Oh dear Harry and Meghan

I agree Terribull the children were so cute and Louis really stole the show as Bridgeit said checking he was doing it correctly.
Back to the bowing and scraping now

Yes Maw you’re right. I saw it on the television news a few days ago.

paddyanne I understand exactly what you’re saying, in fact my dad fought in the war too and was injured.
However I don’t really think a President would be any better in reality.

To think we could have our very own Trump if the republicans get their way! Voters don’t always vote as some think they should as they have found recently. (Queue all their usual whataboutery!)

I shared a picture of what Trump might look like with long home dyed hair and a home self tanned face. I got severe telling offs from US health forum members. Apparently they love their president and he knows exactly what he is doing to keep them safe. Until this they seemed perfectly normal. One brave soul gave it a thumbs up so she’ll be added to Trump’s revenge list.

A news flash on my phone yesterday (sorry can’t remember who it was from) said M&H we’re moving to LA for tax reasons, so they don’t have to pay tax in two countries. (Headline and précis - didn’t read the article though).

The children looked very grounded and normal. Loved the way Louis realised he was slightly out of sync but couldn’t quite get the same rhythm going.

Well it's not democracy a hereditary head of state plus they all cost a fortune. When Queen came to throne she was first monarch where all her family were funded.

She has millions in off shore tax haven as well beneficial tax arrangements Millions from the Duchy of Lancaster PCharles gets millions from Duchy Cornwall. An elected of state would not have these income sources.

Why is Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge, so much more popular with the British press than Meghan, Duchess of Sussex?

Jonathan Trueman, Professional screen-and-copywriter, voice artist, Brit, knowledge addict.
Answered Jan 18
The best answer I’ve come across to this was just yesterday on a BBC panel discussion on this very topic.

One party to this discussion was a royal correspondent for one of the British papers, and he frankly admitted that, to keep their readers interested in royal stories, ‘somebody has to be up and somebody has to be down.’

In other words, the invidious comparisons between the Duchesses are deliberately and cynically engineered to sell papers and clicks. The Cambridges will, one day, be King and Queen, so the Sussexes are a safer target. You really do not want the King against you: it’s soft power, true, but dear God he’ll have a lot of it.

On top of that, of course, any schoolyard bully will tell you that, to put somebody down, you emphasise their differences from the in-group. The Duchess of Sussex is more different from more people in this country than is the Duchess of Cambridge - career-wise, family-wise, accent-wise and, let’s face it, pigment-wise. She is therefore not only a safer but an easier target when it comes to the one-up, one-down narrative.

So why is the D of C more popular with the press- or, more accurately, why is the D of S treated so much worse? Because that situation helps to sell more papers and clicks, with less medium-term risk, to idiots, bigots and - the holy grail - bigoted idiots.

That's nonsense imo, Grany. The thing is, Kate and Meghan are 2 different personalities. Kate has never tried to change things. She took advice, she watched and listened and tried very hard, and has never (as far as I know) put a foot wrong. Whereas Meghan, right from the start, wanted to do things her way. She didn't seem to understand why she was being given sensible advice. She chose to do exactly the opposite and seemed to think she was being clever over it.

Kate has never given permission for "friends" or "a source close ..." to give comments to the Press to get her points across.

She took a look of aggro directed at her by the Press and social media, calling her "Waity Katie", and writing nasty things about her and her family, but she never retaliated.

She took a wise course, she let things work themselves out, and along the way I think she endeared herself to the public.

Your phrase "pigment-wise" is very distasteful re Meghan, although frankly I have never even thought about her being Mixed Race as indeed I never do about anyone else. People just are who they are.

.... a lot of aggro, not look

Quite honestly, I was pretty negative about the monarchy once upon a time, not really anti, but not pro them either, then I moved on to neutral for quite a while. My dad wasn't a royalist at all, in spite of having shed loads of books about pretty much any king or queen that ever reigned and whilst he was endlessly fascinated by their lives in a historical context, in modern times he seemed to reach the conclusion that it would be more egalitarian to have a republic, but I think he didn't factor in quite what would replace the monarchy. He particularly hated listening to any of the Queen's addresses because of how she sounded she just grated on him After he died I hadn't realised how differently my mum felt about them. Being in the army he was stuck in North Africa during the war, but my mum worked in London travelling back home to the suburbs whilst the bombs were raining down. She always felt that George V1 and family were morale boosters for the general public and from that time on considered the presence of the royal family a good thing. I suppose I've slowly come round to that idea too. It also occurs to me that those countries in Europe who have a royal family tend to be, to pinch those now infamous words, "strong and stable" probably not a state that can be attributed to them. Nevertheless, European royals don't seem to lead lives that enrage their citizens, although it has not been unknown for heads of state, politicians and industrialists to be on the take or abuse their position, so on balance I'll stick with the monarchy, although certain members should definitely be offloaded and we all know who they are!. France, Russia and latterly Iran all had bloody revolutions when they got rid of their royal families and what followed wasn't great.

No I don't know her, but I for one will be really sorry when the Queen is with us no longer, she's been there for my entire life.

Catherine endured a lot of flack during the early days, Waity Katie and Duchess Dolittle. Remember that?
Meghan is disliked for her behaviour. Simple. Maybe republicans don’t like that but it’s the truth. She was welcomed by the British people at first but then her behaviour was disliked. And now she’s in Hollywood, her end goal. Long may she stay there, but perhaps the twenty million in security costs for H+M could be used to support our health services and our citizens who have found themselves out of a job due to the current crisis and our economy. I would have thought republicans would endorse that.

On the subject of Meghan, I think the continual up dates of how she disliked her life in the gold fish bowl, what did she think it would be like leaked through her mouthpiece Jessica Mulrooney friends, pisses everyone off, that and the cost of the security which wisely Canada have refused to contribute to, why would they???? Nevertheless, I thought they lurved Canada, and at the moment living in a relatively safe area where the incidences of Covid 19 must be minimal. Seems madness to shift to the US at such a time, cases and deaths are higher than anywhere else in the world I believe.

If both women had been bland, pleasant and polite, the press would have found something and poked at it until they got what they wanted.

All the RF costs a fortune in security not just M&H

Grany, I think 'JonathanBateman' (who he) is being disingenuous when he thinks the public are being manipulated by the press into disliking Meghan Markle. Most people were aware she was acting a part, but gave her credit for it; she performed her role well to begin with, and that was all most people wanted.

Her downfall began with their silly behaviour over the baby's birth and christening, the extravagance, then rejection of Frogmore Cottage, the split with the Cambridges, the interview about themselves following the trip to Africa, the snubbing of the Queen, rejection of their royal responsibilities, their flight to Canada, now also rejected, and their attempt at marketing the royal name. Plus the hypocrisy about holidays and private jets and endless self-promotion, all carefully planned to promote the 'career' of a fading third -rate soap actress.

Much is made of women who married into the royal family ,
it is assumed they are there for the husbands bidding , they are
not equal. Not so, yes in public Kate accompanies William, as
Sophie and Edward, but so it was with Anne and her husbands,
they accompanied her. It’s their roles in public. Can’t imagine
Phillip being submissive to the Queen in private. it’s simply
‘The Crown’.

Megan couldn’t accept this, her place in the protocol line up.
behind Camilla and Kate.

Well Kate dis get agro from press when not married but not after whereas Maghan lots of negative press.

Would love a republic

All you Royal watchers could follow an elected president and his her spouse and family so you would have something to follow chat about. And would cost far less.

No we couldn't.
One of the attractions of an historic royal family is that one can spot family likenesses, for example, Princess Charlotte has a look of Princess Margaret about her eyes, who in turn looked like Queen Charlotte, wife of George 111. Princess Anne looks like the former Princess Royal, Princess Mary, Prince William looks like an earlier Duke of Kent, The Duchess of Cambridge looks like Anne Boleyn, (she is descended from her sister Anne), Prince Harry looks like.....

I don't want to see another picture of Megan and Harry, they deserve each other. She has a history of dumping people, ex husband, staff and family, he knew this but chose to go along with her, he's not a victim, he knows wrong from right. Always playing the victim even when visiting people with absolutely nothing, it's about his traumatic life. So it does to many of us, we get by without the millions and status he had.The way he treated the Queen was disgraceful. I don't wish them well, just not interested. Feel sorry fircArchue
I have respect and admiration for Kate and William, their love gorges H other and family shines out and they seem to genuinely care about people. I love the way they are bringing their delightful children up. To see them waving for the NHS was heartwarming. Harry's quite patronising note just deserved the waste paper basket.

Yes but is it a good history? How did royalty start ?

Stuffing themselves at banquets while peasants starved in the fields.

We have a lot of better history if you look back to be proud of but not this an entitled greedy grasping disfunctional Family.

That is your opinion, but it explains your viewpoint.

I don’t think it started with stuffing themselves at banquets. That wouldn’t have got you a throne.

More like charging across the fields, killing and pillaging

Must not forget it was the English who murder the Prince of
Wales, and it was the English who stopped children speaking
Welsh in schools, and the English who drown welsh farms ,
homes and chapels so they could have water,

The crown had nothing to do with flooding the Welsh valleys
or banned Welsh being spoken in schools.

History is so interesting isn’t it. ?

But that’s history, long gone and totally irrelevant today. How many of us know what our ancestors were doing five or six hundred years ago? Exactly!
However I completely understand that some people would prefer a republic and I totally respect that view. What I cannot understand is why those republicans are such strong supporters of H+M. I just don’t get it.
Furthermore anyone with a modicum of common sense can see how Meghan has used the monarchy to her own ends. No one needs an Oxbridge degree to realise that Meghan was not ever going to arrive in Hollywood and become famous on the world stage due to her own talents, otherwise at pushing forty we would have heard of her long before she met Harry.
eazybee and Sparkling along with others have summed up the situation exactly.

It is irrelevant maddy but republicans like to bring up
1066 ?