when you look at who the most popular actual choice is.

    Nah, I address that.

    I suspect in any election campaign the Royals would see their polling collapse as they wouldn’t survive the robustness of an election campaign.
    I wouldn't expect an election campaign for a Head of State to be anything like a conventional election campaign. Indeed, the suggestion that it would it enough reason to not embark on the idea.

    The main purpose of a Head of State is not to wield vast political power, or to take decisions affecting the lives of individuals on a vast scale. It is to represent the Country abroad and to provide a unifying and focal point for the nation. Any standard forms of election campaigns, politically based campaigning etc would be counterproductive to that. The winner would be the one who could rise above the fray. It is one reason why most countries (whether filling the role via elections or otherwise) seek to separate the two roles, and keep the HoS role away from party politics. Those that combine the roles run the risk of causing problems when the political leadership aspect conflicts with the symbolic leadership. Traditionally US Presidents have actually done a pretty good job in avoiding that and have always engendered broad public support when carrying out their "Head of State" role. Of course all that was blown up by Trump.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 26,402

    ydoethur said:

    The argument of the thread header falls rather flat on its face when you look at who the most popular actual choice is.

    Nah, I address that.

    I suspect in any election campaign the Royals would see their polling collapse as they wouldn’t survive the robustness of an election campaign.
    They've lost at least one of their very public supporters. Perhaps Rolf could still be persuaded to get his didgeridoo out.

    https://twitter.com/terrychristian/status/1373322131858202628?s=20
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 13,012
    They can get theirs from the EU... oh

    :wink::smiley:
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 39,695
    HYUFD said:

    SNP now not only heading for no majority but at risk of falling below its 2016 Holyrood vote and seat share in what would be a humiliation for Sturgeon a la May 2017 after the huge poll leads she had just a few months ago.

    Latest Holyrood poll today has SNP on 46% on the constituency vote and 39% on the list compared to the 46.5% it got on the constituency vote and 41% it got on the list in 2016

    https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1373625695474180096?s=20

    And we still have the reports out in the coming few days, at least one which (and I suspect both) saying she has lied and been exceedingly obstructionist of those getting to the truth.

    Call me old-fashioned, but I ca't see that playing well with the softer end of the SNP vote.

    Expecting a bit of a swing from SNP -> Can't Be Ersed Party
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 5,008

    ydoethur said:

    The argument of the thread header falls rather flat on its face when you look at who the most popular actual choice is.

    Still, a bit of a kick in the nuts for Charles...
    I think probably most people answering the poll rather took it as read that the Queen was out of the picture. And wouldn't have voted for Charles since doing otherwise would be contrary to the basic premise of the question.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 30,969

    mm

    HYUFD said:

    This has to be one of the most infuriating thread headers I have ever read on PB, though no surprise from a republican, Liberal, non Tory like TSE.



    A more elegant way to make the point than I had come up with
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 13,012
    Leon said:

    That is an incredible number

    The equivalent in India would be 16 million in a day
    More wailing from the EU incoming
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 2,784

    ydoethur said:

    The argument of the thread header falls rather flat on its face when you look at who the most popular actual choice is.

    Still, a bit of a kick in the nuts for Charles...
    Just that people have had decades looking at him as successor to HM, probably, and Prince William is a fresher face/personality onto which they can project what they want to see.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 30,969
    Are they trolling Ireland by using St Patrick’s Cross for “not vaccinated”?
  • stodgestodge Posts: 8,257
    Afternoon all :)

    Too busy living my life to join the fun-and-games of this morning's debate. From the perspective of the one-party State that is Newham, the issue of PR takes on a different perspective. It's less about the Proportional and more about the Representation.

    My only thought on this afternoon's humdinger of a thread is the very fact we can take it all so light-heartedly (with one or two predictable exceptions) is testament to the continuity and stability the Queen has brought to the issue. For the vast majority of the UK population, she's the only Head of State we've ever known.

    One day, that won't be the case .

    "Don't it always seem to go, that you don't know what you've got til it's gone" - as someone once opined. That being said, we've retained the Monarchy because the alternative seems so unattractive. To paraphrase another maxim, "you can choose your Presidents, you can't choose your Monarchs".

    I suppose it comes down to what role you want your Head of State to play - if you want a figurehead who is above the day-to-day political fray and can launch an aircraft carrier, fine, we may as well stick with what we've got. I think there's more of an argument to be had about the institution and business that is the Crown, in terms of its economic relationship with the country. I'd be looking at the land holdings and the "trappings" and perhaps insisting on greater transparency (I know it's better now than it was).

    I'm also of the view the age of deference is at an end - we need to remind the Monarchy they are public servants (by their own admission) and there are elements of how they comport themselves which grate a little if not a lot in the 21st century. Fundamentally, the Monarchy works but that doesn't mean it cannot and should not evolve.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 30,969

    Attenborough I get as the nations favourite granddad but why is Fry a clear second in the non royal politician category? He is very clever and sometimes funny but hardly suited to the role?

    I recall seeing a survey years ago that suggested he was the archetypal representation of what ordinary people think a”posh guy” is like
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 57,199
    edited March 21
    TO INFINITY AND BEYOND............................we want million, we want million....
  • felixfelix Posts: 12,583
    I'd have to salute you for posting that Mr. Glenn.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 4,727

    TO INFINITY AND BEYOND............................we want million, we want million....
    He hints that it could go even higher towards the end of next week, so maybe we really will hit a mill

    Then comes the April slowdown.
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 2,273
    HYUFD said:

    SNP now not only heading for no majority but at risk of falling below its pre Brexit 2016 Holyrood vote and seat share in what would be a humiliation for Sturgeon a la May 2017 after the huge poll leads she had just a few months ago.

    Latest Holyrood poll today has SNP on 46% on the constituency vote and 39% on the list compared to the 46.5% it got on the constituency vote and 41.7% it got on the list in 2016

    https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1373625695474180096?s=20

    If you get more votes than anyone else that is called winning.
  • felixfelix Posts: 12,583

    Attenborough I get as the nations favourite granddad but why is Fry a clear second in the non royal politician category? He is very clever and sometimes funny but hardly suited to the role?

    Old queen to replace the old Queen?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 57,199
    edited March 21
    Floater said:
    What did Coventry do to deserve this lady with some very dodgy views....

    Zarah Sultana, a Labour general election candidate for Coventry South, apologised earlier this week for saying she would celebrate the deaths of world leaders including Tony Blair and Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.

    She said she had been “exasperated by endless cycles of global suffering, violence and needless killing”. Sultana also wrote of her support for “violent resistance” by Palestinians in 2015, the Jewish Chronicle reported.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 3,387

    Floater said:
    What did Coventry do to deserve this lady with some very dodgy views.
    Voted labour?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 47,560
    edited March 21
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 6,488
    AnneJGP said:

    ydoethur said:

    The argument of the thread header falls rather flat on its face when you look at who the most popular actual choice is.

    Still, a bit of a kick in the nuts for Charles...
    Just that people have had decades looking at him as successor to HM, probably, and Prince William is a fresher face/personality onto which they can project what they want to see.
    That quivering goon and his RealDoll will probably be worse for the monarchy than KC3.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 57,199
    Leon said:

    TO INFINITY AND BEYOND............................we want million, we want million....
    He hints that it could go even higher towards the end of next week, so maybe we really will hit a mill

    Then comes the April slowdown.
    Comedy Dave is going to have work overtime to find a chart that supports his view that EU really isn't far behind the UK....
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 64,142
    Floater said:
    No socialists have ever been racist. Apparently.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 57,199
    edited March 21
    Just a point....we again heard all these anecdotal stories that loads of people were rejecting their appointment when they found they were to get AZN vaccine....It can't really have been that widespread otherwise never do 850k in a day.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 16,914

    Just a point....we again heard all these anecdotal stories that loads of people were rejecting their appointment when they found they were to get AZN vaccine....It can't really have been that widespread otherwise never do 850k in a day.

    As I pointed out at the time...
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 83,578
    edited March 21

    HYUFD said:

    SNP now not only heading for no majority but at risk of falling below its pre Brexit 2016 Holyrood vote and seat share in what would be a humiliation for Sturgeon a la May 2017 after the huge poll leads she had just a few months ago.

    Latest Holyrood poll today has SNP on 46% on the constituency vote and 39% on the list compared to the 46.5% it got on the constituency vote and 41.7% it got on the list in 2016

    https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1373625695474180096?s=20

    If you get more votes than anyone else that is called winning.
    If you go on for years about how Brexit is a 'material change in cicumstances' requiring independence and end up losing votes and seats compared to the last Holyrood pre Brexit election that is called humiliation.

    Salmond will then be circling in the waters preparing to strike at a potentially fatally wounded Sturgeon and Boris will be cock a hoop
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 13,012
    kle4 said:

    Floater said:
    No socialists have ever been racist. Apparently.
    Nor do socialists ever manufacture an enemy to divide people

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 83,578
    edited March 21
    Dura_Ace said:

    AnneJGP said:

    ydoethur said:

    The argument of the thread header falls rather flat on its face when you look at who the most popular actual choice is.

    Still, a bit of a kick in the nuts for Charles...
    Just that people have had decades looking at him as successor to HM, probably, and Prince William is a fresher face/personality onto which they can project what they want to see.
    That quivering goon and his RealDoll will probably be worse for the monarchy than KC3.
    They will both be outstanding monarchs which will continue to infuriate a diehard Republican such as yourself
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 39,695

    Just a point....we again heard all these anecdotal stories that loads of people were rejecting their appointment when they found they were to get AZN vaccine....It can't really have been that widespread otherwise never do 850k in a day.

    Damn it, could have been a million!

    Instead, we had to make do with the equivalent in one day of the adult populations of Bristol, Bath and Swindon....
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 13,012
    Sky News - "The UK really, really going for it"

    Are you watching Ursula?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 39,695
    kle4 said:

    Floater said:
    No socialists have ever been racist. Apparently.
    Just anti-semites then.....
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 13,012

    kle4 said:

    Floater said:
    No socialists have ever been racist. Apparently.
    Just anti-semites then.....
    Every good comrade knows jews don't count...... they rule the world or something
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 47,560
    This was never really about blood clots, which is why the temporary ban of Astra-Zeneca was condemned by the World Health Organisation, the European Medicines Agency and anyone familiar with this issue......

    The ban is explained by a politically motivated blame game. EU leaders keep discrediting AstraZeneca to deflect attention from their own mistakes and to puncture the notion of a Brexit-related British success story. This short-sighted strategy has backfired quickly. After just two days living under the ban, France and Italy signalled the possibility of a U-turn, as the consequences of their actions became all too clear. Europe is coping with a third wave of Covid; vaccination is the only strategy to get out of the mess. Europe’s leaders have not just harmed this strategy, but inflicted damage to European integration.


    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/europes-reckless-caution-over-astrazeneca
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 37,376

    ydoethur said:

    The argument of the thread header falls rather flat on its face when you look at who the most popular actual choice is.

    Nah, I address that.

    I suspect in any election campaign the Royals would see their polling collapse as they wouldn’t survive the robustness of an election campaign.
    So, you are saying the evidence is that people wouldn't vote for them, and then when the evidence shows people would, that's because the evidence is incomplete?

    Are you familiar with the expression 'confirmation bias?'
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 64,142
    edited March 21

    Just a point....we again heard all these anecdotal stories that loads of people were rejecting their appointment when they found they were to get AZN vaccine....It can't really have been that widespread otherwise never do 850k in a day.

    Damn it, could have been a million!

    Instead, we had to make do with the equivalent in one day of the adult populations of Bristol, Bath and Swindon....
    I am genuinely still shocked that despite clear media digging, they really really really struggle to find any issue with it. 99.9% of people seem to find the process incredibly well run, quick and efficient.

    If only every interaction with the NHS, the state, the banks, energy providers, the internet companies, etc was like that.
    In general both media and opposition have been very responsible around reporting on vaccination, even when there are hiccups. It means critiques have bigger impact.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 57,199
    tlg86 said:

    Just a point....we again heard all these anecdotal stories that loads of people were rejecting their appointment when they found they were to get AZN vaccine....It can't really have been that widespread otherwise never do 850k in a day.

    As I pointed out at the time...
    Its great news that people clearly aren't taking too much notice of the EC / European countries misinformation and turning into anti-vaxxers.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 40,058
    Unfortunately this may end up biting us as Halligan argues in Telegraph today.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 16,914

    tlg86 said:

    Just a point....we again heard all these anecdotal stories that loads of people were rejecting their appointment when they found they were to get AZN vaccine....It can't really have been that widespread otherwise never do 850k in a day.

    As I pointed out at the time...
    Its great news that people clearly aren't taking too much notice of the EC / European countries misinformation and turning into anti-vaxxers.
    Is anyone polling on "what you've seen in the news"? I wonder how many are aware of the whole vaccine issues.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 1,943
    edited March 21
    Leon said:

    Man, I really have enjoyed writing both these weekend threads.

    Your headline is nonsense. The people were asked, who would you have as head of state if we replaced the Queen?

    7% love the Queen so much they want to replace her with... The Queen
    I agree. Also Her Majesty is 95. So lots of people might not want to inflict a 5-year? 10-year? term on her at that age.

    She has given her virtually the whole of her life to the people of this country and the Commonwealth, as she promised at her Coronation a lifetime ago. We're lucky she's still up for the job at all.

    Had the poll been taken when she was a sprightly 85 year old, more people would have voted for her.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 40,058

    tlg86 said:

    Just a point....we again heard all these anecdotal stories that loads of people were rejecting their appointment when they found they were to get AZN vaccine....It can't really have been that widespread otherwise never do 850k in a day.

    As I pointed out at the time...
    Its great news that people clearly aren't taking too much notice of the EC / European countries misinformation and turning into anti-vaxxers.
    Macron has done his best. But it takes more than a load of Gallic tripe to put a Brit of their medicine.
  • CiceroCicero Posts: 664
    Floater said:

    Sky News - "The UK really, really going for it"

    Are you watching Ursula?

    No, because why would anyone believe the lying propaganda in the UK media?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 53,035
    Cicero said:

    Floater said:

    Sky News - "The UK really, really going for it"

    Are you watching Ursula?

    No, because why would anyone believe the lying propaganda in the UK media?
    The vaccine numbers are fake?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 39,928
    Cicero said:

    Floater said:

    Sky News - "The UK really, really going for it"

    Are you watching Ursula?

    No, because why would anyone believe the lying propaganda in the UK media?
    EU has its own comical ali
  • Time_to_LeaveTime_to_Leave Posts: 2,108
    tlg86 said:

    Just a point....we again heard all these anecdotal stories that loads of people were rejecting their appointment when they found they were to get AZN vaccine....It can't really have been that widespread otherwise never do 850k in a day.

    As I pointed out at the time...
    My worry is it’s a real phenomenon, but focused on specific communities which already have an issue with hesitancy.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 55,280
    F1: many, many specials on Ladbrokes.

    Very, very little value.

    Still, I can't complain after some splendid bets last season, not least betting on Hamilton to get under 20.5 points finishes (in a 17 race season).
  • LeonLeon Posts: 4,727

    tlg86 said:

    Just a point....we again heard all these anecdotal stories that loads of people were rejecting their appointment when they found they were to get AZN vaccine....It can't really have been that widespread otherwise never do 850k in a day.

    As I pointed out at the time...
    My worry is it’s a real phenomenon, but focused on specific communities which already have an issue with hesitancy.
    Darwin will sort them out
Sign In or Register to comment.