The republicans don't stand a cat in hell's chance as far as I'm concerned. King Charles 111 has been warmly welcomed by all and sundry and he seems to love meeting the people.
look at poll results here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republicanism_in_the_United_Kingdom
" Polls since the 1990s have shown the proportion favouring a republic as ranging from 13% to 29%. Recent 2022 polls indicate the figure rests at around one quarter of the population. The figure appears to have slightly increased in recent years, but has consistently remained a significantly less popular position than maintaining the monarchy. " - no chance, we'll be a republic any time soon.
King Charles and Prince William are exemplary figures and do our Country Proud. It's a shame they have one or two unfortunate relatives. Neverthless I think the Monarchy's popularity isn't about to diminish anytime soon.
If HM King Charles III comes up to HM Queen Elizabeth II's standard then provided the rest of the RF behave then I see no reason to change the status quo . The alternative of President Truss or President Starmer doesn't bear thinking about.
The Royal Family have not been universally popular throughout our history. Queen Victoria was not popular at first. In recent times the 1990's were a lot point in popularity culminating in the fall out over Diana's death. What seems to saved the Royals in recent years is the younger royals particular William and Kate.
I dont think a republic is on the cards soon. however the current focus on the Queue can give a rather distorted picture. The BBC are not interviewing people in towns and villages in the provinces who are just indifferent to it all
Charles just doesn't have his mother's history. People remember her doing her bit during the war; Charles does organic biscuits and grumbles about architecture, and there are questions about people paying for access to him. He'll inherit her popularity but I would expect it to fade; any more misbehaviour by any of the family will hurt their popularity further.
As for his welcome from those queuing - remember, these are self-selected royal followers. I don't know how many people will prove to have queued, but Churchill's death attracted more than any monarch in the 20th century
abaout 250,000 people queued to see the lying in state. That's fewer than did so for Churchill (about 320,000) , and fewer than for George VI as well (300,000). And the population was smaller in those days.
And this for a queen who was genuinely much loved and had reigned for 70 years. The conclusion I'd draw is that actually, fewer people care about the monarchy. It appears to be an age thing: 77% of over-65s back the monarchy; 31% of 18-24 yos would prefer an elected head of state.
Jno, don't forget that the wall to wall coverage meant people knew how long the queueing time was. That may well have discouraged them. In the 50s and 60s they were probably less aware.
If I had been old enough, I probably would have joined a queue of any length to give my respects to Winston Churchill. I have nothing against QEII, but I wouldn't have gone through to look at her coffin under a flag
yes, quite possible, Hopkirk. They were predicting up to a million people while simultaneously trying to deter them. Without access to old newspapers, I don't know how long queuing took in 1952, and whether people knew about it (but I was no more up to standing in line for 20 hours then than I am now).
We tried being republicans in the 16 hundreds, it didn't work. The Monarchy is what makes this country great, and brings in billions of pounds in tourism every year.