So a middle of the night emergency meeting was because a 95 year old is going to work less?
My current fun theory is that it's really because Harry and his girlfriend illegally eloped and they're forcing Philip to retire as cover while they do damage control.
Based on nothing but that it would make a good plot for a trashy novel.
So a middle of the night emergency meeting was because a 95 year old is going to work less?
It wasn't middle of the night in the U.K. It was essentially a staff meeting to announce the retirement of one of the senior executives. The Daily Mail and twitter just blew it way out of proportion.
But news of the meeting broke around 9 or 10 last night EST, which would be MOTN in England. I know people keep saying "just on the daily mail" but they weren't wrong.
the problem was that then the US had a long night to speculate, lol.
ETA to clarify I think the cries of "emergency middle of the night meeting!" clearly aren't right and were blown out of proportion, but the timing of the news breaking is why people are hung up on "middle of the night."
Kristinmohopecounts I admit I'm no royal scholar so I'll take your word that she intends to hang onto that throne. Though I wouldn't blame her if she's like "Here, Charles, you deal with Trump for the next four years. I have no fucks left to give to that orange wanker."
Trump is probably one of the reasons she won't abdicate. May and Brexit being 2 others. Charles popularity has improved but still isn't that high and given the current instability in the U.K. And abroad no way she would intentionally have the hand off right now and risk further chaos.
Kristinmohopecounts I admit I'm no royal scholar so I'll take your word that she intends to hang onto that throne. Though I wouldn't blame her if she's like "Here, Charles, you deal with Trump for the next four years. I have no fucks left to give to that orange wanker."
Trump is probably one of the reasons she won't abdicate. May and Brexit being 2 others. Charles popularity has improved but still isn't that high and given the current instability in the U.K. And abroad no way she would intentionally have the hand off right now and risk further chaos.
I don't get what this has to do with the Queen. The monarch has very little political standing and essentially doesn't have anything to do with the political process, and hasn't since I think their civil war in the 17th century. That is run through Parliament and the Prime Minister.
Trump is probably one of the reasons she won't abdicate. May and Brexit being 2 others. Charles popularity has improved but still isn't that high and given the current instability in the U.K. And abroad no way she would intentionally have the hand off right now and risk further chaos.
I don't get what this has to do with the Queen. The monarch has very little political standing and essentially doesn't have anything to do with the political process, and hasn't since I think their civil war in the 17th century. That is run through Parliament and the Prime Minister.
It's not necessarily a political thing. I think it means the Queen has a sense of "too much change/chaos at once so I need to hold firm and be a steadfast element". Which could be a bunch of nonsense but I think hats part of how she understands her duty.
I don't get what this has to do with the Queen. The monarch has very little political standing and essentially doesn't have anything to do with the political process, and hasn't since I think their civil war in the 17th century. That is run through Parliament and the Prime Minister.
It's not necessarily a political thing. I think it means the Queen has a sense of "too much change/chaos at once so I need to hold firm and be a steadfast element". Which could be a bunch of nonsense but I think hats part of how she understands her duty.
She's sticking it out no matter what other world leaders are in play. She's in it until death.
Trump is probably one of the reasons she won't abdicate. May and Brexit being 2 others. Charles popularity has improved but still isn't that high and given the current instability in the U.K. And abroad no way she would intentionally have the hand off right now and risk further chaos.
I don't get what this has to do with the Queen. The monarch has very little political standing and essentially doesn't have anything to do with the political process, and hasn't since I think their civil war in the 17th century. That is run through Parliament and the Prime Minister.
Well, sure, she may not have a physical hand in politics but she is beloved and I think her point is that throwing her retirement or even death into the mix at this point would create chaos. She has been a mark for Britain for 80 years and will be a major loss, which the Queen surely knows, for Britain and would be a very bad time to go out right now. Get what I am saying? Or is my American showing again?
Plus she's 91. What would be the point in abdicating now?
I will say, I don't think it's completely unlikely, if her mental health deteriorates. They all might prefer her to abdicate instead of having a regency.
Then again, she's 91, as you said, I think if that was going to be an issue, it would have come up already. Pretty sure the Queen Mother was sharp to the end.
I think the Queen would abdicate if something happened to her health to the point where she could not "be" queen anymore. Like she had a serious stroke or the like.
Or at the point she may just stay on as queen and Charles fulfills her duties as the de facto monarch.
But I don't think she's going to abdicate just because she is old etc.
Trump is probably one of the reasons she won't abdicate. May and Brexit being 2 others. Charles popularity has improved but still isn't that high and given the current instability in the U.K. And abroad no way she would intentionally have the hand off right now and risk further chaos.
I don't get what this has to do with the Queen. The monarch has very little political standing and essentially doesn't have anything to do with the political process, and hasn't since I think their civil war in the 17th century. That is run through Parliament and the Prime Minister.
She is a symbol of stability. And while she has no actual political power she has a great deal of behind the scenes and subtle power.
For example she helped force Thatcher's hands on South Africa by arranging a leak. She dropped a comment prior to the Scottish referendum and so on.
She learned to play the political game from some of the best and she knows how to walk up to the line (and has crossed it once or twice) in managing issues that she must advise, inform, and warn the PM of the day about.
She can not directly control the politics but she can manage certain things by subtly wielding her power as the symbol that is the Monarch.
I don't get what this has to do with the Queen. The monarch has very little political standing and essentially doesn't have anything to do with the political process, and hasn't since I think their civil war in the 17th century. That is run through Parliament and the Prime Minister.
She is a symbol of stability. And while she has no actual political power she has a great deal of behind the scenes and subtle power.
For example she helped force Thatcher's hands on South Africa by arranging a leak. She dropped a comment prior to the Scottish referendum and so on.
She learned to play the political game from some of the best and she knows how to walk up to the line (and has crossed it once or twice) in managing issues that she must advise, inform, and warn the PM of the day about.
She can not directly control the politics but she can manage certain things by subtly wielding her power as the symbol that is the Monarch.
As a Canadian, I've heard that leading up to Constitution Act in 1982 that she was the most knowledgable of all the Brits involved in the discussion. Apparently she really impressed people during the process.
She is a symbol of stability. And while she has no actual political power she has a great deal of behind the scenes and subtle power.
For example she helped force Thatcher's hands on South Africa by arranging a leak. She dropped a comment prior to the Scottish referendum and so on.
She learned to play the political game from some of the best and she knows how to walk up to the line (and has crossed it once or twice) in managing issues that she must advise, inform, and warn the PM of the day about.
She can not directly control the politics but she can manage certain things by subtly wielding her power as the symbol that is the Monarch.
As a Canadian, I've heard that leading up to Constitution Act in 1982 that she was the most knowledgable of all the Brits involved in the discussion. Apparently she really impressed people during the process.
Her overall education sucked but she was tutored by the foremost constitutional scholar once she was heir presumptive. She knows constitutional issues and is well educated on them and with that she knows how to walk the line she must between staying out of politics and using her position to give the royal nod or cold shoulder