Jump to content

Without the Monarchy in place,who would you choose for President?


Recommended Posts

Sort yourselves out. As usual we get endless complaints about what you don't want but no constructive ideas about what you do want.

This runs along the lines of a really angry Mum cooking for her kids:

 

'If you don't want pizza for tea, what do you want?'

'Dunno ... what's in't fridge?'

'Sort yourselves out. As usual we get endless complaints about what you don't want but no constructive ideas about what you do want.'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom Jones hasn't been looking too bad this week :love:

 

Agree with you there he's looking good for his age and the voice is sounding as good as ever too,someone suggested Sir Cliff as he's got the knighthood allready,but the voice is sounding a bit croaky now.

 

Any more intelligent suggestions.;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All weekend the forum has been awash with miserable so and so's complaining how the royals are a waste of space and we shouldn't have them. (although they weren't complaining about an extra day off!!). So the OP asks a perfectly legitimate question and not a single politician or any other credible candidate has been suggested for President. Sort yourselves out. As usual we get endless complaints about what you don't want but no constructive ideas about what you do want. No wonder we are in the state we are in. :roll:

 

Why we having this conversation is beyond me, we have the Queen I don't like royalty, but, I cannot fathom how being a republic would improve our situation. We are not in a state, as Jim puts it, just because people on a forum cannot decide who they want to run the country, we are in a state because of poorly run governments and the like, plus the fact that Europe is on the verge of going tits up. Who would you have Jim to run this country, just out of interest, and that's not an invite to blame every socialist that's ever bloody lived, its a constructive question :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. Winston Churchill once said this, in Parliament:

"Democracy is the worst form of government except for all those others that have been tried."

 

In the same way, Monarchy is the worst form of supreme (Head of State) office except for all those others that have been tried!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the same way, Monarchy is the worst form of supreme (Head of State) office except for all those others that have been tried!

 

I don't know, the Queen doesn't really exercise any executive power. She does have certain powers but never uses them except in a way which the government of the day wants.

 

I think it's quite nice having a head of state who doesn't feel the need to interfere with government. An elected head of state would feel the need to have to do something to ensure their re-election.

 

Anyway, we couldn't change the head of state without sorting out the separation between the executive and legislative branches of government to make sure there were some proper checks and balances to stop the power going to their heads.

 

Though, on the other hand, an elected head of state would mean we could have President Blair :love::love::love::love:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the the first president, Elizabeth Windsor, she is the only one with the poiltical nous to to hold the country together at present.

 

How many people even know that their family name was changed from Saxe-Coburg and Gotha to Windsor in 1917?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.