• Thank you for visiting Buffy-Boards. You obviously have exceptional taste. We just want you to know that:

    1. You really should register so you can chat with us!

    2. Fourteen thousand people can't be wrong.

    3. Buffy-Boards loves you.

    4. See 1 through 3.

    Come on, register already!

Do you prefer William over Charles as King?

William or Charles?

  • William

  • Charles

  • I don't really care


Results are only viewable after voting.

Mr Trick

Scooby
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Messages
15,197
Age
40
Location
London, UK
I disagree. Whilst the royals probably do have their own political views, they have to be seen to be neutral so as not to ostracise sections of the British public. The royals are taxpayer funded (and they bring in tourism and act as representatives for Britain so they're not sponging off the state- a main reason why Harry and his wife were told they won't be receiving security and would have to pay for it themselves because they chose to leave Britain and their royal duties) and people wouldn't be happy if they were paying for someone whose political views treated their own views like dirt.
The problem is the taxpayer is asked to folk out millions of pounds a year for Royal security, updates to the Palace etc... Meanwhile our education system and NHS are both struggling. Not to mention the growth in child poverty. Those areas should be priorties over a new chandelier for the Palace. Bringing in tourism and token appearances at events around the world doesn't justify spending that much money on them.
 

DeadlyDuo

Scooby
Joined
Jul 29, 2016
Messages
9,378
Age
30
The problem is the taxpayer is asked to folk out millions of pounds a year for Royal security, updates to the Palace etc... Meanwhile our education system and NHS are both struggling. Not to mention the growth in child poverty. Those areas should be priorties over a new chandelier for the Palace. Bringing in tourism and token appearances at events around the world doesn't justify spending that much money on them.
Cutting foreign aid will help save money. The government has cut some of it, but they could cut more. I'd like to know what Africa is doing with all the foreign aid that gets sent to them alongside all the charity money from Children in Need, comic relief, sport relief etc. Every year it seems little Timmy needs a new mosquito net so he doesn't die of malaria or little Susie needs a new school built so she can get an education. Where is all the money going? If it's just going to line some corrupt official's pockets, then perhaps a new way needs to be thought up that gets help to the people in need without giving money to officials who don't give a crap and won't improve things because they see it as a way to make money.
 
Last edited:

Give Us A Kiss

Fuffy Apologist
Joined
Feb 4, 2015
Messages
2,729
Sineya
I don't care as long as Harry and Meghan don't ever end up on the throne.
 
Mr Trick
Mr Trick
Yeah trust me they don't want it after the way they've been treated.
thetopher
thetopher
Trust me they won't get it after the way Meghan treated the UK.
ILLYRIAN
ILLYRIAN
Yeah, haha, there's one in the whatsisname for ya, a constipated Harry and Megs.

DeadlyDuo

Scooby
Joined
Jul 29, 2016
Messages
9,378
Age
30
I don't care as long as Harry and Meghan don't ever end up on the throne.
The vast majority of the British public feel this way, especially after Harry's wife told several lies in the Oprah interview. She must be seething that he's decided to stay in Britain a bit longer for the Queen's birthday and that he and William have actually talked to each other as it means he's not under her full control. Also apparently Prince Philip instructed that Harry's wife was not to attend the funeral. She was still trying to make it about her though with "friends" releasing statements like she wanted to go but didn't want to be the centre of attention and that she was willing to "forgive" the royals for the lies she told about them.
 

Athena

The original one-eyed chicklet
Staff member
Joined
Feb 2, 2016
Messages
6,546
Location
UK
Black Thorn
Remember, this is a thread about Charles or William becoming King, not Harry & Meghan, or their interview with Oprah. This thread isn't about Meghan & Harry, so please let's not turn it into that. 👍
 

thetopher

Member of the Church Of Faith
Joined
Dec 23, 2013
Messages
10,541
Location
The Moot, England
Sineya
I prefer William to Charles. William seems more like a modern King and has none of Charles' baggage.

But what I think doesn't matter since I don't get to vote for either of them. However I do get to help decide if there's a royal family, if it declines in popularity then the public will want it gone.
Unfortunately for some on here they seem ever popular, mostly since they are; in terms of tourism, charity work and international diplomacy, more than worth their cost.
 

Taake

I do doodle. You too. You do doodle, too.
Staff member
Joined
Jan 1, 2010
Messages
17,686
Age
35
Location
Stockholm, Swe
Black Thorn
To be honest, I kind of feel like Royal tabloids (we have them too) have indoctrinated me to despise Charles after Diana. Though I am honestly not sure why when I really consider it.

But then, I am not sure either if I should feel sorry for Charles. He’s lived and will continue to live a life of unspeakable privilige, and if he’s not King he can probably breeze through another ”tampon gate” or some such, even at his age. So I suppose it is fair enough to say that William has considerably less baggage.
 

ILLYRIAN

Druish Pervonian Wizard
Joined
Jul 5, 2007
Messages
8,819
Age
65
Location
Toodyay
Black Thorn
How popular is William OR how popular is Charles?
There is an even greater question at play here, how great a perception by the English people are their wives?
With Charles and Camilla - she was mentioned in an episode of Dr. Who by Rose (The Girl in the Fireplace)(second series, disc 2, track 3) though not, I fancy, as a compliment.
Though I feel it is true that Charles and Camilla were not responsible for the death of Princess Diana that is one hurdle he or they will never over come. Admittedly though the Queens attitude was not in his favour. After her death failing to recognize that Princess Diana was the people's Princess.
Now what of William?
His favour by the people increased dramatically when he married Kate, even though the Queen heaped derision on her because of her short dresses (2 inches above the knee). I dare say at that point William and Kate were more popular than the Queen.
I would suggest that William (and his wife Kate) is by far, the person for the next king.
Should Charles take the role, the royal family will cease to be regarded as royal.
 

Stake fodder

Soulless
Joined
Feb 6, 2021
Messages
390
Location
Caught on a root
As an American, I don't have a dog in this fight. I voted just so I could see the results. Still, I have wondered when this subject has come up before if William isn't benefitting from the fact that he is just younger, and therefore has had less time than his father to do unpopular things or make mistakes. Perhaps by the time he becomes king, people will prefer George!
 

AlphaFoxtrot

Scooby
Joined
Sep 11, 2017
Messages
1,976
Age
39
Do I think the rules of succession should be changed to allow a more popular son to take the throne over his less popular father? No. It's by God and my right, not “and popularity.” Now, the firm isn’t stupid, so if the public perception needs to be, Charles is the elderly advisor king emeritus, and William is de facto Prince Regent, then it will be.

I also don’t see it being an issue. Charles primary issue isn’t like Juan Carlos, or Bertie, or the Duke of Windsor, or Andrew. He’s not unfit for the job, he hasn’t abused the public trust. It’s terrible what he did to Diana, sure. But it’s also possible to sympathize with him, what with the whole, can’t marry Camilla because of her status as a virgin/ Grandmother's desire to better ally with the Spencer family? Present him as a transitional King, he should be fine. The Commonwealth has bigger issues.
 

Athena

The original one-eyed chicklet
Staff member
Joined
Feb 2, 2016
Messages
6,546
Location
UK
Black Thorn
I like the Royal Family, I have nothing against them as an institution. Without them we (as a country) wouldn't have anything to ingratiate ourselves with the rest of the world with (apart from our NHS). I think the Queen is a remarkable woman and truly deserves all the honour and records she has achieved as the longest reigning monarch in the world.

I feel mostly sorry for anyone born high into the line of succession. To have your life mapped out for you since birth. You're basically forced into working for the family business. You can't have a life of your own, make your own choices, live where you want, you're expected to work for the Royal Family until you ascend to the biggest throne in the world while constantly living life through a lens. This is going to be life for Charles, and then William, and then George, and then George's first-born child. (Let's remember, the rules for succession to include daughters in the order of birth only came in just before George's birth which is incredible archaic and sexist!)

As romanticised as becoming a prince or a princess is in literature and film, I think it'd be awful in real life.
 
Mr Trick
Mr Trick
Not sure about the first part. To me that is a very white washed version of history. Plus things change. Am with you on the rest.

Mr Trick

Scooby
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Messages
15,197
Age
40
Location
London, UK
I guess if I had to pick I'd say William just because he's more likely to be in touch with modern culture. To me the title means nothing in its current form.
 

The Bronze

Rogue Demon Hunter
Joined
Jul 11, 2013
Messages
3,411
Age
35
Location
Essex
Black Thorn
(Let's remember, the rules for succession to include daughters in the order of birth only came in just before George's birth which is incredible archaic and sexist!)
Not sure how that's any more archaic than a birth right to rule.
 

Athena

The original one-eyed chicklet
Staff member
Joined
Feb 2, 2016
Messages
6,546
Location
UK
Black Thorn
Not sure how that's any more archaic than a birth right to rule.
It's not, really. But if we are going to have a monarchy it should at least have equality for female members of it....
 

ILLYRIAN

Druish Pervonian Wizard
Joined
Jul 5, 2007
Messages
8,819
Age
65
Location
Toodyay
Black Thorn
So, are you saying there should be greater power for the male members of the royal family?
 
Top Bottom