On borrowed time - the royals

Alegrias1

But we have no idea what the Queen's politics are. If non-partisan presidents are as rare as unicorns, then by extension surely the Queen must have some political thoughts that we know nothing about.

We have heard that she liked Harold Wilson but disliked Margaret Thatcher.

“.....the Queen must have some political thoughts that we know nothing about.”

Right again Alegrias, which is why she’s the best HoS. All those PMs she’s dealt with would probably all agree on that.

Every time I’ve ever thought it’d be an excellent idea to get rid of the RF, I’ve then wondered whether I’d have preferred e.g. Tony Blair as President/Head of State, with Cherie as First Lady.
That’s generally cured me.

Out of interest, if we could elect one tomorrow, who would any GNer like to see as President and Head of State?

I enjoyed President Higgins's speech, thank you for posting Grany

But we have no idea what the Queen's politics are. If non-partisan presidents are as rare as unicorns, then by extension surely the Queen must have some political thoughts that we know nothing about.

Human nature being what it is, a Tory will always be a Tory and a socialist etc.

I’ll settle for the Queen thanks.

When you take the job you have to be no partisan that is the rule

Grany Michael Higgins stood for the presidency as the labour candidate

Just for a week

Oh I'd love to see a Putin type character ruling this country !

The Queen would be my definition Grany. Never been a member of any political party......unlike mr Higgins!

An elected head of state has, by definition, been voted in by those who think that they are a better choice than other candidates standing for election at the same time. So how do you prevent the candidates from trying to convince the voters that they are the best choice - ie, from campaigning for votes?

Inevitably the way to gain votes is by persuading voters that you are on the side of their section of the population and will make sure that is the section that will gain most advantage from the laws that will be passed under your presidency.

The voters are not non-partisan, they know what they want, and they can recognise who is likely to achieve most of that for them. They will vote for a candidate who seems to them to have all the virtues of left or right, or green or multicultural, or leans toward their own preference.

A totally non-partisan president is as rare as a unicorn.

Why Pantglas2 ? What is yours?

not biased or partisan, especially towards any particular political group.
"senior civil servants are non-partisan and serve ministers loyally irrespective of politics"

Grany - what is your definition of non partisan?

Very much the same as looking back at the History of our own families.

A dignified, non-partisan, elected head of state, who can talk eloquently for and to the people of Ireland and the Irish diaspora around the world.

Britain deserves a more mature public debate about the monarchy, in the knowledge that we can also elect excellent heads of state.

You can watch the #stpatricksday message from President Michael D. Higgins here:

m.youtube.com/watch?v=TZJEIjw_GRw&feature=youtu.be

You can easily look this up , there is plenty of information relating to this topic.
You can also refer to the History of our country to understand how & why it has evolved.

lemsip if the “job” of the RF isn’t being high profile , pose for photos and wave, what exactly is their “job”? . Interested to see the job description

Gagajo I see your point, but ultimately no government is going to hold a referendum on it. My point was more relative to their popularity amongst 'us' and the lack of traction for republican arguments. The Govt is too invested and entangled - the 'people' en masse don't really care that much about fairness unless they perceive it to be directly affecting them ( as in Brexit, which had one meaning for govt and a ver different on for many people with a vote).

For instance, I can agree with Grany on some elements the Duchy - but do
I care enough about it to join the chorus of dissent? No at this juncture - too much gets thrown by the wayside and many of the republican arguments are too much of a blunt instrument to be persuasive or convincing.

It isn’t a contest, why are we here on our computer’s whilst others around the world Still starving ? If we throw out our computers will it help,? No, but having a computer allows to spread communications about what is still wrong in the world.and to hopefully do something about it.

That’s true , there are many more reasons, that was just one example.

none so far with enough traction to tip the balance over their popularity

Not necessarily about popularity. It is harder for those without power (us) to overturn those in power. They have several different types of power. Instrumental, influential, economic, political, persuasive. It isn't an equal contest.

The biggest employment sector in Cornwall is the professional and managerial group www.nomisweb.co.uk/reports/lmp/la/1946157349/report.aspx#tabempocc
While appreciating the work of an organisation like the Princes Trust it really can'tbe considered a reason to retain the monarchy. I know quite a few charities doing excelent work which are linked to a single person.

There is of course the argument that more people like the RF and the institution of the monarchy than don't currently. Which will always be the prevailing reason they will stay for at least the foreseeable future. There really isn't any other argument for them. Lots against, but none so far with enough traction to tip the balance over their popularity.

One would of thought, that people loosing their jobs would be of the utmost importance to others who purport to care .