Is the Coronation set to be a TV ratings flop? – politicalbetting.com
Comments
-
Thats Trumps genius connecting with low iq people.ohnotnow said:
I seem to remember reading an analysis of his tweets in the run up to the 2016 election. They noticed the language started off relatively 'mature' and by the end was, seemingly, aimed at people with a reading age of around 11.kinabalu said:
Why does he write as if his audience have a mental age of about seven?Simon_Peach said:
He’s taking it wellJosiasJessop said:There have been rumours about this for the last few days, and it's now on the BBC:
"Ex-US President Donald Trump expects to be arrested on Tuesday"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-65000325
Ah, ok, yes I suppose ...0 -
Where do you get that idea from? The polling for Charles, William and Kate is very strong.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Since the late Queen the direction of travel, if you excuse the pun, is ever downwards in the pollingRichard_Tyndall said:
You are utterly wrong.Big_G_NorthWales said:
To be honest an old horse drawn golden coach is the antithesis of being in touchHYUFD said:
Even the King of Spain goes in a grand parade to his inauguration accompanied by cavalry (as indeed does the President of Italy to his)kle4 said:It might be a flop in the same way some people got super excited by how 'few' people showed up for the Queue, as though hundreds of thousands of people doing it was not still an awful lot considering what the activity was, or how people sometimes denigrate this or that protest as having only 100k or 500k or whatever, out of 70m people, ignoring that, again, that is a lot of people to take time out to do it.
There's this yearning sometimes that takes even genuine points way too far. I'm a monarchist and it'd never even occur to me to watch it in a public place, no thank you. I'd be astonished if even 5% do.
I'll probably record it so I can watch it on fast forward. I'm more worried it won't be extravagant and silly enough because they are worried about how it looks during cost of living crisis, and the sense of privilege. Fact is you cannot hold a coronation without looking out of touch and a bit silly, so just go for it. Just think how Spanish republicans missed out on things to make fun of because their King just got handed a sash by his dad.
It may well be a very embarrassing event and certainly not a help in endearing the monarchy to the country4 -
The big question is why did Nicky S resign in the first place? Without an understanding of that, there's not much hope for her replacement. And the answer can't be that everything was wrong, or she shouldn't have stayed as long as she did.kle4 said:It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.
(For example, 1990 was about the Poll Tax and Thatcher's decent into divaish madness. So Major was the right guy to pick because he solved both problems but left everything else broadly unchanged.)0 -
They *are* council tenants!Sean_F said:
I don't buy into the notion that most people dislike pageantry, and expect Heads of State/Government to live like council tenants.Big_G_NorthWales said:
To be honest an old horse drawn golden coach is the antithesis of being in touchHYUFD said:
Even the King of Spain goes in a grand parade to his inauguration accompanied by cavalry (as indeed does the President of Italy to his)kle4 said:It might be a flop in the same way some people got super excited by how 'few' people showed up for the Queue, as though hundreds of thousands of people doing it was not still an awful lot considering what the activity was, or how people sometimes denigrate this or that protest as having only 100k or 500k or whatever, out of 70m people, ignoring that, again, that is a lot of people to take time out to do it.
There's this yearning sometimes that takes even genuine points way too far. I'm a monarchist and it'd never even occur to me to watch it in a public place, no thank you. I'd be astonished if even 5% do.
I'll probably record it so I can watch it on fast forward. I'm more worried it won't be extravagant and silly enough because they are worried about how it looks during cost of living crisis, and the sense of privilege. Fact is you cannot hold a coronation without looking out of touch and a bit silly, so just go for it. Just think how Spanish republicans missed out on things to make fun of because their King just got handed a sash by his dad.
It may well be a very embarrassing event and certainly not a help in endearing the monarchy to the country
The inaugurations of the French and US Presidents are full of pageantry.1 -
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.kle4 said:It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.0 -
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.HYUFD said:
Nope, only 29% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Again ratings Sunak or Starmer would kill forReed said:
Given recent opinion polls that means about 40% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Not good.HYUFD said:
Is he politically divisive? The latest Yougov on the royal family has 79% of Conservative voters, 72% of LD voters and 54% of Labour voters having a favourable view of King Charles. Starmer and Sunak would kill for those ratingsReed said:
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.numbertwelve said:Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2023/01/12/prince-harrys-popularity-falls-further-spare-hits-
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/leosln75nr/Internal_Royals_230111.pdf
That's pretty pathetic actually.0 -
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.Burgessian said:
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.kle4 said:It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.1 -
Is it, given his past favourability ratings?Carnyx said:
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.HYUFD said:
Nope, only 29% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Again ratings Sunak or Starmer would kill forReed said:
Given recent opinion polls that means about 40% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Not good.HYUFD said:
Is he politically divisive? The latest Yougov on the royal family has 79% of Conservative voters, 72% of LD voters and 54% of Labour voters having a favourable view of King Charles. Starmer and Sunak would kill for those ratingsReed said:
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.numbertwelve said:Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2023/01/12/prince-harrys-popularity-falls-further-spare-hits-
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/leosln75nr/Internal_Royals_230111.pdf
That's pretty pathetic actually.1 -
I like the sub-heading: "Silicon Valley’s woke, feelgood brand of capitalism was always built on sand" – sand is dirty silicon.Andy_JS said:The Spiked view on the collapse of SVB.
https://www.spiked-online.com/2023/03/18/the-fall-of-svb-has-exposed-the-delusions-of-our-elites/
2 -
A better comparison arguably is QEII. You see? Will be interesting to see how it develops.RobD said:
Is it, given his past favourability ratings?Carnyx said:
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.HYUFD said:
Nope, only 29% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Again ratings Sunak or Starmer would kill forReed said:
Given recent opinion polls that means about 40% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Not good.HYUFD said:
Is he politically divisive? The latest Yougov on the royal family has 79% of Conservative voters, 72% of LD voters and 54% of Labour voters having a favourable view of King Charles. Starmer and Sunak would kill for those ratingsReed said:
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.numbertwelve said:Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2023/01/12/prince-harrys-popularity-falls-further-spare-hits-
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/leosln75nr/Internal_Royals_230111.pdf
That's pretty pathetic actually.
0 -
Thanks very much to @DavidL and @TheScreamingEagles for getting me back on here
I'm going to be away for the Coronation; I've got three weeks off work, starting the last week of April
I'm seriously considering a big walk in Brittany - visiting the sites of the seven founder Saints (all from Wales and Cornwall)
It's a 350 mile trek, just to visit the seven places, not taking into account detours to see other interesting things on the way
I think I should go for it
The legend says that if you don't do this walk in your lifetime, you have to do it in the afterlife. But you can only walk one coffin length every seven years in the afterlife
10 -
There is no obligation on UNSC member republics to have shitty executive presidencies, even if all four of them do. A country which has a hereditary monarchy, an even shittier arrangement, need not limit itself to climbing only one level up inside the sewage pipe. A British republic could have a presidency similar to the German one. The "you don't want a politician as head of state" bullshit was how the monarch managed to win the 1999 referendum in Australia, despite having a large republican majority. You may find it's worn a bit thin, HYUFD. There's nothing wrong with a President Miliband or Hague or Rowling. Bring it on. Doesn't scare anyone, so long as they're non-executive. Better than some addled old bastard who's there because of who is mother was, who wants to get biblically anointed, who seems to think he's the king of kings and the head of all religions, and who obviously hasn't acquired the art of speaking to servants even after seven decades of practice. The monarchy is making the country a fucking laughing stock.HYUFD said:
No, there almost certainly would be a President Blair or President Johnson. We are a P5 permanent UN Security Council member and member of the G7 and G20 not a small country like Ireland but equivalent to the US and France and would likely have a powerful directly elected President like them if we were a republic.ping said:
There would never be a president Blair or President Johnson.HYUFD said:
We currently have King Charles and Queen Consort Camilla, this should be peak time for republicans, if they can't even get close to a majority now they have zero chance once William and Kate take over, especially given the alternative of President Blair or President JohnsonBig_G_NorthWales said:
I back retaining the monarchy but expect there will be a continuous drip of support over the coming years as we are already seeingHYUFD said:
No it isn't. 18 Commonwealth realms became republics or got their own head of state in the late Queen's reign. There are only 15 Commonwealth realms left so even if they all ended the monarchy neither Charles nor William would have lost as many as the late Queen did. Elizabeth II did a good job but she she did undoubtedly leave the monarchy globally smaller than she inherited from her father.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Since the late Queen the direction of travel, if you excuse the pun, is ever downwards in the pollingRichard_Tyndall said:
You are utterly wrong.Big_G_NorthWales said:
To be honest an old horse drawn golden coach is the antithesis of being in touchHYUFD said:
Even the King of Spain goes in a grand parade to his inauguration accompanied by cavalry (as indeed does the President of Italy to his)kle4 said:It might be a flop in the same way some people got super excited by how 'few' people showed up for the Queue, as though hundreds of thousands of people doing it was not still an awful lot considering what the activity was, or how people sometimes denigrate this or that protest as having only 100k or 500k or whatever, out of 70m people, ignoring that, again, that is a lot of people to take time out to do it.
There's this yearning sometimes that takes even genuine points way too far. I'm a monarchist and it'd never even occur to me to watch it in a public place, no thank you. I'd be astonished if even 5% do.
I'll probably record it so I can watch it on fast forward. I'm more worried it won't be extravagant and silly enough because they are worried about how it looks during cost of living crisis, and the sense of privilege. Fact is you cannot hold a coronation without looking out of touch and a bit silly, so just go for it. Just think how Spanish republicans missed out on things to make fun of because their King just got handed a sash by his dad.
It may well be a very embarrassing event and certainly not a help in endearing the monarchy to the country
In the UK around 2/3 still back retaining the monarchy
A president Rowling - or similar - would win any ballot. cf; Ireland.
On every measure, J K Rowling would be a better head of state.
Say it ain’t so?
Even if we only had a ceremonial President elected by Parliament it would more likely be President Hague or President Ed Miliband than President Rowling (who is hated now by trans activists anyway). Even the current Irish President is an ex Labour politician
0 -
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.Carnyx said:
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.Burgessian said:
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.kle4 said:It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.0 -
Depends entirely on how the drafting committee of the new English Republic see things.HYUFD said:
No, there almost certainly would be a President Blair or President Johnson. We are a P5 permanent UN Security Council member and member of the G7 and G20 not a small country like Ireland but equivalent to the US and France and would likely have a powerful directly elected President like them if we were a republic.ping said:
There would never be a president Blair or President Johnson.HYUFD said:
We currently have King Charles and Queen Consort Camilla, this should be peak time for republicans, if they can't even get close to a majority now they have zero chance once William and Kate take over, especially given the alternative of President Blair or President JohnsonBig_G_NorthWales said:
I back retaining the monarchy but expect there will be a continuous drip of support over the coming years as we are already seeingHYUFD said:
No it isn't. 18 Commonwealth realms became republics or got their own head of state in the late Queen's reign. There are only 15 Commonwealth realms left so even if they all ended the monarchy neither Charles nor William would have lost as many as the late Queen did. Elizabeth II did a good job but she she did undoubtedly leave the monarchy globally smaller than she inherited from her father.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Since the late Queen the direction of travel, if you excuse the pun, is ever downwards in the pollingRichard_Tyndall said:
You are utterly wrong.Big_G_NorthWales said:
To be honest an old horse drawn golden coach is the antithesis of being in touchHYUFD said:
Even the King of Spain goes in a grand parade to his inauguration accompanied by cavalry (as indeed does the President of Italy to his)kle4 said:It might be a flop in the same way some people got super excited by how 'few' people showed up for the Queue, as though hundreds of thousands of people doing it was not still an awful lot considering what the activity was, or how people sometimes denigrate this or that protest as having only 100k or 500k or whatever, out of 70m people, ignoring that, again, that is a lot of people to take time out to do it.
There's this yearning sometimes that takes even genuine points way too far. I'm a monarchist and it'd never even occur to me to watch it in a public place, no thank you. I'd be astonished if even 5% do.
I'll probably record it so I can watch it on fast forward. I'm more worried it won't be extravagant and silly enough because they are worried about how it looks during cost of living crisis, and the sense of privilege. Fact is you cannot hold a coronation without looking out of touch and a bit silly, so just go for it. Just think how Spanish republicans missed out on things to make fun of because their King just got handed a sash by his dad.
It may well be a very embarrassing event and certainly not a help in endearing the monarchy to the country
In the UK around 2/3 still back retaining the monarchy
A president Rowling - or similar - would win any ballot. cf; Ireland.
On every measure, J K Rowling would be a better head of state.
Say it ain’t so?
Even if we only had a ceremonial President elected by Parliament it would more likely be President Hague or President Ed Miliband than President Rowling (who is hated now by trans activists anyway). Even the current Irish President is an ex Labour politician
Republic Cymru will simply ask Llafor to nominate someone.0 -
The award for the biggest pile of shite on here today has a winner.Westie said:
There is no obligation on UNSC member republics to have shitty executive presidencies, even if all four of them do. A country which has a hereditary monarchy, an even shittier arrangement, need not limit itself to climbing only one level up inside the sewage pipe. A British republic could have a presidency similar to the German one. The "you don't want a politician as head of state" bullshit was how the monarch managed to win the 1999 referendum in Australia, despite having a large republican majority. Nothing wrong with a President Miliband or Hague or Rowling. Bring it on. Better than some old bastard who wants to get biblically anointed and seems to think he's the king of kings and the head of all religions. The monarchy is making the country a fucking laughing stock.HYUFD said:
No, there almost certainly would be a President Blair or President Johnson. We are a P5 permanent UN Security Council member and member of the G7 and G20 not a small country like Ireland but equivalent to the US and France and would likely have a powerful directly elected President like them if we were a republic.ping said:
There would never be a president Blair or President Johnson.HYUFD said:
We currently have King Charles and Queen Consort Camilla, this should be peak time for republicans, if they can't even get close to a majority now they have zero chance once William and Kate take over, especially given the alternative of President Blair or President JohnsonBig_G_NorthWales said:
I back retaining the monarchy but expect there will be a continuous drip of support over the coming years as we are already seeingHYUFD said:
No it isn't. 18 Commonwealth realms became republics or got their own head of state in the late Queen's reign. There are only 15 Commonwealth realms left so even if they all ended the monarchy neither Charles nor William would have lost as many as the late Queen did. Elizabeth II did a good job but she she did undoubtedly leave the monarchy globally smaller than she inherited from her father.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Since the late Queen the direction of travel, if you excuse the pun, is ever downwards in the pollingRichard_Tyndall said:
You are utterly wrong.Big_G_NorthWales said:
To be honest an old horse drawn golden coach is the antithesis of being in touchHYUFD said:
Even the King of Spain goes in a grand parade to his inauguration accompanied by cavalry (as indeed does the President of Italy to his)kle4 said:It might be a flop in the same way some people got super excited by how 'few' people showed up for the Queue, as though hundreds of thousands of people doing it was not still an awful lot considering what the activity was, or how people sometimes denigrate this or that protest as having only 100k or 500k or whatever, out of 70m people, ignoring that, again, that is a lot of people to take time out to do it.
There's this yearning sometimes that takes even genuine points way too far. I'm a monarchist and it'd never even occur to me to watch it in a public place, no thank you. I'd be astonished if even 5% do.
I'll probably record it so I can watch it on fast forward. I'm more worried it won't be extravagant and silly enough because they are worried about how it looks during cost of living crisis, and the sense of privilege. Fact is you cannot hold a coronation without looking out of touch and a bit silly, so just go for it. Just think how Spanish republicans missed out on things to make fun of because their King just got handed a sash by his dad.
It may well be a very embarrassing event and certainly not a help in endearing the monarchy to the country
In the UK around 2/3 still back retaining the monarchy
A president Rowling - or similar - would win any ballot. cf; Ireland.
On every measure, J K Rowling would be a better head of state.
Say it ain’t so?
Even if we only had a ceremonial President elected by Parliament it would more likely be President Hague or President Ed Miliband than President Rowling (who is hated now by trans activists anyway). Even the current Irish President is an ex Labour politician2 -
Max Versappen out!1
-
Twitter
mandy rhodes@holyroodmandy
That must have been an uncomfortable morning in the Sturgeon/Murrell kitchen as the SNP CEO pushed his resignation letter across the breakfast bar to his boss!
https://twitter.com/holyroodmandy/status/16370655967256125660 -
So they would then most likely end up with President Kinnock, as if we didn't need any more reasons to keep the monarchy!OldKingCole said:
Depends entirely on how the drafting committee of the new English Republic see things.HYUFD said:
No, there almost certainly would be a President Blair or President Johnson. We are a P5 permanent UN Security Council member and member of the G7 and G20 not a small country like Ireland but equivalent to the US and France and would likely have a powerful directly elected President like them if we were a republic.ping said:
There would never be a president Blair or President Johnson.HYUFD said:
We currently have King Charles and Queen Consort Camilla, this should be peak time for republicans, if they can't even get close to a majority now they have zero chance once William and Kate take over, especially given the alternative of President Blair or President JohnsonBig_G_NorthWales said:
I back retaining the monarchy but expect there will be a continuous drip of support over the coming years as we are already seeingHYUFD said:
No it isn't. 18 Commonwealth realms became republics or got their own head of state in the late Queen's reign. There are only 15 Commonwealth realms left so even if they all ended the monarchy neither Charles nor William would have lost as many as the late Queen did. Elizabeth II did a good job but she she did undoubtedly leave the monarchy globally smaller than she inherited from her father.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Since the late Queen the direction of travel, if you excuse the pun, is ever downwards in the pollingRichard_Tyndall said:
You are utterly wrong.Big_G_NorthWales said:
To be honest an old horse drawn golden coach is the antithesis of being in touchHYUFD said:
Even the King of Spain goes in a grand parade to his inauguration accompanied by cavalry (as indeed does the President of Italy to his)kle4 said:It might be a flop in the same way some people got super excited by how 'few' people showed up for the Queue, as though hundreds of thousands of people doing it was not still an awful lot considering what the activity was, or how people sometimes denigrate this or that protest as having only 100k or 500k or whatever, out of 70m people, ignoring that, again, that is a lot of people to take time out to do it.
There's this yearning sometimes that takes even genuine points way too far. I'm a monarchist and it'd never even occur to me to watch it in a public place, no thank you. I'd be astonished if even 5% do.
I'll probably record it so I can watch it on fast forward. I'm more worried it won't be extravagant and silly enough because they are worried about how it looks during cost of living crisis, and the sense of privilege. Fact is you cannot hold a coronation without looking out of touch and a bit silly, so just go for it. Just think how Spanish republicans missed out on things to make fun of because their King just got handed a sash by his dad.
It may well be a very embarrassing event and certainly not a help in endearing the monarchy to the country
In the UK around 2/3 still back retaining the monarchy
A president Rowling - or similar - would win any ballot. cf; Ireland.
On every measure, J K Rowling would be a better head of state.
Say it ain’t so?
Even if we only had a ceremonial President elected by Parliament it would more likely be President Hague or President Ed Miliband than President Rowling (who is hated now by trans activists anyway). Even the current Irish President is an ex Labour politician
Republic Cymru will simply ask Llafor to nominate someone.0 -
Latest insider information, the knife goes deeper
3 -
Given the bad press he has had over the past 30+ years, it is actually pretty good.Carnyx said:
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.HYUFD said:
Nope, only 29% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Again ratings Sunak or Starmer would kill forReed said:
Given recent opinion polls that means about 40% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Not good.HYUFD said:
Is he politically divisive? The latest Yougov on the royal family has 79% of Conservative voters, 72% of LD voters and 54% of Labour voters having a favourable view of King Charles. Starmer and Sunak would kill for those ratingsReed said:
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.numbertwelve said:Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2023/01/12/prince-harrys-popularity-falls-further-spare-hits-
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/leosln75nr/Internal_Royals_230111.pdf
That's pretty pathetic actually.0 -
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.Burgessian said:
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.Carnyx said:
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.Burgessian said:
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.kle4 said:It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.0 -
I think people are naturally rallying round. The significant thing though is the enduring popularity of William and Kate. The monarchy seems utterly secure for the foreseeable.RobD said:
Is it, given his past favourability ratings?Carnyx said:
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.HYUFD said:
Nope, only 29% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Again ratings Sunak or Starmer would kill forReed said:
Given recent opinion polls that means about 40% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Not good.HYUFD said:
Is he politically divisive? The latest Yougov on the royal family has 79% of Conservative voters, 72% of LD voters and 54% of Labour voters having a favourable view of King Charles. Starmer and Sunak would kill for those ratingsReed said:
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.numbertwelve said:Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2023/01/12/prince-harrys-popularity-falls-further-spare-hits-
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/leosln75nr/Internal_Royals_230111.pdf
That's pretty pathetic actually.0 -
Talking of wetting yourself laughing, I imagine TSE has really had to change his trousers after that shambles from Red Bull!0
-
We can be sure she will not be filling her own bankbook as labour usually do , people her eknow what bad uns they are. Far better a bit of religion as a grifter.RandallFlagg said:
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.Burgessian said:
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.Carnyx said:
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.Burgessian said:
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.kle4 said:It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.2 -
What is pathetic is you criticising the King for having only a 62% positive rating when the pathetic 2 main candidates of your pathetic party, Forbes and Yousaf, have just a 27% and 22% positive rating respectively in Scotland. Even in Scotland the King has double that at 52% positive.Carnyx said:
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.HYUFD said:
Nope, only 29% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Again ratings Sunak or Starmer would kill forReed said:
Given recent opinion polls that means about 40% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Not good.HYUFD said:
Is he politically divisive? The latest Yougov on the royal family has 79% of Conservative voters, 72% of LD voters and 54% of Labour voters having a favourable view of King Charles. Starmer and Sunak would kill for those ratingsReed said:
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.numbertwelve said:Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2023/01/12/prince-harrys-popularity-falls-further-spare-hits-
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/leosln75nr/Internal_Royals_230111.pdf
That's pretty pathetic actually.
Now that REALLY is PATHETIC!!!!!!!!
https://news.sky.com/story/snp-leadership-scottish-independence-support-at-just-39-poll-says-128327831 -
Bloody French tourist board, think up all sorts of shit to trap you there.BlancheLivermore said:Thanks very much to @DavidL and @TheScreamingEagles for getting me back on here
I'm going to be away for the Coronation; I've got three weeks off work, starting the last week of April
I'm seriously considering a big walk in Brittany - visiting the sites of the seven founder Saints (all from Wales and Cornwall)
It's a 350 mile trek, just to visit the seven places, not taking into account detours to see other interesting things on the way
I think I should go for it
The legend says that if you don't do this walk in your lifetime, you have to do it in the afterlife. But you can only walk one coffin length every seven years in the afterlife1 -
In answer to the question in the header. I effing well hope so!0
-
This Aston Martin is looking very impressive so far this year. Wonder if they can keep this up? If so they could be a real force in a year or so.1
-
"Tartan Tory"....RandallFlagg said:
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.Burgessian said:
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.Carnyx said:
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.Burgessian said:
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.kle4 said:It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.0 -
That’s certainly how I interpret public opinion.Burgessian said:
I think people are naturally rallying round. The significant thing though is the enduring popularity of William and Kate. The monarchy seems utterly secure for the foreseeable.RobD said:
Is it, given his past favourability ratings?Carnyx said:
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.HYUFD said:
Nope, only 29% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Again ratings Sunak or Starmer would kill forReed said:
Given recent opinion polls that means about 40% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Not good.HYUFD said:
Is he politically divisive? The latest Yougov on the royal family has 79% of Conservative voters, 72% of LD voters and 54% of Labour voters having a favourable view of King Charles. Starmer and Sunak would kill for those ratingsReed said:
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.numbertwelve said:Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2023/01/12/prince-harrys-popularity-falls-further-spare-hits-
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/leosln75nr/Internal_Royals_230111.pdf
That's pretty pathetic actually.2 -
Just as you forecast Malcmalcolmg said:Latest insider information, the knife goes deeper
You are the sage of PB on all matters SNP1 -
Notd relevant. You are comparing kings with elected officials, which you have spent all day denying is a valid comparison. And the institution of monarchy with divine right ought to have a *much* stronger consensus than 62 per cent ranging from 'great' to 'little better than meh'.HYUFD said:
What is pathetic is you criticising the King for having only a 62% positive rating when the pathetic 2 main candidates of your pathetic party, Forbes and Yousaf, have just a 27% and 22% positive rating respectively.Carnyx said:
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.HYUFD said:
Nope, only 29% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Again ratings Sunak or Starmer would kill forReed said:
Given recent opinion polls that means about 40% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Not good.HYUFD said:
Is he politically divisive? The latest Yougov on the royal family has 79% of Conservative voters, 72% of LD voters and 54% of Labour voters having a favourable view of King Charles. Starmer and Sunak would kill for those ratingsReed said:
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.numbertwelve said:Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2023/01/12/prince-harrys-popularity-falls-further-spare-hits-
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/leosln75nr/Internal_Royals_230111.pdf
That's pretty pathetic actually.
Now that REALLY is PATHETIC!!!!!!!!
https://news.sky.com/story/snp-leadership-scottish-independence-support-at-just-39-poll-says-128327830 -
Her views on the SNP's record in office will be more than enough!RandallFlagg said:
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.Burgessian said:
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.Carnyx said:
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.Burgessian said:
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.kle4 said:It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.1 -
In Scotland it just feels normal. We live in a Potemkin village.RobD said:
The launch of the ship in 2017 (six years before it will actually go into service),with painted on windows to make it look ready, seems so surreal.DavidL said:
But everyone got their bonuses for their astounding (well I am astounded by the outcome of their efforts, for one) efforts. Which is nice.MarqueeMark said:
"Glen Sannox and Hull 802 were due online in the first half of 2018 when Ferguson Marine was under the control of tycoon Jim McColl, with one initially to serve Arran and the other to serve the Skye triangle routes to North Uist and Harris, but they are at least five years late. The last estimates suggested the costs of delivery has more than quadrupled compared to the original £97m cost."Scott_xP said:@heraldscotland
The chief financial officer of Ferguson Marine has left the nationalised shipyard
https://twitter.com/heraldscotland/status/16371216917543321600 -
The German President is a politician and ex leader of the SPD who only got the job as a consolation prize after Merkel beat him in 2009.Westie said:
There is no obligation on UNSC member republics to have shitty executive presidencies, even if all four of them do. A country which has a hereditary monarchy, an even shittier arrangement, need not limit itself to climbing only one level up inside the sewage pipe. A British republic could have a presidency similar to the German one. The "you don't want a politician as head of state" bullshit was how the monarch managed to win the 1999 referendum in Australia, despite having a large republican majority. You may find it's worn a bit thin, HYUFD. There's nothing wrong with a President Miliband or Hague or Rowling. Bring it on. Doesn't scare anyone, so long as they're non-executive. Better than some addled old bastard who's there because of who is mother was, who wants to get biblically anointed, who seems to think he's the king of kings and the head of all religions, and who obviously hasn't acquired the art of speaking to servants even after seven decades of practice. The monarchy is making the country a fucking laughing stock.HYUFD said:
No, there almost certainly would be a President Blair or President Johnson. We are a P5 permanent UN Security Council member and member of the G7 and G20 not a small country like Ireland but equivalent to the US and France and would likely have a powerful directly elected President like them if we were a republic.ping said:
There would never be a president Blair or President Johnson.HYUFD said:
We currently have King Charles and Queen Consort Camilla, this should be peak time for republicans, if they can't even get close to a majority now they have zero chance once William and Kate take over, especially given the alternative of President Blair or President JohnsonBig_G_NorthWales said:
I back retaining the monarchy but expect there will be a continuous drip of support over the coming years as we are already seeingHYUFD said:
No it isn't. 18 Commonwealth realms became republics or got their own head of state in the late Queen's reign. There are only 15 Commonwealth realms left so even if they all ended the monarchy neither Charles nor William would have lost as many as the late Queen did. Elizabeth II did a good job but she she did undoubtedly leave the monarchy globally smaller than she inherited from her father.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Since the late Queen the direction of travel, if you excuse the pun, is ever downwards in the pollingRichard_Tyndall said:
You are utterly wrong.Big_G_NorthWales said:
To be honest an old horse drawn golden coach is the antithesis of being in touchHYUFD said:
Even the King of Spain goes in a grand parade to his inauguration accompanied by cavalry (as indeed does the President of Italy to his)kle4 said:It might be a flop in the same way some people got super excited by how 'few' people showed up for the Queue, as though hundreds of thousands of people doing it was not still an awful lot considering what the activity was, or how people sometimes denigrate this or that protest as having only 100k or 500k or whatever, out of 70m people, ignoring that, again, that is a lot of people to take time out to do it.
There's this yearning sometimes that takes even genuine points way too far. I'm a monarchist and it'd never even occur to me to watch it in a public place, no thank you. I'd be astonished if even 5% do.
I'll probably record it so I can watch it on fast forward. I'm more worried it won't be extravagant and silly enough because they are worried about how it looks during cost of living crisis, and the sense of privilege. Fact is you cannot hold a coronation without looking out of touch and a bit silly, so just go for it. Just think how Spanish republicans missed out on things to make fun of because their King just got handed a sash by his dad.
It may well be a very embarrassing event and certainly not a help in endearing the monarchy to the country
In the UK around 2/3 still back retaining the monarchy
A president Rowling - or similar - would win any ballot. cf; Ireland.
On every measure, J K Rowling would be a better head of state.
Say it ain’t so?
Even if we only had a ceremonial President elected by Parliament it would more likely be President Hague or President Ed Miliband than President Rowling (who is hated now by trans activists anyway). Even the current Irish President is an ex Labour politician
So yes I certainly prefer our monarchy to that rubbish, as do other nations with constitutional monarchies from Denmark to Spain, the Netherlands to Jordan and New Zealand to Canada and Japan to Norway0 -
You are forgetting that Labour is actually a right-wing party - and even more so if it is not to lose in England. SKS is a born again British nationalist and Brexiter, so that is going to be tricky.Burgessian said:
"Tartan Tory"....RandallFlagg said:
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.Burgessian said:
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.Carnyx said:
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.Burgessian said:
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.kle4 said:It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.0 -
I think it was the Welsh (Colonies) who came up with it!ydoethur said:
Bloody French tourist board, think up all sorts of shit to trap you there.BlancheLivermore said:Thanks very much to @DavidL and @TheScreamingEagles for getting me back on here
I'm going to be away for the Coronation; I've got three weeks off work, starting the last week of April
I'm seriously considering a big walk in Brittany - visiting the sites of the seven founder Saints (all from Wales and Cornwall)
It's a 350 mile trek, just to visit the seven places, not taking into account detours to see other interesting things on the way
I think I should go for it
The legend says that if you don't do this walk in your lifetime, you have to do it in the afterlife. But you can only walk one coffin length every seven years in the afterlife0 -
Will Sunak be away when the free vote comes up ?
What will Tory MPs do ?
Failing to vote for sanctions if Johnson is found guilty would be a gift for the opposition.0 -
If he's right, there's going to be some pissed off betters who have backed Humza earlier today...malcolmg said:Latest insider information, the knife goes deeper
2 -
13 cars covered by 0.886. Closest season in years.0
-
-
Forbes is right of Sunak let alone Starmer, the SNP will tear itself apart on that basis if she winsCarnyx said:
You are forgetting that Labour is actually a right-wing party - and even more so if it is not to lose in England. SKS is a born again British nationalist and Brexiter, so that is going to be tricky.Burgessian said:
"Tartan Tory"....RandallFlagg said:
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.Burgessian said:
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.Carnyx said:
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.Burgessian said:
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.kle4 said:It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.0 -
The Welsh are even worse.BlancheLivermore said:
I think it was the Welsh (Colonies) who came up with it!ydoethur said:
Bloody French tourist board, think up all sorts of shit to trap you there.BlancheLivermore said:Thanks very much to @DavidL and @TheScreamingEagles for getting me back on here
I'm going to be away for the Coronation; I've got three weeks off work, starting the last week of April
I'm seriously considering a big walk in Brittany - visiting the sites of the seven founder Saints (all from Wales and Cornwall)
It's a 350 mile trek, just to visit the seven places, not taking into account detours to see other interesting things on the way
I think I should go for it
The legend says that if you don't do this walk in your lifetime, you have to do it in the afterlife. But you can only walk one coffin length every seven years in the afterlife
I should know, I'm a Welshman.3 -
All we need now is the return of the King over the water.Burgessian said:
"Tartan Tory"....RandallFlagg said:
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.Burgessian said:
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.Carnyx said:
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.Burgessian said:
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.kle4 said:It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.0 -
Yup.ydoethur said:Talking of wetting yourself laughing, I imagine TSE has really had to change his trousers after that shambles from Red Bull!
Going to back the Dutch shunt to win tomorrow though.0 -
Nope, it is a valid comparison. The King is still far more popular than any senior politician and his son and the Princess of Wales even more so.Carnyx said:
Notd relevant. You are comparing kings with elected officials, which you have spent all day denying is a valid comparison. And the institution of monarchy with divine right ought to have a *much* stronger consensus than 62 per cent ranging from 'great' to 'little better than meh'.HYUFD said:
What is pathetic is you criticising the King for having only a 62% positive rating when the pathetic 2 main candidates of your pathetic party, Forbes and Yousaf, have just a 27% and 22% positive rating respectively.Carnyx said:
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.HYUFD said:
Nope, only 29% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Again ratings Sunak or Starmer would kill forReed said:
Given recent opinion polls that means about 40% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Not good.HYUFD said:
Is he politically divisive? The latest Yougov on the royal family has 79% of Conservative voters, 72% of LD voters and 54% of Labour voters having a favourable view of King Charles. Starmer and Sunak would kill for those ratingsReed said:
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.numbertwelve said:Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2023/01/12/prince-harrys-popularity-falls-further-spare-hits-
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/leosln75nr/Internal_Royals_230111.pdf
That's pretty pathetic actually.
Now that REALLY is PATHETIC!!!!!!!!
https://news.sky.com/story/snp-leadership-scottish-independence-support-at-just-39-poll-says-12832783
The fact we still have a few republican whingers who dislike the monarchy is largely irrelevant as they have little more support than the LDs got in 20100 -
How is she right of them? She's been in a key SNP ministry for years and that is well to the left of both of them by any standard.HYUFD said:
Forbes is right of Sunak let alone Starmer, the SNP will tear itself apart on that basis if she winsCarnyx said:
You are forgetting that Labour is actually a right-wing party - and even more so if it is not to lose in England. SKS is a born again British nationalist and Brexiter, so that is going to be tricky.Burgessian said:
"Tartan Tory"....RandallFlagg said:
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.Burgessian said:
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.Carnyx said:
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.Burgessian said:
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.kle4 said:It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.
0 -
I think trying to argue that Keir Starmer, Angela Rayner, et al, are to the right of Kate Forbes would be a task that would defeat even Murray Foote.Carnyx said:
You are forgetting that Labour is actually a right-wing party - and even more so if it is not to lose in England. SKS is a born again British nationalist and Brexiter, so that is going to be tricky.Burgessian said:
"Tartan Tory"....RandallFlagg said:
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.Burgessian said:
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.Carnyx said:
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.Burgessian said:
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.kle4 said:It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.0 -
Wha'll Be King But Harry?malcolmg said:
All we need now is the return of the King over the water.Burgessian said:
"Tartan Tory"....RandallFlagg said:
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.Burgessian said:
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.Carnyx said:
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.Burgessian said:
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.kle4 said:It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.
0 -
Should make for a very exciting race.TheScreamingEagles said:
Yup.ydoethur said:Talking of wetting yourself laughing, I imagine TSE has really had to change his trousers after that shambles from Red Bull!
Going to back the Dutch shunt to win tomorrow though.0 -
Can’t see it, from starting 15th.TheScreamingEagles said:
Yup.ydoethur said:Talking of wetting yourself laughing, I imagine TSE has really had to change his trousers after that shambles from Red Bull!
Going to back the Dutch shunt to win tomorrow though.0 -
Scandalous red card.
Ref might as well be wearing a green shirt.0 -
He backs Aston Martin?TheScreamingEagles said:Scandalous red card.
Ref might as well be wearing a green shirt.
TBF, I think we will all be rooting for them tomorrow!0 -
He said "in the current climate".TheScreamingEagles said:Scandalous red card.
Ref might as well be wearing a green shirt.
Translation: "I know this is bullshit just as much as you do, but I have no option if I ever want to referee again".0 -
You're looking at it from a London perspective.Burgessian said:
I think trying to argue that Keir Starmer, Angela Rayner, et al, are to the right of Kate Forbes would be a task that would defeat even Murray Foote.Carnyx said:
You are forgetting that Labour is actually a right-wing party - and even more so if it is not to lose in England. SKS is a born again British nationalist and Brexiter, so that is going to be tricky.Burgessian said:
"Tartan Tory"....RandallFlagg said:
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.Burgessian said:
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.Carnyx said:
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.Burgessian said:
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.kle4 said:It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.
It's the overall approach that counts. Trident, Brexit, and refusing referenda (after originally saying it was a decent thing to do) are pretty right wing in a Scottish context.
Also - the Greens in Scotland will take up the more leftie vote, which English Labour don't have to worry about.0 -
In England or Wales?HYUFD said:
So they would then most likely end up with President Kinnock, as if we didn't need any more reasons to keep the monarchy!OldKingCole said:
Depends entirely on how the drafting committee of the new English Republic see things.HYUFD said:
No, there almost certainly would be a President Blair or President Johnson. We are a P5 permanent UN Security Council member and member of the G7 and G20 not a small country like Ireland but equivalent to the US and France and would likely have a powerful directly elected President like them if we were a republic.ping said:
There would never be a president Blair or President Johnson.HYUFD said:
We currently have King Charles and Queen Consort Camilla, this should be peak time for republicans, if they can't even get close to a majority now they have zero chance once William and Kate take over, especially given the alternative of President Blair or President JohnsonBig_G_NorthWales said:
I back retaining the monarchy but expect there will be a continuous drip of support over the coming years as we are already seeingHYUFD said:
No it isn't. 18 Commonwealth realms became republics or got their own head of state in the late Queen's reign. There are only 15 Commonwealth realms left so even if they all ended the monarchy neither Charles nor William would have lost as many as the late Queen did. Elizabeth II did a good job but she she did undoubtedly leave the monarchy globally smaller than she inherited from her father.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Since the late Queen the direction of travel, if you excuse the pun, is ever downwards in the pollingRichard_Tyndall said:
You are utterly wrong.Big_G_NorthWales said:
To be honest an old horse drawn golden coach is the antithesis of being in touchHYUFD said:
Even the King of Spain goes in a grand parade to his inauguration accompanied by cavalry (as indeed does the President of Italy to his)kle4 said:It might be a flop in the same way some people got super excited by how 'few' people showed up for the Queue, as though hundreds of thousands of people doing it was not still an awful lot considering what the activity was, or how people sometimes denigrate this or that protest as having only 100k or 500k or whatever, out of 70m people, ignoring that, again, that is a lot of people to take time out to do it.
There's this yearning sometimes that takes even genuine points way too far. I'm a monarchist and it'd never even occur to me to watch it in a public place, no thank you. I'd be astonished if even 5% do.
I'll probably record it so I can watch it on fast forward. I'm more worried it won't be extravagant and silly enough because they are worried about how it looks during cost of living crisis, and the sense of privilege. Fact is you cannot hold a coronation without looking out of touch and a bit silly, so just go for it. Just think how Spanish republicans missed out on things to make fun of because their King just got handed a sash by his dad.
It may well be a very embarrassing event and certainly not a help in endearing the monarchy to the country
In the UK around 2/3 still back retaining the monarchy
A president Rowling - or similar - would win any ballot. cf; Ireland.
On every measure, J K Rowling would be a better head of state.
Say it ain’t so?
Even if we only had a ceremonial President elected by Parliament it would more likely be President Hague or President Ed Miliband than President Rowling (who is hated now by trans activists anyway). Even the current Irish President is an ex Labour politician
Republic Cymru will simply ask Llafor to nominate someone.
I know you vote Plaid.0 -
They do, but not to the same extent. There were a few constituencies last time where the Green vote was larger than the Tory majority over Labour - eg North West Durham - but they're generally much less visible and less important than their Scottish counterparts.Carnyx said:
You're looking at it from a London perspective.Burgessian said:
I think trying to argue that Keir Starmer, Angela Rayner, et al, are to the right of Kate Forbes would be a task that would defeat even Murray Foote.Carnyx said:
You are forgetting that Labour is actually a right-wing party - and even more so if it is not to lose in England. SKS is a born again British nationalist and Brexiter, so that is going to be tricky.Burgessian said:
"Tartan Tory"....RandallFlagg said:
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.Burgessian said:
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.Carnyx said:
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.Burgessian said:
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.kle4 said:It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.
It's the overall approach that counts. Trident, Brexit, and refusing referenda (after originally saying it was a decent thing to do) are pretty right wing in a Scottish context.
Also - the Greens in Scotland will take up the more leftie vote, which English Labour don't have to worry about.0 -
Mm, thanks for the correction! Interesting.ydoethur said:
They do, but not to the same extent. There were a few constituencies last time where the Green vote was larger than the Tory majority over Labour - eg North West Durham - but they're generally much less visible and less important than their Scottish counterparts.Carnyx said:
You're looking at it from a London perspective.Burgessian said:
I think trying to argue that Keir Starmer, Angela Rayner, et al, are to the right of Kate Forbes would be a task that would defeat even Murray Foote.Carnyx said:
You are forgetting that Labour is actually a right-wing party - and even more so if it is not to lose in England. SKS is a born again British nationalist and Brexiter, so that is going to be tricky.Burgessian said:
"Tartan Tory"....RandallFlagg said:
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.Burgessian said:
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.Carnyx said:
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.Burgessian said:
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.kle4 said:It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.
It's the overall approach that counts. Trident, Brexit, and refusing referenda (after originally saying it was a decent thing to do) are pretty right wing in a Scottish context.
Also - the Greens in Scotland will take up the more leftie vote, which English Labour don't have to worry about.0 -
Watched the Saints Spurs game with my Dad (Spurs season ticket holder)
I'm rather happier than him!
He seems to have already forgotten that he won over seven grand on the PlacePot at Cheltenham on Thursday (from a £16 bet - 32 lines x 50p)3 -
I feel like Charles needs to find 'his thing'. Personally, along with @Leon, I feel the public is most aligned with Charles on architecture, so maybe he should be found a way get stuck into that somehow.MarqueeMark said:On topic. Charles is always going to suffer by comparison because "Well, he's not the Queen, is he?"
It's likely William will get a boost because "Well, he's not King Charles, is he?"1 -
Destroyed what could have been an epic game.TheScreamingEagles said:Scandalous red card.
Ref might as well be wearing a green shirt.1 -
Incidentally you can see why Alpine were very upset about losing Piastri. This McLaren is a joke but he's got it into q3.
You wonder what he'd do with an Alpine...2 -
Twitter
alexmassie@alexmassie·58m
No real need to flee a ship that isn’t sinking because it’s never been afloat.
https://twitter.com/alexmassie/status/1637136443179950082
The Herald - "THE chief financial officer of Ferguson Marine who is engulfed in a row over £87,000 in bonus payments to managers has left the nationalised shipyard."
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/homenews/23395607.ferguson-marine-finance-chief-embroiled-bonus-payments-row-quits/0 -
Environment as well. He was for ecology long before it was fashionable.Luckyguy1983 said:
I feel like Charles needs to find 'his thing'. Personally, along with @Leon, I feel the public is most aligned with Charles on architecture, so maybe he should be found a way get stuck into that somehow.MarqueeMark said:On topic. Charles is always going to suffer by comparison because "Well, he's not the Queen, is he?"
It's likely William will get a boost because "Well, he's not King Charles, is he?"0 -
When is St. Taffy's Day? And it is ok to wear a ramp instead of a leek?ydoethur said:
The Welsh are even worse.BlancheLivermore said:
I think it was the Welsh (Colonies) who came up with it!ydoethur said:
Bloody French tourist board, think up all sorts of shit to trap you there.BlancheLivermore said:Thanks very much to @DavidL and @TheScreamingEagles for getting me back on here
I'm going to be away for the Coronation; I've got three weeks off work, starting the last week of April
I'm seriously considering a big walk in Brittany - visiting the sites of the seven founder Saints (all from Wales and Cornwall)
It's a 350 mile trek, just to visit the seven places, not taking into account detours to see other interesting things on the way
I think I should go for it
The legend says that if you don't do this walk in your lifetime, you have to do it in the afterlife. But you can only walk one coffin length every seven years in the afterlife
I should know, I'm a Welshman.
The ramp being Appalachian equivalent/substitute, for example world-famous Ramp Festival of Richwood, West Virginia, one of a number held across the region.
One one notorious occasion, the editor of the local "West Virginia Hillbilly" (an equally notorious character) printed an edition of the paper with ramp-scented ink. And when the initial print run didn't seem sufficiently "fragrant" added more of essence of ramp.
As the ink dried, the odor increased expotentially. Resulting in several postal employee (are you getting this, Blanche?) in a railroad mail car, being overcome by the fumes. Was with some difficulty that the paper was able to retain it's postal privileges.0 -
St David, not St Taff. And traditionally we wear daffodils not leeks on that day,SeaShantyIrish2 said:
When is St. Taffy's Day? And it is ok to wear a ramp instead of a leek?ydoethur said:
The Welsh are even worse.BlancheLivermore said:
I think it was the Welsh (Colonies) who came up with it!ydoethur said:
Bloody French tourist board, think up all sorts of shit to trap you there.BlancheLivermore said:Thanks very much to @DavidL and @TheScreamingEagles for getting me back on here
I'm going to be away for the Coronation; I've got three weeks off work, starting the last week of April
I'm seriously considering a big walk in Brittany - visiting the sites of the seven founder Saints (all from Wales and Cornwall)
It's a 350 mile trek, just to visit the seven places, not taking into account detours to see other interesting things on the way
I think I should go for it
The legend says that if you don't do this walk in your lifetime, you have to do it in the afterlife. But you can only walk one coffin length every seven years in the afterlife
I should know, I'm a Welshman.
The ramp being Appalachian equivalent/substitute, for example world-famous Ramp Festival of Richwood, West Virginia, one of a number held across the region.
One one notorious occasion, the editor of the local "West Virginia Hillbilly" (an equally notorious character) printed an edition of the paper with ramp-scented ink. And when the initial print run didn't seem sufficiently "fragrant" added more of essence of ramp.
As the ink dried, the odor increased expotentially. Resulting in several postal employee (are you getting this, Blanche?) in a railroad mail car, being overcome by the fumes. Was with some difficulty that the paper was able to retain it's postal privileges.2 -
Going to be tricky to convince people that someone who is against gay marriage, wants a smaller state, and thinks George Osborne's economic programme was wonderful is more left wing than SKS.Carnyx said:
You are forgetting that Labour is actually a right-wing party - and even more so if it is not to lose in England. SKS is a born again British nationalist and Brexiter, so that is going to be tricky.Burgessian said:
"Tartan Tory"....RandallFlagg said:
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.Burgessian said:
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.Carnyx said:
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.Burgessian said:
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.kle4 said:It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.2 -
Speaking of Leon, I see he is no longer banned. Perhaps someone should tell him?Luckyguy1983 said:
I feel like Charles needs to find 'his thing'. Personally, along with @Leon, I feel the public is most aligned with Charles on architecture, so maybe he should be found a way get stuck into that somehow.MarqueeMark said:On topic. Charles is always going to suffer by comparison because "Well, he's not the Queen, is he?"
It's likely William will get a boost because "Well, he's not King Charles, is he?"0 -
Two political hot potatoes though, and getting hotter. Whatever one thinks of Poundbury it';s not what the big builders want to do, so far as I can see. And as climate change worsens ...ydoethur said:
Environment as well. He was for ecology long before it was fashionable.Luckyguy1983 said:
I feel like Charles needs to find 'his thing'. Personally, along with @Leon, I feel the public is most aligned with Charles on architecture, so maybe he should be found a way get stuck into that somehow.MarqueeMark said:On topic. Charles is always going to suffer by comparison because "Well, he's not the Queen, is he?"
It's likely William will get a boost because "Well, he's not King Charles, is he?"0 -
He's already 74. His mum had had half a century in the role by this point. Getting "his thing" has maybe 20 years still as King, but at that age, does he have the energy? Dunno.Luckyguy1983 said:
I feel like Charles needs to find 'his thing'. Personally, along with @Leon, I feel the public is most aligned with Charles on architecture, so maybe he should be found a way get stuck into that somehow.MarqueeMark said:On topic. Charles is always going to suffer by comparison because "Well, he's not the Queen, is he?"
It's likely William will get a boost because "Well, he's not King Charles, is he?"0 -
I was reading about Welsh/Roman Conan Meriadoc earlierydoethur said:
The Welsh are even worse.BlancheLivermore said:
I think it was the Welsh (Colonies) who came up with it!ydoethur said:
Bloody French tourist board, think up all sorts of shit to trap you there.BlancheLivermore said:Thanks very much to @DavidL and @TheScreamingEagles for getting me back on here
I'm going to be away for the Coronation; I've got three weeks off work, starting the last week of April
I'm seriously considering a big walk in Brittany - visiting the sites of the seven founder Saints (all from Wales and Cornwall)
It's a 350 mile trek, just to visit the seven places, not taking into account detours to see other interesting things on the way
I think I should go for it
The legend says that if you don't do this walk in your lifetime, you have to do it in the afterlife. But you can only walk one coffin length every seven years in the afterlife
I should know, I'm a Welshman.
They say when he colonised Armorica he had all of the men killed, to be replaced by his soldiers
He then had his men cut out all the women's tongues so they couldn't tell anyone what had happened0 -
Yes, really disappointing, that. I'm all for deterring players tackling recklessly, but I don't think Steward was even doing that - he was basically trying to protect himself. If the laws say that's a red card, the laws need looking at again.MarqueeMark said:
Destroyed what could have been an epic game.TheScreamingEagles said:Scandalous red card.
Ref might as well be wearing a green shirt.
Not much point watching the rest of the game now. Well done to Ireland for winning the Grand Slam; just a shame I was denied 40 minutes of entertainment. I shall set about some Dadmin instead.1 -
On topic - the other half is currently searching for some other country for us to escape to over that weekend.0
-
What was the Queen's thing? I'd say it was basically being less awful than any other public figure. He could try that.ydoethur said:
Environment as well. He was for ecology long before it was fashionable.Luckyguy1983 said:
I feel like Charles needs to find 'his thing'. Personally, along with @Leon, I feel the public is most aligned with Charles on architecture, so maybe he should be found a way get stuck into that somehow.MarqueeMark said:On topic. Charles is always going to suffer by comparison because "Well, he's not the Queen, is he?"
It's likely William will get a boost because "Well, he's not King Charles, is he?"1 -
Well those rumours from Scotland are certainly eyebrow-raising.
I hope Welsh Labour are watching closely*, realising the dangers of being in power for too long with minimal accountability.
*Yes I know they won't be.1 -
Good to see you back AND planning a truly exciting endeavor. Esp. interested to see your proposed route includes & highlights Mont St. Michel.BlancheLivermore said:Thanks very much to @DavidL and @TheScreamingEagles for getting me back on here
I'm going to be away for the Coronation; I've got three weeks off work, starting the last week of April
I'm seriously considering a big walk in Brittany - visiting the sites of the seven founder Saints (all from Wales and Cornwall)
It's a 350 mile trek, just to visit the seven places, not taking into account detours to see other interesting things on the way
I think I should go for it
The legend says that if you don't do this walk in your lifetime, you have to do it in the afterlife. But you can only walk one coffin length every seven years in the afterlife
Of which I happen to have a very nice, exterior-only model.3 -
The Commonwealth.Cookie said:
What was the Queen's thing? I'd say it was basically being less awful than any other public figure. He could try that.ydoethur said:
Environment as well. He was for ecology long before it was fashionable.Luckyguy1983 said:
I feel like Charles needs to find 'his thing'. Personally, along with @Leon, I feel the public is most aligned with Charles on architecture, so maybe he should be found a way get stuck into that somehow.MarqueeMark said:On topic. Charles is always going to suffer by comparison because "Well, he's not the Queen, is he?"
It's likely William will get a boost because "Well, he's not King Charles, is he?"0 -
Good evening, everyone.
An entertaining qualifying session.0 -
Not a pun, but an allusion:Stuartinromford said:
This scandal has clearly been building up for some time... was its Genesis Alex Salmond's resignation?pigeon said:Just saw someone describe SNP departures an an Exodus, which makes perfect sense in a campaign which so far has featured Leviticus and Numbers prominently.
https://twitter.com/ProfChalmers/status/1637046703307075586
(If you can come up with a pun featuring Deuteronomy, you're a better man than I am.)
Ol Deuteronomy's lived many lives
No, I am tempted to say ninety-nine
And her numerous progeny prospers and thrives
And the village is proud of her in her decline
Until recently I’d argue that was true1 -
I don't hold a massive candle for Charles, although I don't actively dislike him, but I am still a monarchist. I revered QEII at an almost religious level - duty was her byword and she was still trying to work 20 hours before she died.Reed said:
Given recent opinion polls that means about 40% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Not good.HYUFD said:
Is he politically divisive? The latest Yougov on the royal family has 79% of Conservative voters, 72% of LD voters and 54% of Labour voters having a favourable view of King Charles. Starmer and Sunak would kill for those ratingsReed said:
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.numbertwelve said:Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2023/01/12/prince-harrys-popularity-falls-further-spare-hits-
I suspect many are similar to me.0 -
Forbes is right of almost every politician bar JRM and Ann Widdecombe on social issues, let alone Starmer. Anti homosexual marriage, anti abortion, even anti women priests.Carnyx said:
How is she right of them? She's been in a key SNP ministry for years and that is well to the left of both of them by any standard.HYUFD said:
Forbes is right of Sunak let alone Starmer, the SNP will tear itself apart on that basis if she winsCarnyx said:
You are forgetting that Labour is actually a right-wing party - and even more so if it is not to lose in England. SKS is a born again British nationalist and Brexiter, so that is going to be tricky.Burgessian said:
"Tartan Tory"....RandallFlagg said:
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.Burgessian said:
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.Carnyx said:
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.Burgessian said:
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.kle4 said:It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.
She backs lower tax and a smaller state too. I haven't seen her oppose Trident either0 -
Sorry, don't buy it. I think like the rest of the UK, people in Scotland think where you end up on the left-right axis is determined primarily by your social and economic views. For instance, nobody, whether they live in Scotland or England thinks Mick Lynch is right wing even though he is a Brexiteer.Carnyx said:
You're looking at it from a London perspective.Burgessian said:
I think trying to argue that Keir Starmer, Angela Rayner, et al, are to the right of Kate Forbes would be a task that would defeat even Murray Foote.Carnyx said:
You are forgetting that Labour is actually a right-wing party - and even more so if it is not to lose in England. SKS is a born again British nationalist and Brexiter, so that is going to be tricky.Burgessian said:
"Tartan Tory"....RandallFlagg said:
If Forbes wins, you can fully bet come the GE Labour will put up posters across the central belt highlighting Forbes' social and (especially her) economic views.Burgessian said:
Her religious beliefs bleed into her views on social policy. She is no progressive and stands in stark contrast to Sturgeon. And, she seems to hold much "drier" views on economics than the average SNPer. She may have to compromise on a lot of that is she wins the leadership but she is a big contrast with Yousaf and the SNP establishment however you look at it.Carnyx said:
Don't agree. You're confusing personal religious beliefs with overall approach, and she's been a key minister for some time now.Burgessian said:
That's certainly the case with the parliamentarians but as to the members, who knows? SNP could end up like Labour in the Corbyn era. Except in this case the leader (Forbes) would be far to the right of the parliamentary party.kle4 said:It will be very funny if Humza does win now. Various people angry with status quo and party establishment but elect Mr Continuity.
At the end of the day the members were all busy defending continuity up until Sturgeon announced, hard to switch.
It's the overall approach that counts. Trident, Brexit, and refusing referenda (after originally saying it was a decent thing to do) are pretty right wing in a Scottish context.
Also - the Greens in Scotland will take up the more leftie vote, which English Labour don't have to worry about.
I guess we'll see, but if Forbes becomes FM and pollsters ask voters to place her on the left-right axis they will position her to the right of SKS, Sarwar, Reeves etc.0 -
William and Kate will be very popular once they, eventually, accede to the throne.Sean_F said:
That’s certainly how I interpret public opinion.Burgessian said:
I think people are naturally rallying round. The significant thing though is the enduring popularity of William and Kate. The monarchy seems utterly secure for the foreseeable.RobD said:
Is it, given his past favourability ratings?Carnyx said:
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.HYUFD said:
Nope, only 29% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Again ratings Sunak or Starmer would kill forReed said:
Given recent opinion polls that means about 40% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Not good.HYUFD said:
Is he politically divisive? The latest Yougov on the royal family has 79% of Conservative voters, 72% of LD voters and 54% of Labour voters having a favourable view of King Charles. Starmer and Sunak would kill for those ratingsReed said:
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.numbertwelve said:Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2023/01/12/prince-harrys-popularity-falls-further-spare-hits-
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/leosln75nr/Internal_Royals_230111.pdf
That's pretty pathetic actually.
That could be in 20 years time, mind.0 -
His great-great-great grandfather Edward VI had virtually the identical challenge.MarqueeMark said:
He's already 74. His mum had had half a century in the role by this point. Getting "his thing" has maybe 20 years still as King, but at that age, does he have the energy? Dunno.Luckyguy1983 said:
I feel like Charles needs to find 'his thing'. Personally, along with @Leon, I feel the public is most aligned with Charles on architecture, so maybe he should be found a way get stuck into that somehow.MarqueeMark said:On topic. Charles is always going to suffer by comparison because "Well, he's not the Queen, is he?"
It's likely William will get a boost because "Well, he's not King Charles, is he?"
Which HE met partly in the field of fashion, as in "Edwardian" in contrast to "Victorian" in many ways beyond dress sense.
But most significantly in the (to coin a phrase) realm of diplomacy. As in EdVII's role in the creation of the Entente Cordiale.1 -
Unless Charles turns out to be an incredibly unpopular King the monarchy will last till then. Out of the two main parties, only Labour might abolish the monarchy and - a bit like its position on Brexit right now - won't do so if they think it will lose them votes.Casino_Royale said:
William and Kate will be very popular once they, eventually, accede to the throne.Sean_F said:
That’s certainly how I interpret public opinion.Burgessian said:
I think people are naturally rallying round. The significant thing though is the enduring popularity of William and Kate. The monarchy seems utterly secure for the foreseeable.RobD said:
Is it, given his past favourability ratings?Carnyx said:
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.HYUFD said:
Nope, only 29% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Again ratings Sunak or Starmer would kill forReed said:
Given recent opinion polls that means about 40% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Not good.HYUFD said:
Is he politically divisive? The latest Yougov on the royal family has 79% of Conservative voters, 72% of LD voters and 54% of Labour voters having a favourable view of King Charles. Starmer and Sunak would kill for those ratingsReed said:
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.numbertwelve said:Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2023/01/12/prince-harrys-popularity-falls-further-spare-hits-
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/leosln75nr/Internal_Royals_230111.pdf
That's pretty pathetic actually.
That could be in 20 years time, mind.0 -
Charles may abdicate in 10 years and retire to Highgrove and hand over to Camilla like the monarchs of Japan, the Netherlands and Spain have abdicated by their late 80s and handed over to their younger sons.RandallFlagg said:
Unless Charles turns out to be an incredibly unpopular King the monarchy will last till then. Out of the two main parties, only Labour might abolish the monarchy and - a bit like its position on Brexit right now - won't do so if they think it will lose them votes.Casino_Royale said:
William and Kate will be very popular once they, eventually, accede to the throne.Sean_F said:
That’s certainly how I interpret public opinion.Burgessian said:
I think people are naturally rallying round. The significant thing though is the enduring popularity of William and Kate. The monarchy seems utterly secure for the foreseeable.RobD said:
Is it, given his past favourability ratings?Carnyx said:
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.HYUFD said:
Nope, only 29% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Again ratings Sunak or Starmer would kill forReed said:
Given recent opinion polls that means about 40% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Not good.HYUFD said:
Is he politically divisive? The latest Yougov on the royal family has 79% of Conservative voters, 72% of LD voters and 54% of Labour voters having a favourable view of King Charles. Starmer and Sunak would kill for those ratingsReed said:
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.numbertwelve said:Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2023/01/12/prince-harrys-popularity-falls-further-spare-hits-
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/leosln75nr/Internal_Royals_230111.pdf
That's pretty pathetic actually.
That could be in 20 years time, mind.
Even Labour voters want to keep the monarchy by 50% to 36%
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/leosln75nr/Internal_Royals_230111.pdf0 -
Prince & Princess of Wales today, are in the same boat (but NOT yacht!) as their predecessors, namely the future King George V and Queen Mary.Casino_Royale said:
William and Kate will be very popular once they, eventually, accede to the throne.Sean_F said:
That’s certainly how I interpret public opinion.Burgessian said:
I think people are naturally rallying round. The significant thing though is the enduring popularity of William and Kate. The monarchy seems utterly secure for the foreseeable.RobD said:
Is it, given his past favourability ratings?Carnyx said:
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.HYUFD said:
Nope, only 29% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Again ratings Sunak or Starmer would kill forReed said:
Given recent opinion polls that means about 40% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Not good.HYUFD said:
Is he politically divisive? The latest Yougov on the royal family has 79% of Conservative voters, 72% of LD voters and 54% of Labour voters having a favourable view of King Charles. Starmer and Sunak would kill for those ratingsReed said:
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.numbertwelve said:Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2023/01/12/prince-harrys-popularity-falls-further-spare-hits-
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/leosln75nr/Internal_Royals_230111.pdf
That's pretty pathetic actually.
That could be in 20 years time, mind.
Who of course proved to be very popular. AND who together established most of standards and expectations for the British monarchy that endure and persist into the dawn of the 3rd millennium.1 -
William, not Camilla. Unless they are hiding something big.HYUFD said:
Charles may abdicate in 10 years and retire to Highgrove and hand over to Camilla like the monarchs of Japan, the Netherlands and Spain have abdicated by their late 80s and handed over to their younger sons.RandallFlagg said:
Unless Charles turns out to be an incredibly unpopular King the monarchy will last till then. Out of the two main parties, only Labour might abolish the monarchy and - a bit like its position on Brexit right now - won't do so if they think it will lose them votes.Casino_Royale said:
William and Kate will be very popular once they, eventually, accede to the throne.Sean_F said:
That’s certainly how I interpret public opinion.Burgessian said:
I think people are naturally rallying round. The significant thing though is the enduring popularity of William and Kate. The monarchy seems utterly secure for the foreseeable.RobD said:
Is it, given his past favourability ratings?Carnyx said:
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.HYUFD said:
Nope, only 29% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Again ratings Sunak or Starmer would kill forReed said:
Given recent opinion polls that means about 40% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Not good.HYUFD said:
Is he politically divisive? The latest Yougov on the royal family has 79% of Conservative voters, 72% of LD voters and 54% of Labour voters having a favourable view of King Charles. Starmer and Sunak would kill for those ratingsReed said:
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.numbertwelve said:Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2023/01/12/prince-harrys-popularity-falls-further-spare-hits-
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/leosln75nr/Internal_Royals_230111.pdf
That's pretty pathetic actually.
That could be in 20 years time, mind.
Even Labour voters want to keep the monarchy by 50% to 36%
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/leosln75nr/Internal_Royals_230111.pdf2 -
@iamliamkelly
EXCL: BBC chairman Richard Sharp helped a friend — at whose wedding he was an usher — get a £1,000/day paid role advising the corporation on standards
Story with the peerless @RosamundUrwin @HarryYorke1
https://twitter.com/iamliamkelly/status/16371559921431019540 -
And to what end?RandallFlagg said:
Unless Charles turns out to be an incredibly unpopular King the monarchy will last till then. Out of the two main parties, only Labour might abolish the monarchy and - a bit like its position on Brexit right now - won't do so if they think it will lose them votes.Casino_Royale said:
William and Kate will be very popular once they, eventually, accede to the throne.Sean_F said:
That’s certainly how I interpret public opinion.Burgessian said:
I think people are naturally rallying round. The significant thing though is the enduring popularity of William and Kate. The monarchy seems utterly secure for the foreseeable.RobD said:
Is it, given his past favourability ratings?Carnyx said:
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.HYUFD said:
Nope, only 29% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Again ratings Sunak or Starmer would kill forReed said:
Given recent opinion polls that means about 40% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Not good.HYUFD said:
Is he politically divisive? The latest Yougov on the royal family has 79% of Conservative voters, 72% of LD voters and 54% of Labour voters having a favourable view of King Charles. Starmer and Sunak would kill for those ratingsReed said:
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.numbertwelve said:Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2023/01/12/prince-harrys-popularity-falls-further-spare-hits-
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/leosln75nr/Internal_Royals_230111.pdf
That's pretty pathetic actually.
That could be in 20 years time, mind.
Few want to ditch the monarchy, and end almost 1,500 years of history and tradition, for the chance to choose another elected politician every four years and lose something that makes Britain distinctive and unique at the same time.
Not going to happen.0 -
Betting Post
F1: If you followed my Perez to win each way tip at 7, I'd advocate laying at around 2.44-2.5 on Betfair.
I'll include this in the pre-race ramble to be posted tomorrow morning.0 -
He's a really good friend, always helping connect them with others who want to spend or receive thousands and thousands of pounds.Scott_xP said:@iamliamkelly
EXCL: BBC chairman Richard Sharp helped a friend — at whose wedding he was an usher — get a £1,000/day paid role advising the corporation on standards
Story with the peerless @RosamundUrwin @HarryYorke1
https://twitter.com/iamliamkelly/status/1637155992143101954
Maybe we could try for a BBC Chair who is not in the business of professional backhanders though.1 -
I could see Charles abdicating in a way I couldn't see HMQEII ever doing.HYUFD said:
Charles may abdicate in 10 years and retire to Highgrove and hand over to Camilla like the monarchs of Japan, the Netherlands and Spain have abdicated by their late 80s and handed over to their younger sons.RandallFlagg said:
Unless Charles turns out to be an incredibly unpopular King the monarchy will last till then. Out of the two main parties, only Labour might abolish the monarchy and - a bit like its position on Brexit right now - won't do so if they think it will lose them votes.Casino_Royale said:
William and Kate will be very popular once they, eventually, accede to the throne.Sean_F said:
That’s certainly how I interpret public opinion.Burgessian said:
I think people are naturally rallying round. The significant thing though is the enduring popularity of William and Kate. The monarchy seems utterly secure for the foreseeable.RobD said:
Is it, given his past favourability ratings?Carnyx said:
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.HYUFD said:
Nope, only 29% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Again ratings Sunak or Starmer would kill forReed said:
Given recent opinion polls that means about 40% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Not good.HYUFD said:
Is he politically divisive? The latest Yougov on the royal family has 79% of Conservative voters, 72% of LD voters and 54% of Labour voters having a favourable view of King Charles. Starmer and Sunak would kill for those ratingsReed said:
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.numbertwelve said:Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2023/01/12/prince-harrys-popularity-falls-further-spare-hits-
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/leosln75nr/Internal_Royals_230111.pdf
That's pretty pathetic actually.
That could be in 20 years time, mind.
Even Labour voters want to keep the monarchy by 50% to 36%
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/leosln75nr/Internal_Royals_230111.pdf
He doesn't feel duty in the same way she did, but does feel hard done by in general.1 -
Any descendents of Cromwell about to vote for? Even as a monarchist I'm a fan.Casino_Royale said:
And to what end?RandallFlagg said:
Unless Charles turns out to be an incredibly unpopular King the monarchy will last till then. Out of the two main parties, only Labour might abolish the monarchy and - a bit like its position on Brexit right now - won't do so if they think it will lose them votes.Casino_Royale said:
William and Kate will be very popular once they, eventually, accede to the throne.Sean_F said:
That’s certainly how I interpret public opinion.Burgessian said:
I think people are naturally rallying round. The significant thing though is the enduring popularity of William and Kate. The monarchy seems utterly secure for the foreseeable.RobD said:
Is it, given his past favourability ratings?Carnyx said:
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.HYUFD said:
Nope, only 29% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Again ratings Sunak or Starmer would kill forReed said:
Given recent opinion polls that means about 40% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Not good.HYUFD said:
Is he politically divisive? The latest Yougov on the royal family has 79% of Conservative voters, 72% of LD voters and 54% of Labour voters having a favourable view of King Charles. Starmer and Sunak would kill for those ratingsReed said:
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.numbertwelve said:Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2023/01/12/prince-harrys-popularity-falls-further-spare-hits-
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/leosln75nr/Internal_Royals_230111.pdf
That's pretty pathetic actually.
That could be in 20 years time, mind.
Few want to ditch the monarchy, and end almost 1,500 years of history and tradition, for the chance to choose another elected politician every four years and lose something that makes Britain distinctive and unique at the same time.
Not going to happen.0 -
I definitely want to see Mont St Michel; if it weren't on the route I would have detouredSeaShantyIrish2 said:
Good to see you back AND planning a truly exciting endeavor. Esp. interested to see your proposed route includes & highlights Mont St. Michel.BlancheLivermore said:Thanks very much to @DavidL and @TheScreamingEagles for getting me back on here
I'm going to be away for the Coronation; I've got three weeks off work, starting the last week of April
I'm seriously considering a big walk in Brittany - visiting the sites of the seven founder Saints (all from Wales and Cornwall)
It's a 350 mile trek, just to visit the seven places, not taking into account detours to see other interesting things on the way
I think I should go for it
The legend says that if you don't do this walk in your lifetime, you have to do it in the afterlife. But you can only walk one coffin length every seven years in the afterlife
Of which I happen to have a very nice, exterior-only model.
I'm planning to stick with my own coined rhyming idiomatic French hiking motto - "Je marche partout et je bois comme un trou" (I walk everywhere and I drink like a hole)
But will certainly extend my drinking from beer and wine (probably mostly Muscadet) to include Cidre, Chouchen and Lambig0 -
I could have done too. Right up until his first broadcast as King.Casino_Royale said:
I could see Charles abdicating in a way I couldn't see HMQEII ever doing.HYUFD said:
Charles may abdicate in 10 years and retire to Highgrove and hand over to Camilla like the monarchs of Japan, the Netherlands and Spain have abdicated by their late 80s and handed over to their younger sons.RandallFlagg said:
Unless Charles turns out to be an incredibly unpopular King the monarchy will last till then. Out of the two main parties, only Labour might abolish the monarchy and - a bit like its position on Brexit right now - won't do so if they think it will lose them votes.Casino_Royale said:
William and Kate will be very popular once they, eventually, accede to the throne.Sean_F said:
That’s certainly how I interpret public opinion.Burgessian said:
I think people are naturally rallying round. The significant thing though is the enduring popularity of William and Kate. The monarchy seems utterly secure for the foreseeable.RobD said:
Is it, given his past favourability ratings?Carnyx said:
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.HYUFD said:
Nope, only 29% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Again ratings Sunak or Starmer would kill forReed said:
Given recent opinion polls that means about 40% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Not good.HYUFD said:
Is he politically divisive? The latest Yougov on the royal family has 79% of Conservative voters, 72% of LD voters and 54% of Labour voters having a favourable view of King Charles. Starmer and Sunak would kill for those ratingsReed said:
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.numbertwelve said:Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2023/01/12/prince-harrys-popularity-falls-further-spare-hits-
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/leosln75nr/Internal_Royals_230111.pdf
That's pretty pathetic actually.
That could be in 20 years time, mind.
Even Labour voters want to keep the monarchy by 50% to 36%
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/leosln75nr/Internal_Royals_230111.pdf
He doesn't feel duty in the same way she did, but does feel hard done by in general.0 -
Would be VERY Byzantine - even for the House of Windsor-Mountbatten-Whathaveyou.RobD said:
William, not Camilla. Unless they are hiding something big.HYUFD said:
Charles may abdicate in 10 years and retire to Highgrove and hand over to Camilla like the monarchs of Japan, the Netherlands and Spain have abdicated by their late 80s and handed over to their younger sons.RandallFlagg said:
Unless Charles turns out to be an incredibly unpopular King the monarchy will last till then. Out of the two main parties, only Labour might abolish the monarchy and - a bit like its position on Brexit right now - won't do so if they think it will lose them votes.Casino_Royale said:
William and Kate will be very popular once they, eventually, accede to the throne.Sean_F said:
That’s certainly how I interpret public opinion.Burgessian said:
I think people are naturally rallying round. The significant thing though is the enduring popularity of William and Kate. The monarchy seems utterly secure for the foreseeable.RobD said:
Is it, given his past favourability ratings?Carnyx said:
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.HYUFD said:
Nope, only 29% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Again ratings Sunak or Starmer would kill forReed said:
Given recent opinion polls that means about 40% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Not good.HYUFD said:
Is he politically divisive? The latest Yougov on the royal family has 79% of Conservative voters, 72% of LD voters and 54% of Labour voters having a favourable view of King Charles. Starmer and Sunak would kill for those ratingsReed said:
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.numbertwelve said:Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2023/01/12/prince-harrys-popularity-falls-further-spare-hits-
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/leosln75nr/Internal_Royals_230111.pdf
That's pretty pathetic actually.
That could be in 20 years time, mind.
Even Labour voters want to keep the monarchy by 50% to 36%
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/leosln75nr/Internal_Royals_230111.pdf0 -
The possibility that a party capable of winning an election will stand on a ticket of either abolishing the monarchy or even holding a referendum on it does not arise in any foreseeable way.RandallFlagg said:
Unless Charles turns out to be an incredibly unpopular King the monarchy will last till then. Out of the two main parties, only Labour might abolish the monarchy and - a bit like its position on Brexit right now - won't do so if they think it will lose them votes.Casino_Royale said:
William and Kate will be very popular once they, eventually, accede to the throne.Sean_F said:
That’s certainly how I interpret public opinion.Burgessian said:
I think people are naturally rallying round. The significant thing though is the enduring popularity of William and Kate. The monarchy seems utterly secure for the foreseeable.RobD said:
Is it, given his past favourability ratings?Carnyx said:
In other words, only 3 in 5 have an even slightly positive view of the King.HYUFD said:
Nope, only 29% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Again ratings Sunak or Starmer would kill forReed said:
Given recent opinion polls that means about 40% have an unfavourable view of Charles. Not good.HYUFD said:
Is he politically divisive? The latest Yougov on the royal family has 79% of Conservative voters, 72% of LD voters and 54% of Labour voters having a favourable view of King Charles. Starmer and Sunak would kill for those ratingsReed said:
I wont be watching. Charles is way too politically divisive to be an effective monarch.numbertwelve said:Ready to be proven wrong but I’m pretty sure it’ll attract a good enough audience. Anecdotally I know a few people who say they’ll watch it for the fact that it’s the first one we’ve had for 70 years and therefore the first one most of us have seen in our lifetimes.
I see no groundswell of republicanism right now, and I’m not entirely sure where others seem to be seeing it.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2023/01/12/prince-harrys-popularity-falls-further-spare-hits-
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/leosln75nr/Internal_Royals_230111.pdf
That's pretty pathetic actually.
That could be in 20 years time, mind.
No such party has even stood on a disestablishment ticket, which would be far less controversial.
Unnecessary policies which may lose elections don't happen. Except if you are T May in 2017.
This is why the monarchy will remain.
2 -
Richard Sharp is accused of corruption?Scott_xP said:@iamliamkelly
EXCL: BBC chairman Richard Sharp helped a friend — at whose wedding he was an usher — get a £1,000/day paid role advising the corporation on standards
Story with the peerless @RosamundUrwin @HarryYorke1
https://twitter.com/iamliamkelly/status/1637155992143101954
I'm shocked. Shocked, I tell you,4
