Royal family favourability ratings are in

[cambridgeshire canary 6,833]

 

[How I Wrote Elastic Man 1,198]

Henry & Meghan are a record low with minus 26 & 42, but Randy Andy, on minus 80 isn't?

Wow

[Wings of a Sparrow 1,444]

Euughh. William and Catherine are too sickly sweet for me. Be unbearable if/when they become the heads of state. 

[KernowCanary 214]

I find it sickening that the country fawns to them while they call us “commoners”, “her subjects” and don’t give a damn about us. Queenie recently wrote an open letter addressed to “my subjects”, thanking her for the “support”. The way TV shows are shoehorning this into their scripts is ridiculous and cringeworthy.

This cost us 1.3 billion, money that could have been saved to help starving families as prices just keep on “hiking”, all thanks to Putin thinking bombing the sh*t out of your neighbours is the solution to some made up thought in his twisted head. I don’t care when people say that the Royals bring in more money than they cost, as that’s an unfounded statement; just how many people go to this country because it’s a “Constitutional Monarchy” instead of a Republic?. France got rid of their parasite family well before any of us and our great-great grandparents were born, yet they get more tourists than us.

This Platinum Medal awarded to people spending 5+ years in the Emergency Services, what an absolute load of rubbish. So, because you ended up in the right job, been there for 5 years or more, got into that job at the right time (if this is your 5th year) and happen to be around and not dead yet for when Queenie reaches 70 years, as well as born in the right timeframe to be around for it let alone born from the right womb of a mother living in a Monarchy instead of a Republic, allows you to get this medal!?. My other half is a mental health nurse working for the NHS and has been in her job for three years, so misses out by two. She don’t care anyway, as if she got one she would have returned it.

Paying tax pounds to fund a Nazi-background family which includes a pedo son, it makes me sick. She isn’t “Happy and Glorious” either, she’s miserable as f*ck. Anyone who says Christmas isn’t the same without watching her pre-recorded garbage, needs a drill through their skull.

Edited June 1, 2022 by KernowCanary

[horsefly 4,318]

31 minutes ago, KernowCanary said:

I find it sickening that the country fawns to them while they call us “commoners”, “her subjects” and don’t give a damn about us. Queenie recently wrote an open letter addressed to “my subjects”, thanking her for the “support”. The way TV shows are shoehorning this into their scripts is ridiculous and cringeworthy.

This cost us 1.3 billion, money that could have been saved to help starving families as prices just keep on “hiking”, all thanks to Putin thinking bombing the sh*t out of your neighbours is the solution to some made up thought in his twisted head. I don’t care when people say that the Royals bring in more money than they cost, as that’s an unfounded statement; just how many people go to this country because it’s a “Constitutional Monarchy” instead of a Republic?. France got rid of their parasite family well before any of us and our great-great grandparents were born, yet they get more tourists than us.

This Platinum Medal awarded to people spending 5+ years in the Emergency Services, what an absolute load of rubbish. So, because you ended up in the right job, been there for 5 years or more, got into that job at the right time (if this is your 5th year) and happen to be around and not dead yet for when Queenie reaches 70 years, as well as born in the right timeframe to be around for it let alone born from the right womb of a mother living in a Monarchy instead of a Republic, allows you to get this medal!?. My other half is a mental health nurse working for the NHS and has been in her job for three years, so misses out by two. She don’t care anyway, as if she got one she would have returned it.

Paying tax pounds to fund a Nazi-background family which includes a pedo son, it makes me sick. She isn’t “Happy and Glorious” either, she’s miserable as f*ck. Anyone who says Christmas isn’t the same without watching her pre-recorded garbage, needs a drill through their skull.

Get off the fence Kernow! It does seem somewhat incongruous that any country deemed to be a democracy would have an unelected head of state determined by the "principle" of heredity. I get the feeling that once queenie has shuffled off her mortal coil, the enthusiasm for monarchy will take a rapid nosedive.

Just one little point of correction; we did actually beat the French (yet again) in the race to behead our monarch and replace him with a republic/commonwealth. It's a good measure of the "success" of eleven years of Puritanism that we wished we could have glued his head back on again.

Time to grow up and elect our head of state. 

[Creative Midfielder 2,003]

12 hours ago, Wings of a Sparrow said:

Euughh. William and Catherine are too sickly sweet for me. Be unbearable if/when they become the heads of state. 

Have to take your word on that because I've no idea who Catherine is 😀

Other than that the scores seem pretty much as you would expect, though I don't know why so many people dislike Meghan - I've always had her down as one of the saner members of the royal family, and probably the only one that has a clue as to what the real world looks like.

[dj11 378]

I am very much against the class system in this country, and the only way it can change, in my mind, is when the royal family are removed from their current position. I appreciate that I am probably in a minority, but I would hope the younger generation have an informed opinion of its worth.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

I do disagree when it is rolled out about the money they bring into the country. How many tourists actually get to see them? I don't visit Notre Dame expecting to see a Hunchback. Its the buildings and areas that attract visitors. If we got rid of the monarchy it wouldn't erase who had their head chopped off at the Tower of London.

[Herman 9,838]

5 hours ago, Creative Midfielder said:

Have to take your word on that because I've no idea who Catherine is 😀

Other than that the scores seem pretty much as you would expect, though I don't know why so many people dislike Meghan - I've always had her down as one of the saner members of the royal family, and probably the only one that has a clue as to what the real world looks like.

The Daily Mail hate campaign worked a treat. I'm not sure what they had against Meghan though. Maybe she was too common?😉

[Midlands Yellow 4,108]

Has everyone got their bunting up ready for the celebrations? 

[Yellow Fever 3,841]

3 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

I do disagree when it is rolled out about the money they bring into the country. How many tourists actually get to see them? I don't visit Notre Dame expecting to see a Hunchback. Its the buildings and areas that attract visitors. If we got rid of the monarchy it wouldn't erase who had their head chopped off at the Tower of London.

We could have some new exhibits too.....

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

59 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

We could have some new exhibits too.....

NCFC Trophy Cabinet

[dylanisabaddog 5,021]

20 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

I do disagree when it is rolled out about the money they bring into the country. How many tourists actually get to see them? I don't visit Notre Dame expecting to see a Hunchback. Its the buildings and areas that attract visitors. If we got rid of the monarchy it wouldn't erase who had their head chopped off at the Tower of London.

The most visited city in Europe is Paris. The most most visited building is the Palace of Versailles. 

[dylanisabaddog 5,021]

21 hours ago, dj11 said:

I am very much against the class system in this country, and the only way it can change, in my mind, is when the royal family are removed from their current position. I appreciate that I am probably in a minority, but I would hope the younger generation have an informed opinion of its worth.

I think between 5 and 10% of the world's population have a ruling monarch. The other 90 to 95% seem strangely content. 

I would like to vote for David Attenborough as our first elected President. If people think he's too old then perhaps his oldest son could do it instead. 

[sonyc 5,541]

16 hours ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Has everyone got their bunting up ready for the celebrations? 

 

 

[The Real Buh 3,486]

2 minutes ago, sonyc said:

 

 

I mean, is this meant to make him look like the urbane, intelligent, sophisticated one?

it’s a sign that says “** Off” on your front door. It’s not even directed at anyone 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,605]

20 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

I do disagree when it is rolled out about the money they bring into the country. How many tourists actually get to see them? I don't visit Notre Dame expecting to see a Hunchback. Its the buildings and areas that attract visitors. If we got rid of the monarchy it wouldn't erase who had their head chopped off at the Tower of London.

How many tourists get to see her misses the point. The monarchy is a living brand that does draw in tourists.

Beyond that, within the UK, having a ceremonial hereditary head of state who is required to be politically neutral is the best way to separate out party politics from the functions of the nation, in contrast to partisan elected Presidents that risk dividing the country on political grounds as we saw with Donald Trump.

She has been a constant thread in British life over a time where the country has changed almost unrecognisably. Speaking for myself, as someone who values a bit of stability and constancy (a not uncommon preference), that's something I like.

Here in Aquitaine, France, the front page of Sud Ouest was a large photo of the Queen and a lot of the content was about the jubilee and her reign. In France. 

Not least, Her Majesty personally has always fulfilled her duties to an admirable standard matched in a way no elected politician ever would and I've no doubt Charles and William will aim for the same high standard.

In conclusion, the monarchy enjoys more popular support than any elected politician domestically, is the most valuable asset we have in the nation's global brand, and she personally has conducted her role impeccably.

Aside from that, making an occasion celebrating her lifetime commitment to the nation, in the full knowledge that most do respect what she has done, yet another occasion to slag off the institution with the usual hackneyed complaints just strikes me as pig ignorant.

Edited June 2, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[Herman 9,838]

He probably heard that you were in the area. 

[Herman 9,838]

6 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

How many tourists get to see her misses the point. The monarchy is a living brand that does draw in tourists.

Beyond that, within the UK, having a ceremonial hereditary head of state who is required to be politically neutral is the best way to separate out party politics from the functions of the nation, in contrast to partisan elected Presidents that risk dividing the country on political grounds as we saw with Donald Trump.

She has been a constant thread in British life over a time where the country has changed almost unrecognisably. Speaking for myself, as someone who values a bit of stability and constancy (a not uncommon preference), that's something I like.

Here in Aquitaine, France, the front page of Sud Ouest was a large photo of the Queen and a lot of the content was about the jubilee and her reign. In France. 

Not least, Her Majesty personally has always fulfilled her duties to an admirable standard matched in a way no elected politician ever would and I've no doubt Charles and William will aim for the same high standard.

In conclusion, the monarchy enjoys more popular support than any elected politician domestically, is the most valuable asset we have in the nation's global brand, and she personally has conducted her role impeccably.

Aside from that, making an occasion celebrating her lifetime commitment to the nation, in the full knowledge that most do respect what she has done, yet another occasion to slag off the institution with the usual hackneyed complaints just strikes me as pig ignorant.

Maybe people are sick and tired of pretending this is OK and healthy for a 21st century democracy. Using a major celebration to highlight how anachronistic it all is is probably the best time. 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,605]

2 minutes ago, Herman said:

Maybe people are sick and tired of pretending this is OK and healthy for a 21st century democracy. Using a major celebration to highlight how anachronistic it all is is probably the best time. 

It is okay, as demonstrated by the popular support she has.

[The Real Buh 3,486]

Correlation with anti-monarchists and Liverpool FC closet fans is hilarious 😂 

call me a boot locker if you like, at least I’m not pitching a tent in klopps rear end

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

37 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

How many tourists get to see her misses the point. The monarchy is a living brand that does draw in tourists.

Beyond that, within the UK, having a ceremonial hereditary head of state who is required to be politically neutral is the best way to separate out party politics from the functions of the nation, in contrast to partisan elected Presidents that risk dividing the country on political grounds as we saw with Donald Trump.

She has been a constant thread in British life over a time where the country has changed almost unrecognisably. Speaking for myself, as someone who values a bit of stability and constancy (a not uncommon preference), that's something I like.

Here in Aquitaine, France, the front page of Sud Ouest was a large photo of the Queen and a lot of the content was about the jubilee and her reign. In France. 

Not least, Her Majesty personally has always fulfilled her duties to an admirable standard matched in a way no elected politician ever would and I've no doubt Charles and William will aim for the same high standard.

In conclusion, the monarchy enjoys more popular support than any elected politician domestically, is the most valuable asset we have in the nation's global brand, and she personally has conducted her role impeccably.

Aside from that, making an occasion celebrating her lifetime commitment to the nation, in the full knowledge that most do respect what she has done, yet another occasion to slag off the institution with the usual hackneyed complaints just strikes me as pig ignorant.

How can anyone be neutral? You really think the Queen likes the Labour Party who have many members who want a Republic?

It either stays or goes.

[Herman 9,838]

29 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

It is okay, as demonstrated by the popular support she has.

Popular support doesn't equate to something being OK. I can name five things off the top of my head that were popular but also utter ****e at the same time.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,605]

2 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

How can anyone be neutral? You really think the Queen likes the Labour Party who have many members who want a Republic?

It either stays or goes.

That's speculation on your part; you have no idea because she keeps her opinions to herself in accordance with her role. 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,605]

9 minutes ago, Herman said:

Popular support doesn't equate to something being OK. I can name five things off the top of my head that were popular but also utter ****e at the same time.

Only in your personal view.

Whether or not we have a monarchy is a clear, simple, and binary question; popular support among the public underpins the legitimacy of its part in the British state. If in the future, it ceases to enjoy popular support for any length of time, doubtless it will go as I'm sure any elected politician would jump at the chance to have the authority to dismantle any checks and balances on them. 

[Herman 9,838]

I haven't seen any evidence of checks nor balances so that is why I have moved into the republican camp.

[sonyc 5,541]

4 hours ago, Herman said:

Maybe people are sick and tired of pretending this is OK and healthy for a 21st century democracy. Using a major celebration to highlight how anachronistic it all is is probably the best time. 

Yeah. I'm not anti-monarchist and think the Queen has been an 'anchoring' or stabilising influence at times. But for me the monarchy has felt far more of an anachronism in recent times. The recent Caribbean tour is evidence. I think your use of the word is right.

I don't connect to the celebrations at all. Nor do I understand some of those OTT cat strangler types with flags - but it's a free world. Likewise for those who want to say "**** off" to it all. That's their choice too. The banner in that tweet is for anyone to represent anything they want. Buh can use it to represent his sheer dislike of anyone in Liverpool for example reading the recent posts in the football thread. I don't agree but it's his prerogative. But then some of us have friends from Liverpool and know they are lovely people (not football fans at all). 

And the Queen...well 70 years is a feat. Fair play for her longevity. It has a value.

Can't really be too invested in the royals. Not interested in reading about them. Thankfully I'm not a Mail or Express reader.😏

Edited June 2, 2022 by sonyc

[littleyellowbirdie 2,605]

1 hour ago, Herman said:

I haven't seen any evidence of checks nor balances so that is why I have moved into the republican camp.

Judicial review requiring parliament to approve the enactlment of article 50 is one example of a check on government power assured by the independence of the judiciary. A President would be in a position to dispense with that, as happened in Russia fairly recently and has happened in many basket cases in Africa. 

In the final analysis, our armed forces swear loyalty to the Queen, not the government, which is a safeguard against tyranny that no written constitution can offer. 

Then again, if you'd be happy with Boris Johnson as head of state and commander in chief of our armed forces then I guess that's your call. 

Edited June 2, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[littleyellowbirdie 2,605]

7 minutes ago, sonyc said:

Yeah. I'm not anti-monarchist and think the Queen has been an 'anchoring' or stabilising influence at times. But for me the monarchy has felt far more of an anachronism in recent times. The recent Caribbean tour is evidence. I think your use of the word is right.

I don't connect to the celebrations at all. Nor do I understand some of those OTT cat strangler types with flags - but it's a free world. Likewise for those who want to say "**** off" to it all. That's their choice too. The banner in that tweet is far anyone to represent anything they want.

In the Queen, 70 years is a feat. Far play for longevity. It has a value. Can't really be too invested in the royals. Not interested really in reading about them. Thankfully I'm not a Mail or Express reader.😏

The (small) protests to the recent caribbean tour and comments of politicians there was heavily influenced by China buying politicians there through the belt and road initiative. ironically, grievance's over slavery hundreds of years ago seems to be inspiring them to allow China to put the place in new chains. 

There were also plenty of people there pleased to see them and appreciative of what they did drawing attention to social projects there. 

Edited June 2, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

1 hour ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

That's speculation on your part; you have no idea because she keeps her opinions to herself in accordance with her role. 

Oh come on. One of the world's richest women, more properties than a monopoly board and you think she would prefer a Labour Government. Its not speculation at all.

You are just using all the old, old arguments that do not stand up in a modern society.