Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Bloomberg moves to a 9% chance on Betfair for the Democratic n

13»

Comments

  • Options
    GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,079

    Stocky said:

    That’s a hostage to fortune given Northern Ireland’s trajectory and Boris Johnson’s own part in that.
    The threat to the union that Brexit would have (because Brexit is inconsistent with the Good Friday Agreement) is IMO the rationale for a 2nd referendum. History may judge Brexit through this lens.
    History is more likely to judge the Good Friday Agreement as a further invidious element of Blair stopping us ever leaving the EU.
    Imagine actually thinking this.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,114

    GIN1138 said:

    HYUFD said:

    The Sun 'Charles and William incandescent with rage'


    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10701694/queen-deeply-upset-harry-meghan-markles-exit-civil-war/.

    Looks like they are about to be cut off, Meghan really is Wallace Simpson 2 with Harry a latter day Edward VIII

    Perhaps,,, Although to be honest they are no where near as important as Edward (was) and Wallace (might have been if she'd been allowed to stick around)

    Harry was at his most important as "the spare" but even that went out the window when William had George.

    Harry's only saving grace now is that Diana was his mother... And even that becomes more insignificant with each passing year.

    I think this is really where Harry and Meghan have gone wrong within the Firm. They seemed to think they were much important players than they actually were. Turns out with HMQ>Charles>William>George> succession keeping the Royals secure for the next seventy years H and Meg just aren't that important.

    Go. Stay. Who cares.
    Harry is (quite obviously) still very badly affected by the death of his mother. I'm still not sure he's found himself.

    If I was being uncharitable, I'd say Meghan was exploiting that.
    More charitable perhaps to say she could have no comprehension of the pressures being Royal has put him under. No outsider really could. And Meghan is REALLY an outsider - that much has become clear. And therefore not the person best placed to hep him navigate his way through it.

    But maybe effectively being No Longer Royal will be the way for him to cope. I hope so, for his sake.
    I'm not sure it will. I think he's deeply upset at the split with his brother and will miss his family. I can't see him being happy with Meghan alone.

    It wouldn't surprise me if the marriage doesn't last, and he comes home.
    The talk in the Palace was that the marriage wouldn't last three years. Maybe the wish was father to the thought....
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,328

    I'm surprised no Leaver has yet suggested that Prince Harry is being kept in reserve for that moment when Ms von der Leyen launches her successful reconquest and needs a puppet monarch sympathetic to European values to install on the throne.

    I actually predicted downthread that it wouldn't surprise me if much opinion on this split along Brexit lines.

    Everything else does.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,189

    tlg86 said:

    MikeL said:


    This royal debacle -- following on from Andrew -- should encourage all of us to take a proper look at how big a royal family we want or need & how it should be funded.

    A seriously slimmed down, much cheaper, Royal Family looks sensible to me.

    Indeed - look at it in reverse - if the royal family hadn't had Andrew and Harry in the first place would it have had any adverse effect?

    People only accept the royal family as it is because no other option has been presented.

    If the royal family was Queen, Philip, Charles, Camilla, William, Kate + their kids full stop that would be quite enough.

    By full stop I mean nobody else gets anything - no titles, no patronages, no cash, no security guards, nothing.

    The Queen can of course privately fund anyone else if she wishes.
    But, then you have to bear in mind that there have been no problems with Princess Anne, who is perfectly comfortable with duty, and Edward has been fine since he married. Camilla made a comeback. Charles seems to be growing into his prospective job.

    There are rules of behaviour that, if followed, are fine. If not, rapidly cause raising of eyebrows.
    Andrew Pierce last night brought up Edward's foray into television and film production and said that should be a warning to Harry and Meghan.

    I can understand why someone might be uncomfortable with living the existence that royals do (cutting ribbons etc.). But that really ought to have been made clear to Meghan before she married into it. There was a time when Kate had a bit of a wobble, and clearly she was thinking hard about what it would mean to marry William, but once the decision was made, she's got on with it and does it very well.
    Americans watch films like 'A Christmas Prince' on Netflix, which is all glitz and glamour and about fairytale royals, castles and kingdoms.

    They haven't a clue what it's really about - duty - and dislike it when they find out.
    And it's not as though the monarchy hasn't modernised greatly in the last 30 years. That Harry was allowed to marry someone who had been previously married is a good example of that.
  • Options
    kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 3,943

    kyf_100 said:

    HYUFD said:

    The Sun 'Charles and William incandescent with rage'


    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10701694/queen-deeply-upset-harry-meghan-markles-exit-civil-war/.

    Looks like they are about to be cut off, Meghan really is Wallace Simpson 2 with Harry a latter day Edward VIII

    Of course, just like the idiots (some on here, sadly) who keep dismissing any criticism of them with "tabloids" and "racism" Wallis and David had their legions of fans for decades after the abdication who they cultivated and clung onto.

    They learnt nothing, and they forgot nothing.
    Prince Philip was right: "One steps out with actresses, one doesn't marry them.”
    I was actually very dismissive of the reports of Meghan's past behaviour from her family and friends as tabloid gossip/jealousy when she married Harry.

    I'm now wondering if there was something to them.
    Her broken relationship with her own family was an enormous red flag. People overlooked it because nobody wanted to be accused of racism or snobbery.

    Take the royalty and race out of it is you have a fairly notorious party girl in her 20s trying to reinvent herself by marrying into a "good" family, then laying down the law to that entire family and being a complete bridezilla, while most of her own family believe her to be completely toxic - her own brother urged them to call off the wedding!

    In such a circumstance I, too, would be alarmed if my child/grandchild brought home such a person.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,922

    I'm surprised no Leaver has yet suggested that Prince Harry is being kept in reserve for that moment when Ms von der Leyen launches her successful reconquest and needs a puppet monarch sympathetic to European values to install on the throne.


    "Leaver" is so last decade
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,189
    This thread has abdicated.
  • Options
    DavidL said:

    In my family and I suspect most others parents try hard to treat each of their children equally and give them equal consideration. In the Royal family that is not the case, especially as they get older and the eldest starts to produce their own prodigy, making the spares fundamentally irrelevant. It is hardly surprising that this causes problems and resentment. Andrew has lived a fundamentally empty life and Harry faces the risk of the same. Its almost cruel what this slightly bizarre institution does to its constituents.

    On certain measures Andrew has lived an extremely full life. Full of what is another question.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    isam said:

    I'm surprised no Leaver has yet suggested that Prince Harry is being kept in reserve for that moment when Ms von der Leyen launches her successful reconquest and needs a puppet monarch sympathetic to European values to install on the throne.


    "Leaver" is so last decade
    I'm open to other words that neatly encapsulate backward-looking insular paranoics, but Leaver still seems the most apt.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,328
    NEW THREAD
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,922

    isam said:

    I'm surprised no Leaver has yet suggested that Prince Harry is being kept in reserve for that moment when Ms von der Leyen launches her successful reconquest and needs a puppet monarch sympathetic to European values to install on the throne.


    "Leaver" is so last decade
    I'm open to other words that neatly encapsulate backward-looking insular paranoics, but Leaver still seems the most apt.
    "Remainersorus"
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,893

    kyf_100 said:

    HYUFD said:

    The Sun 'Charles and William incandescent with rage'


    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10701694/queen-deeply-upset-harry-meghan-markles-exit-civil-war/.

    Looks like they are about to be cut off, Meghan really is Wallace Simpson 2 with Harry a latter day Edward VIII

    Of course, just like the idiots (some on here, sadly) who keep dismissing any criticism of them with "tabloids" and "racism" Wallis and David had their legions of fans for decades after the abdication who they cultivated and clung onto.

    They learnt nothing, and they forgot nothing.
    Prince Philip was right: "One steps out with actresses, one doesn't marry them.”
    I was actually very dismissive of the reports of Meghan's past behaviour from her family and friends as tabloid gossip/jealousy when she married Harry.

    I'm now wondering if there was something to them.
    There's enough being said from the same 'blind gossip' sites that predicted most of the recent Hollywood scandals, that covers both her previous career as a b-list actress, and her more recent behaviour as a minor Royal. There's also been a concerted PR campaign on her behalf running in the US, which is backfiring because she upset a lot of people on her way up.
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,124

    isam said:
    I was careful not to say that it was universal. We seem to be seeing a hard squeeze on the middle.
    Yup - and those with the slickest online operation (and products folk want) will survive in the main
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,124

    Prince Andrew has done far more damage to the royal family than Harry and Meghan.

    I suspect both will prove to be peripheral. The public will rally behind Will and Kate.
  • Options
    nunu2nunu2 Posts: 1,453

    Barnesian said:

    HYUFD said:

    Barnesian said:

    HYUFD said:

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    Bloomberg's plan is not really the Democratic nomination, it is to set the stage for an Independent bid if, as looks increasingly likely, it is a Trump v Sanders general election and get the most votes for a 3rd party candidate since the 19% for Ross Perot in 1992 (Perot even led some early summer 1992 polls against Bush Snr and Bill Clinton).

    Why would he do that given he could not win as an independent?
    As in his view Sanders and Trump are both so equally awful he has no choice but to give the country a third party alternative and as a billionaire like Perot he can afford to fund it
    By standing as an independent he wants to stop Sanders winning and make sure Trump does in the event that Sanders wins the Democrat nomination. If Biden gets the nomination, Bloomberg will not stand. He's using his money to ensure that Biden gets the nomination. It's simple blackmail.
    It looks increasingly like Sanders will get the nomination, so Bloomberg will stand as an Independent
    Sanders has a chance but it's not increasingly likely.

    Bloomberg can stand as anything he likes, he's not going to win.
    He doesn't want to win. He wants to stop Sanders winning.
    That's correct. Does he think Sanders is too left?
    An independent like Bloomberg might take a few suburban Republicans from Trump, not clear he will hurt Dems more.
  • Options
    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    MikeL said:


    This royal debacle -- following on from Andrew -- should encourage all of us to take a proper look at how big a royal family we want or need & how it should be funded.

    A seriously slimmed down, much cheaper, Royal Family looks sensible to me.

    Indeed - look at it in reverse - if the royal family hadn't had Andrew and Harry in the first place would it have had any adverse effect?

    People only accept the royal family as it is because no other option has been presented.

    If the royal family was Queen, Philip, Charles, Camilla, William, Kate + their kids full stop that would be quite enough.

    By full stop I mean nobody else gets anything - no titles, no patronages, no cash, no security guards, nothing.

    The Queen can of course privately fund anyone else if she wishes.
    But, then you have to bear in mind that there have been no problems with Princess Anne, who is perfectly comfortable with duty, and Edward has been fine since he married. Camilla made a comeback. Charles seems to be growing into his prospective job.

    There are rules of behaviour that, if followed, are fine. If not, rapidly cause raising of eyebrows.
    Andrew Pierce last night brought up Edward's foray into television and film production and said that should be a warning to Harry and Meghan.

    I can understand why someone might be uncomfortable with living the existence that royals do (cutting ribbons etc.). But that really ought to have been made clear to Meghan before she married into it. There was a time when Kate had a bit of a wobble, and clearly she was thinking hard about what it would mean to marry William, but once the decision was made, she's got on with it and does it very well.
    Americans watch films like 'A Christmas Prince' on Netflix, which is all glitz and glamour and about fairytale royals, castles and kingdoms.

    They haven't a clue what it's really about - duty - and dislike it when they find out.
    And it's not as though the monarchy hasn't modernised greatly in the last 30 years. That Harry was allowed to marry someone who had been previously married is a good example of that.
    'allowed'
This discussion has been closed.