Support for the Monarchy in the UK 1: Ending Sep 2022

[royalistbert]

Comment on Youtube are generally quite nasty no matter what the topic and as for DM comments well them to winge about everything.

 

[Grandduchess24]

Do the British even like the royal family because videos leading to the royal wedding had most not caring that there was a royal wedding and that there is no need for them anymore.

 

[Lumutqueen]

Do the British even like the royal family because videos leading to the royal wedding had most not caring that there was a royal wedding and that there is no need for them anymore.

No idea which videos you were watching but the thousands of people who lined the route to Westminster Abbey and back to Buckingham Palace would disagree that Britain does not care.
There is minimal support for a republic in this country, so they majority support must like something.

 

[Nico]

Not according to the vast majority of comments posted by the public (unmoderated) in reponse to pretty much any article about C and C. It's easy to say that, on this moderated forum, people are warming to Camilla. It does not appear to be the case when you read the public reponses to published articles or on Youtube.

Ok lets take a look, for exemple the last DM article about Camilla

Duchess of Cornwall charms with reading of Gruffalo while Prince Charles perfects his slam dunk | Mail Online

About 100 comments and more :
-Of course some are pretty nasty and incredibly rude :most part from two camps : the "freeloader and taxpayer" one (and even the Queen usually receive some rude comments from this part) and of course your dear "Diana forever fanatics" camp.
-But surprise surprise a lot are also very positive and, oh more surprise, the BEST RATED one is "Lovely to see them both so happy at last ! They make a great couple and should have married years ago". Mmm hardly an anti-Camilla feeling isn't it ?

But maybe the Daily Mail readers comments is also a moderated place or, who knows, under the control of Clarence House...

 

[Lumutqueen]

But maybe the Daily Mail readers comments is also a moderated place or, who knows, under the control of Clarence House...

It is a moderator place, but you are right in pointing out that the general criticism for all royals generally comes from the "freeloader" camp or the "Die Hard Diana fans" that applies to all the royals, even The Queen. Some people are just too narrow minded to move on from the past and accept the future. This is the situation, this is how it's going to be, like it or lump it. I bet all the people in those camps wouldn't actually do anything to get rid of the monarchy, they just like the vent anger.

 

[royalistbert]

Do the British even like the royal family because videos leading to the royal wedding had most not caring that there was a royal wedding and that there is no need for them anymore.

People don't always mean what they say.

 

[EIIR]

Do the British even like the royal family because videos leading to the royal wedding had most not caring that there was a royal wedding and that there is no need for them anymore.

More than 34 million people in the UK watched some or all of the Royal Wedding coverage on TV. That puts it in the top 10 most watched programmes in British TV history.

To put that in context, Downton Abbey is the biggest British TV hit for many years. And it gets 11 million viewers.

Add in the fact that it was a public holiday and in most of the country it was hot and sunny on 29 April. Millions of Brits took advantage of the extended break (which included 2 public holidays for Easter just before the wedding and 1 for May Day just after) and went abroad on holiday. I also know quite a few people who were at the beach at home etc (we get so few hot sunny days we have to take advantage). Oh, and the guts of 1 million people were on the streets of London to see it in person.

All in all, I'd say the British people were fairly interested in the wedding.

 

[Lumutqueen]

Perhaps this article fits here;

Express.co.uk - Home of the Daily and Sunday Express | UK News :: 'Prince William is more popular than The Queen'

People in Australia, Britain and Canada find the prospect of William taking over the throne far more appealing than the notion of a King Charles, according to a major survey of 5,520 people across the three countries by the respected Angus Reid polling organisation.

Around half the public – 51 per cent of Britons, 52 per cent of Australians and 47 per cent of Canadians - want the succession to skip a generation and jump to William.

Conversely, only 31 per cent of Britons, 17 per cent of Canadians and 13 per cent of Australians would prefer to see Charles ascend the throne.

 

[VictoriaB]

Perhaps this article fits here;

Express.co.uk - Home of the Daily and Sunday Express | UK News :: 'Prince William is more popular than The Queen'

Interesting. As the combined population of the UK, Australia and Canada according to Google is 118.6 million that means the sample size represents 0.004% of the people.

And as Sir Humphrey pointed out in Yes Minister, a poll can get the answers it wants depending on the questions asked.

 

[wbenson]

Interesting. As the combined population of the UK, Australia and Canada according to Google is 118.6 million that means the sample size represents 0.004% of the people.

In a well-constructed poll, a sample of that size is more than large enough to get a valid measurement. 5,520 is actually quite a large sample for a single survey. For a population of 118.6 million, you could get away with a sample of a few more than a thousand and be within 3% 19 times out of 20. Of course, all that means is that if you asked every single person the same question, the results would probably be quite similar; as you mention, people might answer the same underlying question differently depending on how it's posed.

 

[EIIR]

In a well-constructed poll, a sample of that size is more than large enough to get a valid measurement. 5,520 is actually quite a large sample for a single survey. For a population of 118.6 million, you could get away with a sample of a few more than a thousand and be within 3% 19 times out of 20. Of course, all that means is that if you asked every single person the same question, the results would probably be quite similar; as you mention, people might answer the same underlying question differently depending on how it's posed.

I absolutely agree, wbenson. As you say, this is actually rather a large sample as far as polls go. Most polls are based on a sample of about 1,000. With a sample size of over 5,000 the margin of error would only be about 2%, if that. Polling by the big companies, such as Angus Reid who produced this one, is now incredibly accurate because the polling companies have the ability to ensure their sample is demographically representative of the country in question. In the UK most polling companies get their predictions about right for elections.

When people say, 'ah but they only polled 5,000 people'. That's because to poll large chunks of the population would be incredibly difficult and prohibitively expensive, and would be unlikely to produce an outcome disimilar to the poll of just 5,000 people.

 

[EIIR]

Not sure that this is the most appropriate thread for this but, new polling suggests that support for the monarchy is at a 20 year high. 80% of Britons want the UK to remain a monarchy, wthl support for a republic at a record low of 13%.

Surprisingly, the monarchy is most popular in the Midlands, contradicting the myth that the monarchy is most popular in the affluent south east of England.

This news is certainly a nice 'present' to HM the Queen.

Diamond Jubilee and 'Kate effect' lead to record support for the monarchy, poll shows - Telegraph

 

[Benedict XVI]

I was watching a show somewhere and a English republican was convinced that the monarchies days are numbered and that the country will become a republic when the queen dies because of Charles. I found this extremely hard to believe it takes a lot more for a popular monarchy to be changed to a republic. I can not see howitzer would be possible for a country who has arguably the most famous monarchy in Europe to give up on the only form of government they have especially since the future of the monarchy is in William and Kate who are as seen above are more popular than the queen.although I highly doubt it I can't stress how unlikely it is but if those two got a divorce it would be a death penalty for the monarchy. Does anyone know what the lowest recorded approval raiting for the monarchy in the history of polling?

 

[NGalitzine]

Not sure about its lowest, but support rarely dips below 70%. Finding committed repullicans isnt that easy to do but out of "fairness" everytime there is a major royal event the media seem to search them out.
The Queens polling numbers, and the crowd she draws, would be the envy of every politician. They would kill to have her numbers, even at their lowest.

 

[royalistbert]

The recent poll puts support at 80% and 13% who favor a republic. The lowest point was during Charles and Camilla wedding where it was 60% support and 20% support a republic.

 

[Benedict XVI]

The recent poll puts support at 80% and 13% who favor a republic. The lowest point was during Charles and Camilla wedding where it was 60% support and 20% support a republic.

So even if they don't like Charles they hate the idea of a republic more

 

[Lumutqueen]

So even if they don't like Charles they hate the idea of a republic more

Hate is the wrong word. Unless something drastic happens support either way won't change. People are more bothered about their own life right now not other peoples. The only people who vote for a republic are the ones who always post negative comments at the bottom of the DM articles. Some of which are from overseas.

 

[EIIR]

The campaign group, Republic, have tried to be more visible over recent weeks. They had a protest outside BP during the dinner Charles gave for foreign royals last week. Only about 200 people turned out, and most of those weren't protesting about the monarchy at all, but were Bahraini nationals protesting about the presence of the King of Bahrain at the dinner.

The leader of Republic goes around making the stupidest statements. For example, he claimed that only a couple of hundred people turned up in Leicester to see the Queen, DoE and Kate. Now, anyone who saw any coverage or photos of that event could see quite clearly that there were thousands of people there. Meanwhile, Republic's protest in Leicester on the same day attracted a crowd of about 8.

 

[Warren]

Diamond Jubilee: Queen watches Royal Navy, the Army and RAF march through Windsor | Mail Online

21 May 2012
> scroll down to near the bottom of the Armed Forces Diamond Jubilee Parade and Muster coverage...

Nearly 80% 'in support' of Monarchy as popularity soars in Jubilee year
​

British support for the monarchy is at an all time high, according to a poll.
​

As the Queen tours the country to celebrate her Jubilee, a survey of 1,006 British adults showed almost eight in ten supported the monarchy.
Just 13 per cent were in favour of the country becoming a republic, the Mori poll showed.

The Midlands was shown to be the most Royalist, with 89 per cent supporting a monarchy.
Just 9 per cent of respondents from the region favoured abolishing the monarchy.

But only 76 per cent of those surveyed in the South were in favour of the monarchy, while 17 per cent said they would support a republic.

Support for the monarchy was highest among the older generation, with about nine in ten aged over 55 and the same number of over 65s saying it should remain in place.

Ninety-six per cent of Conservative voters favoured a monarch over a republic, in compared with 74 per cent of Labour supporters and 84 per cent of Liberal Democrats.

Simon Atkinson, deputy chief executive of Ipsos MORI, said: 'Support for the Royal family has always been consistently high but the Queen will enter her Jubilee celebrations with support for the monarchy running at record levels.'
.

 

[EIIR]

Excellent news. I'm waiting to see what excuses those geniuses at Republic come up with to discredit this poll.

I'm sure the Queen will be heartened by this poll. I think it reflects the fact that the family are personally in a good place at the moment, and that translates to the general public.

 

[Osipi]

This is an odd thought that has crossed my mind once or twice following the Diamond Jubilee. With it being election year here in the States, I'm kind of really put off with the political mudslinging, scandals and reports of millions of dollars in fundraising. Sometimes I wish we we were under a constitutional monarchy with someone like Queen Elizabeth as a representative of everything that is historic and identifies us as a people. Someone we could all look up to and admire and celebrate in our lives.

I'd much rather read about 10 million being spent on celebrations and street parties rather than one person's presidential campaign.

 

[Benedict XVI]

Thank you Warren. These statistics are extremely helpful. I figured that this years numbers would be some of the highest we have ever seen. If we have numbers like this imagine what they wil be when she has been on the throne for 70 years god willing.

 

[Jacknch]

The result showing support for the monarchy is no surprise to me given that IMO politicians and those who seek high office tend to be a feckless bunch of amateurs who seek high positions and responsibilities way beyond their actual scope of ability. The exception I have of this view point is the office of the Irish Presidency whose incumbants in recent years at least, have been of a high standard (even though the recent candidates were abit hit and miss). Unfortunately the British public are never exposed to apolitical presidencial elections - only the political ones of the US and France.
The British are canny enough to realise that a head of state born into the position and brought up in life to undertake the role in a serious way is better than the alternative. And of course a head of state born into the position by chance is no less democratic or fair than the chance someone gains of being elected.

 

[Warren]

This thread is titled "Support for the Monarchy in the UK".
It is not the place to discuss the merits or otherwise of the US political system, alternatives to it, and the wealth of US political candidates.

Unsurprisingly, those posts have been removed.

Warren
British Forums moderator

 

[Warren]

source: UK royal image riding high in queen's jubilee year | Reuters - 21 May 2012

UK royal image riding high in Queen's jubilee year
​

excerpts

Fifteen years ago, the death of Princess Diana left Britain's royal family looking shattered, outdated and even in danger of extinction, tarred by embarrassing scandals, wrecked marriages, and a monarchy that seemed hopelessly out of touch.

Now, millions are set to flock to London next month to celebrate Queen Elizabeth's 60 years on the throne, with gushing newspapers running photos of the royals on front pages almost daily and barely a whiff of discontent in the air. Far from being a stuffy relic of the past, the royal family, it seems, are now "cool". "They're in vogue, they're the flavour of the month," said Mark Borkowski, one of Britain's leading public relations experts, describing the image turnaround as amazing.

The most obvious demonstration of the enduring royal pulling power and global appeal was last April's wedding of Prince William, son of heir-to-the-throne Prince Charles, to Kate Middleton. A global TV audience of some two billion watched the glittering display of pageantry and a million crowded the London streets to catch a glimpse of the newlyweds breeze past in a horse-drawn carriage and then pootle about in a sports car in front of the media, heading for a post-wedding reception.

"That image of Prince William and Kate Middleton, man and wife, going down the Mall in an open top sports car with a cheering crowd, that was a deliberately engineered photographic moment," Borkowski said. "But it also showed the confidence of an organisation to create one of those things outside the ubiquity of the kiss on the balcony."

Rather than a one-off, the positive coverage of the royals, even those who have not always enjoyed a happy relationship with the press, continues to blossom. It's all a far cry from the dark days that followed Diana's death in a Paris car crash in August 1997, a period captured in the Oscar-winning film "The Queen". A British public, shocked by the loss of Charles's hugely popular first wife, was beginning to turn against the House of Windsor as it stumbled to address rising anger.

"I think if you compare the front pages and the headlines of 10, 15, 20 years ago, when it was much more about the personal lives and about scandal alleged or otherwise, there was this feeling where it just seemed to be a soap opera," a senior royal aide told Reuters. "It just feels a fairer, saner environment now, a lot less drama."

So how has it all come about? Within royal circles, much of the credit goes to the family themselves and the emergence of a new generation, most notably William and Harry but also the likes of the Queen's granddaughter Zara Phillips. Seemingly far more down to earth and in touch with everyday Britons, they are able to strike a chord with the public. Others attribute it to the Queen's own understanding of their global "brand".

Former Prime Minister Tony Blair said the 86-year-old was "very canny" and had brought in "imperceptible modernisation". "Whilst yielding up very little of the monarchy's mystique, she has made it come to be seen as a much more grounded part of national life," he is quoted as saying in a recent biography of the monarch by journalist Robert Hardman.

But, many say it is the hard graft of professional PR experts the royal household turned to after Diana's death that has really made a difference. "[I'm] very, very impressed," Borkowski said. "I was asked by PR Week [magazine] to say what I thought was the best campaign and for two years running I've said it's been the handling of the royal image."

"We have very, very clear policies of how we do things," the senior royal aide said. "We don't brief, we don't leak, we don't favour anyone, we do it very straight, very professional, clear and consistent. Over time that pays dividends."

excerpts courtesy of Reuters
.

 

[Tiberivs]

All those polls seem somewhat worthless since they change due to a temporary "feel good" factors (the royal wedding, the jubilee), when they royal family blunder and caught in scandal they went down.

IMHO the important thing is the support of the establishment in the monarchy and this the royal family never seem to lose, even in its more harder times, I don't see this changing unless there is a major anti-royalist sentiment from the British public.

 

[Artemisia]

I would say those polls are pretty accurate.
Don't forget that even at its lowest, the support for Monarchy never went under 60%.
For the past several years (way before the Jubilee and Royal Wedding), the approval rating was above 75%.

 

[EIIR]

I tend to look more at the number supporting a republic. For the last 40 years that number has never gone above 18%, and it's currently 13%. Just think for a moment of the changes we've seen since the 1960s. In those days the press was still very deferential to the monarchy; none of their personal scandals would've got near being published in a newspaper.

Yet despite this, the number supporting a republic has barely changed. Despite all the press scandals, marriage breakdowns, the presence of campaign groups such as Republic, the British people are no less pro-monarchy than they were in the 1960s. That's a real achievement.

 

[Jacknch]

I tend to agree EIIR - looking at the polls in support of a republic makes more sense because as Tiberivs indicates, a royal wedding or jubilee - the feelgood factor - tends to suddenly increase numbers in support for a while. I would be more worried if the percentages in favour of a republic were steadily increasing.

 

[Tiberivs]

That a good point about the support for a republic, another one that wasn't address in this poll (or any others to my knowledge) is how many people are sitting on the fence - not supporting a republic but not supporting the monarchy either.