Before I began journalism school, many years ago, I went to the campus bookstore with a list of required books to buy.
Some were classics of the journalistic format - one was John Hersey's searing "Hiroshima", an onsite interview with survivors of the first nuclear bombing of a civilian population, a book that still haunts me.
Another was Darrell Huff's "How to Lie with Statistics," which came to mind earlier today, when I read that a Tatler survey found "more than half the country believes the Duchess of Sussex has been good for the Royal Family."
For example, the sample with the built-in bias. Huff refers to a famous 1936 home telephone poll, which showed that US President Franklin Delano Roosevelt would definitely be defeated by his Republican challenger.
Unfortunately, at the time wealthy people were far more likely to have home telephones, and they were also more likely to be Republicans. When the actual election day came along, millions of people without telephones turned up and elected FDR to a second term.
Some were classics of the journalistic format - one was John Hersey's searing "Hiroshima", an onsite interview with survivors of the first nuclear bombing of a civilian population, a book that still haunts me.
Another was Darrell Huff's "How to Lie with Statistics," which came to mind earlier today, when I read that a Tatler survey found "more than half the country believes the Duchess of Sussex has been good for the Royal Family."
The sample with built-in bias
Huff's book is 65 years old, but it's still a light and easy read (with cartoons!) and many of the methods it describes are still in use today.For example, the sample with the built-in bias. Huff refers to a famous 1936 home telephone poll, which showed that US President Franklin Delano Roosevelt would definitely be defeated by his Republican challenger.
Unfortunately, at the time wealthy people were far more likely to have home telephones, and they were also more likely to be Republicans. When the actual election day came along, millions of people without telephones turned up and elected FDR to a second term.
People who like to answer questionnaires
Huff also points out that all questionnaire answers come, by definition, from people who are willing to answer questionnaires.
What about people who aren't? Or, these days, what about the people who don't take voice calls? (A lot of people under 30, in my experience)
Or those who hang up when the nice question-and-answer lady calls - because they are annoyed, busy, ill, or don't feel safe sharing their opinions with a complete stranger?
In particular, they may be less likely to answer if their opinions could be considered unacceptable by the nice question-and-answer lady - if, say, they are in favor of Donald Trump or Brexit.
Or if they don't think the new (slightly) Black duchess who has recently joined the Royal Family is all that great.
The Meghan poll
According to the poll, as quoted in the Daily Mail and Daily Telegraph, 55 percent of adults think Meghan has been "good for the monarchy" while 45 percent disagree.
But only 54 percent of respondents were willing to answer the question.
Would the 46 percent who did not respond also have called Meghan "good for the monarchy" at a 55-45 ratio?
My guess is no. Perhaps these quiet folk subscribe to the dictim "if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all."
Or they might have a very real fear of being called a racist if they express a dislike of Meghan.
Timing is everything
In addition, the poll of 2,016 adults was conducted on September 6 and 8, well after Meg and Harry had made fools of themselves by lecturing people on the environment then flying about in private jets, but long before they had made fools of themselves by overshadowing their expensive South Africa trip with a quixotic lawsuit against the media.
The effects of this week's weepy, sympathetic documentary about how no one asks about Meg or her problems was also not included.
But the press was sure to run the very latest images with the article, giving it an up-to-date feel.
I wonder why it took Tatler and its partner, ComRes, nearly two months to pull the results together.
It seems like something that could be done overnight with some basic statistical software.
Part of the PR campaign
My guess is that the release of the poll was timed strategically as part of yet another Meghan PR initiative, this one including groanworthy articles like Meghan means business: Why the Duchess of Sussex is dipping into her on-screen Suits style.
Is the media being paid for these pieces, or is it running them in an effort to show it is not biased against the US-born Duchess, as Prince Harry charged in his (second) angry letter directed at the press?
If only we could know what the reporters and editors are really thinking.
But they are precisely the kind of people who would be unlikely to answer a poll.
Comments
Subtler pr would work better too. The constant, fake, transparent positive pr stories are annoying.
1. that famous seen from Yes, Prime Minister
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0ZZJXw4MTA
2. the saying " Lies, damned lies, and statistics"
I'm guessing her fanz will say the focus should be on her 'work', not on her clothes, as though her 'work' had any substance. And I wonder if Meghan's Mirror will still somehow manage to get the designer ID?
She's hitting us where it hurts. In our wallets. In what's a perpetual battle for many families to simply pay their bills, let alone save for the future.
We know she's terminally tone-deaf, but what about her PR? She must be doing this alone as no professional support of any worth would counsel much a move.
Also, it could hit her future 'charitable' income. Lack of transparency sends the worst possible message to possible donors.
My guess is that the Harkles are completely on their own. They only listen to Harvey Weinstein's PR firm who of course have no clue how to operate with a royal client. That's why I'll be gobsmacked if we see them at Sandringham this Xmas. I think at this stage, Meghan barely exists for the royals. Like the rest of us they're just waiting for the inevitable divorce when Harry comes crawling back to them. But I suspect they have given up all hope for her.
And of course, the whole refusing to reveal the designer of her ill-fitting rags is only going to encourage speculation and keep people talking. A bit like all the secrecy around Archie's birth and christening. You'd almost think they WANT people to talk about them all the time.....
I guess that she wants purchases to run through her site.
Now I just assume that the polls and statistics are being provided by the low-cost contractor and interpreted by people with no math skills whatsoever and are not to be relied upon. If it is important to me, I'll know what people really think.
Smarkle might not be identifying her clothes to the media, but she is still identifying them to Meghan's Mirror.
I guess that she wants purchases to run through her site.
This is one of those things that I do not understand, so perhaps you wonderful ladies would be kind enough to explain it to me. Why in the world would somebody want to buy clothes through her site? I'm strictly a cost/benefit type of gal, so the cachet of enriching a low-level royal who was previously an 'actress' does not appeal to me. NOW, if I got a significant discount, that would be different.
Regardless, color me disgusted.
Glowworm 🐛
Also, if this is Tatlers strategy to sell more copies then ha ha, take note Vogue.
Now though it seems like journalists write big broad statements with no backup at all just because they have bought some PR-driven narrative. “I have a deadline and need to produce something so will just pick up ‘info’ from this PR press sheet. My favorite example as you all know is the myth of how Smirkles is a beacon of hope to women of African descent everywhere (Oprah approved! Gayle likes her!) Writers don’t even bother with a proper poll on that, let alone mess with it.
I do agree though that withholding that info comes in the way of transparency. So I guess it's a catch 22.
The mind games are too passive aggressive or bother sides to lead to something substantial. And eventually if someone is planning to get of them it will be through something concrete and admissible inlegal terms, something that the public can't dispute.
Ypu're right that KP recently declined to say what Kate was wearing, but that was not the norm. All of her clothes on the recent tour were IDed I believe.
But if Meghan has now decided none of her clothes are going to be IDed, I suspect there is, as always, shenanigans. Like others I wonder if it's some kind of merching deal, with Meghan's Mirror as the outlet of choice? If so, then that would be pretty much proof that a) Meghan's Mirror is basically a Harkle PR site and b) her clothes are not paid for by the Duchy of Cornwall but are given or lent for merching purposes. The latter, of course, would be totally inappropriate for a member of the royal family.
I also wonder if the reason we've been seeing her in 'repeats' and less expensive outfits is because she is now planning to "reposition" herself for merching purposes? After all, I doubt too many of her fans can afford custom Givenchy.
The exact same thought did occur to me while reading the clothing comments today. Everyone can't afford Dior and Givenchy. And she has been wearing a lot of affordable rewears, nothing fancy schamzy. That infact would be the perfect merching a d bra dung deal wouldn't it. And if it's all available through Meghan's mirror, with discounts, then it's a win win.
That being said she needs to ditch those high heels. They make her the least relatable person ever. But then again, that can also be said about her wigs, her fake lashes, her fake tan, her too white teeth, her cackling laughter. She could merch Spanx though, too bad she doesn't want to own up to that.
I think all of this may depend on her keeping her name on the front page.
The top pictures show her more ... pregnant on 16/01 than on 30/01/ and the rest in a time period of 45 minutes.
They will need to provide him with a way back that preserves some vestiges of self-respect. He's not himself. It's as if he has a succubus (female version of incubus) attached to him, day and night, and they need to detach it from him without tearing him to pieces in the process. So so difficult. For any family, let alone one in the world's spotlight.
Wealth makes things harder here, not easier. How do you carry out tough love if he could die sooner than he runs out of money? Yes his wife is profligate, but if access to capital is limited in some way (and we know royal wealth can have its own rules), that offsets her profligacy. Their privileges - wealth and the royal management of wealth - turn against them.
It must feel like a race against time, especially now she has made fun of him in public. On film. How much is left of him to rescue? How much will there be six months from now? And all the time pressure is building on them from the other side. From the people. Reflected increasingly frequently through the media. To just tear the succubus off him. Careless of damage. Their love for him has already gone.
I know some of you will say so what? He deserves it! I feel that way too. I've never rated him. I've said that before. However, considering him not as a prince but as my brother, son or grandson, I realised how heartbreakingly difficult this is. I realised that if I was the Queen, Prince Charles or Prince William, I just wouldn't know what to do. I would just be hoping she moves on, leaving whatever is left to me.
Glowworm
To me it looks like she is getting her way. And bit just in the bad PR way that is happening now. We are seeing Harry, or her husband, as she refers to him publicly unravelling. We have Gus family calling him fragile, Charles obviously miffed about this whole kurfuffle. There are articles saying HE has been a mess for a long time and Mm is dealing with it behind scenes.
We also see him bringing her out with with him to most of his important engagements bow, she is always holding his hand, leading him, rubbing his back, all a show of being his constant support. At the same time she is perfectly capable of carrying it her own engagements by herself, TRex on the lose. What does this all convey? That Harry is a mess. He is depressed, he is the one who wants to give it all up while she is his strength, she is dealing with it all. That it's all his doing. That is a dangerous narrative to set, and she has been doing it steady over time.
In a few weeks time it is going to be much worse for Harry. And it's then that these silly polls and her speeches about kindness and empowerment and putting a brave face in will begin to shift the narrative in her favour. That I think is her ultimate goal. We haven't seen her actually saying anything damaging about the BRF, it's always been him. So maybe that's what she wants?
1. Only 2016 people responded. Now this is a pretty small sample size the begin with
2.only 30% adults agreed with the statement that she has been good for the BRF
3. 25% adults disagreed with the above statement
4. 31% adults neither agreed, nor disagreed. In addition to that, 14% "didn't know"...which is pretty much the same as neither agreed, nor disagreed. This means that 45% of the people sampled don't have any opinion about her. They certainly cannot be counted in the 55% adults who are supposedly her fans (as per the media)
So to recount, we have only 30% adults stating that she has been good for the family. An almost equal number (25%) feel she has been bad for the family,while the rest (45%), just don't care!
Where has the figure of 55% come from? Have the media outlets just added the 30% (who like her) another 25% (who don't) ? Curiouser and curiouser.
Maybe she is designing her own clothes in an attempt to launch her own clothing line. Someone else is making patterns and sewing so that is why the vast majority of her clothes are ill fitting. Even when she was getting free couture, nothing fit i.e., samples.
The interest shown in each item she wears is developing her line of clothes.
Ugh.
They ignored the inconvenient data (i.e. those who had no opinion or did not answer the question. I scrolled through the comments on DM and not one person called them out on their misleading headline. MM is going to run with this as 55% approval.
I don't know how democracy works in your country. I suspect that Australia and Switzerland are the only democratic countries who have a high degree of honesty in their democracy (I was told that in Australia you have to vote, and in Switzerland the government is always made up of a coalition and referendums are common for bi decisions.)
In my country, 65.99% of eligible voters actually voted. The party that won the election, and thus formed a government and chose the president, got 62.15% of the vote huge majority, no one can touch us, entitled to rule forever!) Actually, only 41% of the voting population voted for the ruling party, and that is not a majority.
Manipulating stats happens all the time and has significant consequences, but there is no rational debate about this. It is now accepted as a fact that 55% of people in the UK believe that MM has changed the BRF in a positive way. Both parts of that statement are not true, but it has now, very quickly, been accepted as fact.
1. Use all channels in social media to challenge this poll and the results in a factual way.
2. Report the media for factually inaccurate headlines.
3. Every time MM appears in public, hold up banners exposing the lies.
Or, accept being outplayed by a brash, shameless, ambitious, and trashy grifter!
@Sigfreya, I think their angle was "55% of the people who had an opinion liked her."
So they took the 30% of the total - 648 people - and divided it by the number of people who had an active opinion (eliminating the don't knows and don't cares). That's around 1188 people.
Divide 648 people divided by 1188 people - 55% of all Britons love Meg!
(Or, 55% of all Britons with an active opinion who were willing to talk to us loved Meg on September 4-6 2019.)
I'm sure she would absolutely love to develop her own line of clothing. However, that would be simply impossible so long as she remains a member of the royal family. That said, this is Meghan so who really knows?
While I personally voted for Clinton, I remember that the general media take was you were a "deplorable" if you even considered voting for Trump - a racist, sexist loser clinging to your guns and religion!
Surprisingly, not many people wanted to tell the nice lady or gentleman from the poll-taking company that they were on the Trump train.
It's the same thing when they do self-reporting for TV ratings. The people who have to fill in the little diaries reporting what they watch always say they're watching a lot of documentaries and historical dramas. The people with actual meters fixed to their TV are proven to be watching sports and the Kardashians.
As for PH, I think he is a very vulnerable young man and his wife has taken advantage of that. Another poster mentioned in length the other day that since they got married he has changed a lot. Before that his family protected him and found ways to channel his ineptitude towards the right fields.
If she is as manipulative and fame hungry as she has been painted here then she has been destroying him bit by bit. I don't think that she even needed to have a certain plan; she simply does what comes natural to her. As I mentioned before, I work with vulnerable people. Some are very intelligent but for one reason or the other they cannot easily escape their problems. While they are good at posturing when you ask them to complete a small task which will help them gain confidence and improve their situation they are terrified at the thought alone.
Personally I hope that he gets professional help and finds himself at the end but I don't care about MM. I detest people who take advantage of the emotionally weak - prince or pauper.
If she were wearing bespoke Givenchy or Dior, she'd be very happy to tell people what she is wearing.
She's having to move down to mid-price brands like we ordinary people wear, and she thinks she's too good for those brands, so she'd rather go silent.
Personally, I've worn both high-end and low-end in my life, and quality doesn't always follow price or label.
For example, I have some Roland Mouret trousers in a lovely fabric, butthey don't have a particularly good shape or drape to them, so they rarely come out of the closet.
But last time I was in the US I found some fabulous knit dresses at JC Penney (of all places) that I get a lot of compliments on. You just never know.
There's a similar phenonemon on this side of the Atlantic: "The Shy Tory". People don't want to tell pollsters they're going to vote for the nasty right-wing party... and yet they keep on winning elections.
"The people who have to fill in the little diaries reporting what they watch always say they're watching a lot of documentaries and historical dramas. The people with actual meters fixed to their TV are proven to be watching sports and the Kardashians."
Yup. Ditto with food. In surveys, people insist that they hardly ever snack or eat junk food and so simply can't understand why they keep gaining weight. However, when cameras are placed in their kitchens, it's shown that people tend to eat much more a- nd much more unhealthy food - than they'd like to think.
@Alice Surrey James, KP deliberately didn't relase Kate's clothes details because she was wearing a French label and a day before then, DM published a report that Kate wears more British designs than Meghan. So Richard Palmer said it's probably why KP refused to release the details. DM can't praise Kate for wearing more British labels and the next day she is seen wearing a French label. So to avoid backlash, KP refused to release the details.
6
Glowworm
And this is where I would probably solidly distrust a follow up survey as I would highly suspect a question along the lines of a recent poll showed that M is found to be favorable to 55% of the population. Has this changed your opinion of her?
I recently read the parts of two books on HRC - specifically the parts about election night. Her Florida numbers looked ok, about what they were expecting but it was one area which had a lot of retirees from the Rust Belt which went unexpectedly Trump. People (other than the I follow this one area because they come from the Rust Belt and it tells me things) said that ok, a little soft but not a big deal. And it all went from there.
I am not a British citizen but I studied English literature and history. I am amazed by the longevity of the British monarchy and came to the conclusion that the Windsors have one of the best and most efficient PR professionals. Dare I say propaganda even instead of PR? It baffles me that these two don’t listen to them! Although they’ve done wonders for Harry’s public image!
I don’t fully trust polls. The idiom “the devil lies in the details” applies perfectly to polls. Plus, spinning the results one way or another is quite easy and fairly common with polls. Unfortunately, I think you’re right : some people were maybe too afraid to be honest about MM for the wrong reason (being accused of racism)... Besides, 55% is not a great approval rate.
What attracts me the most is watching the actions of MM - a malignant narcissist. It’s truly fascinating. Due to a personal experience and extensive research and reading, I have no doubt that she is a malignant narcissist with maybe some borderline personality disorder. It’s like watching a thriller although you already know how it ends. I see a malignant narcissist in plain sight and all her actions go unpunished. I see her victim falling in her traps, one after another and no sign of him even realizing what’s going on. I know Harry is no prize and not very bright and I even think he is arrogant and petulant but still it’s disturbing to watch what’s happening to him. And I keep reading about them! She is a textbook malignant narcissist and still nothing and no one can stop her. It’s an abusive relationship and whatever we think of him he is her prey. He might have used or encouraged her to get back at his family for the way he believes they mistreated his mother. But she manipulated him into encouraging her actions. Frankly, it’s very annoying seeing him trotting behind her or waiting for her signal (or permission) to greet people! He is diminished and completely under her control. The most disturbing being the way she forced him back into his grief and anger about his mother’s death. The constant and unjustified comparisons to his dead mother feel so wrong, creepy even. What grownup woman wants her husband to see in her his dead mother??? I believe she played this game from the beginning forcing him to marry her at 36, the age Diana was when she died. She has been using from the beginning and will keep using him till she finds her next prey. She won’t leave him until he is of absolutely no use to her. She seems to be thriving all right ! And everything is going according to her plan.
Not that I am a fan of conspiracy theories but I still do wonder how this untalented zlist actress wormed her way into the BRF and managed to become a duchess! How much planing and conniving did it take??? She’s a hustler and a grifter but aiming for a British prince is a long stretch...
None of these frothy pieces have an accredited RR byline. It's astonishing how cheaply articles can be commissioned. Richard Palmer in one Twitter exchange distanced himself from the online content from which separation I understood always to check the byline. Papers need to continually refresh their content and what's better than clickbait?
What has confirmed to me that MM is a stupid woman with a very narrow focus is that she hasn't maximised her soft PR opportunities. Appearing in Charles's documentary appearing demure and fascinated (whilst keeping her mouth shut for once) would have given her a lot of Brownie points. Ditto going to Balmoral, approved pics of her with a pram and dogs in Windsor Great Park - the easy wins are endless but I imagine simply didn't fit into her modern Princess image of herself, being seen to dance to the Windsor's tune.
Of course if she is building her narrative of the spurned and isolated black princess her behaviour makes sense; however broadening her experience of the Royal experience would be worth $$$ post divorce.
Whichever way you cut it she's completely f*cked up her brilliant opportunity. In short she's taken the Brits for fools and we don't like it.
Of course, putting her on the cover in the first place could have been done at her team's behest although using an old photo (indirectly drawing attention to how she's aged) and using "divide or conquer?" on the cover isn't heavy-handed a**-kissing on its face.
Speaking of "divide vs conquer" Tatler published an editorial about her using those same terms last spring. The sentiment resonates but kind of odd to use the same words.
https://www.tatler.com/article/meghan-markle-mania
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7617371/Buckingham-Palace-hits-anonymous-adviser-Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle.html
A 'senior courtier' / 'senior Buckingham Palace aide' hitting back as the claims made for our single-handed modernisers ...
"The couple are already planning to take six weeks off from Royal duties for some ‘much-needed family time’ but The Mail on Sunday has learned it may be the precursor to a much longer absence from Britain.
"It is understood plans for the couple to spend up to six months abroad are being actively considered, with the United States the most likely destination.
"A British diplomatic source in the US said: ‘Everything is fluid at the moment from the Government’s point of view but I wouldn’t be surprised if [Harry and Meghan] end up here. The way it is going in Britain at the moment, there is nothing for them to lose in leaving.’"
If it was the US it would deprive H&M of the chance to make the story about their special suitability for Commonwealth duties.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1196048/meghan-markle-royal-news-prince-harry-poll-british-culture-queen
https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/meghan-markles-half-sister-samantha-20731961
"Meghan Markle’s half-sister Samantha was tonight at the centre of an extraordinary police probe into online bullying.
"The investigation was launched by detectives in the US, where Sam lives.
"It comes after she wrote a series of controversial messages about Meghan and her husband Prince Harry .
"Tonight an officer working on the case for Polk County Sheriff Department, Florida, told the Sunday Mirror: 'There have been multiple reports of allegations of cyber-bullying made.
"'Samantha Markle is aware of this allegation.'
"'She has not been arrested. This is an ongoing case and I cannot speculate on a timeline yet or make any other comment.'"
I wish when she was being interviewed and she whined about what was being printed the interviewer had said "I thought you don't read any press on you, that is all just noise" (to use her words).
I agree with Misty's assessment that MM did NOT want Harry at the roundtable yesterday and resented it. She spoke of him "crashing the party" and insulted his past work in front of the roundtable, then laughed about it.
This is the same as publicly regifting the Invictus onesie. There are people who are just clueless, but she appears at times to have a truly malicious, mean-spirited streak.
If Samantha says something untrue then hit her for libel/slander but these tactics are disgustingly ruthless.
Thomas and Samantha Markle are not just 'ordinary' people with limited resources but also with health issues. Again, as with the cessation of information to MSM about her clothing costs, how will this play to the public? Why should third parties go to the trouble of making formal police complaints? 'Tone-deaf' is an increasingly inadequate term.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10220173/meghan-markles-half-sister-investigated-online-bullying/
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10220173/meghan-markles-half-sister-investigated-online-bullying/
Extract from the Sun:
'Another source [as distinct from a 'purported source' from the Polk County police dept which in itself sounds vague] said: “The allegations relate to numerous internet platforms and include complaints from at least four countries, including the UK, Canada and Sweden.
'"It is a large and widespread investigation and is likely to be a long process.
'"The investigation is still at an early stage.”'
Interesting UK and Canada are mentioned.
@Neutral observer! I just read the very condescending comment of yours on the last thread. How arrogant of you to assume that I don't know the difference and can't judge how my male colleagues are being treated.I can assure you that the men who have bullied me would never, ever consider doing the same thing to a man because they would get punched out.
The mansplaining in one job was so bad that I started stuttering. Did my male colleagues mansplain their colleagues comments?
Did the colleague who told me that he would shoot me in the head and then rape me also say the same thing to his male colleagues?
I think you need to trust that I am a good judge of my own experience. How very sexist and misogynistic of you!
Mischi, I am not NeutralObserver, but I have probably been working in male-dominated environments since before you were born (I started in the 70s). Army, police, trucking, construction...very physical and very, very macho. If you don't think it was thousands of of times worse then, you better think again. You can call me sexist if you want. Words don't bother me.
I would advise you to take some self-defense classes. Krav maga is good. Why? Because bullies of both sexes (and I have had women bosses that were worse than the men) will go after anybody of any sex that they perceive to be weaker physically and mentally than they are. If you are weaker physically, exercise and strengthen to your full physical capacity. If you are weaker mentally (and I don't mean IQ, I mean your ability to do violence) then you need to toughen that up, too. Krav maga isn't interested in fighting fair. Krav maga is interested in eliminating the threat. Learn about pressure points to create pain as a tool in self defense, but do not rely on them because different people have different perceptions of pain. What may incapacitate one person may really aggravate another. It is to be used in conjunction with other self defense methods, not as a primary.
Learn how to use a knife and a club, and defenses against same. Learn how to break chokeholds.
If you do not already know how, shooting lessons.
Network and form alliances. Bullies like to pick on people without allies.
You would probably be surprised at how quickly the horsesh*t stops when they perceive you to be an equal.
Note: Anybody my age didn't have the luxury about complaining to HR. We had to handle our problems ourselves.
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/meghan-markles-sister-samantha-being-20733484
In this one the information from 'another source' shown above is still referred to as a 'police source'.
From what I could see regarding her response to that now infamous documentary, it was in line with general public opinion. Referred to as 'a series of controversial messages' in the article. Dark days.
Speaking of height, I was watching 'Identity Thief' last night to cheer myself up and Melissa McCarthy was referred to as "Hobbit height". Looked her up and she's the same height as me! 5' 2". Watching her quite a bit at the moment. You need to see someone let rip and make you laugh out loud at the same time, with all of this going on.
Re: polls. Some very good pollsters were dead wrong in the US Election in 2016, & even experts like Nate Silver have written that polling gets harder & harder with the move away from landlines, & yes pollsters can ask questions in such a way that they get the results they want. An acquaintance of mine who worked for the Nielsen tv ratings co joked to me that Nielsen didn't want to measure people like me, who at the time watched a lot of PBS & cable news, Nielsen wanted people who would tell advertisers that the shows they were spending money on were reaching buyers of their products, & Nielsen was giving them that.
In 2016, supposedly Hillary was using all of the high tech methods of targeting & polling voters that Obama had used so successfully, but she still lost, incredibly. Like Nutty, I voted for Hillary, although anyone who's read my posts knows that I don't like her. I don't think you have to admire a politician to prefer their policies. Hillary would have won if she picked up less than 100,000 votes spread out between three states, Michigan, Wisconsin & Pennsylvania, but enough about US politics.
Polls sometimes have been uncannily accurate, even with a sample of only around 1,000, but it's a complicated art, & not all pollsters are equally good. I don't think the Tatler poll is any way scientific. As someone else has pointed out, they just want people to buy their magazine. The press wants Megs to be a money maker like Diana was, & she knows that. I am more & more perplexed at how Harry & Megs' marriage can work. He hates the limelight, she loves it & thrives in it. I'm getting a little tired of Megs & Harry myself, but then I read the WSJ & the NYTimes & come running back to this inane story. The Times is all pearl clutching over Trump & the WSJ is about PG&E power cuts, wildfires, substandard products on Amazon & riots in Hong Kong. Depressing. The Megs & Harry story has mystery & malice, love, hate, family. We all can relate to that.
Did anyone else look at it and think it was the least royal cover photo ever? That's the expression of a model, not a royal.
We should do a MM themed cookbook, it can be a group project, so everyone can participate. Title: 101 Recipes for Bananas You Never Wanted or Will Ever Use
https://the-best-soap-opera-ever.tumblr.com/post/188613207436/submission-deconstructing-wordsalad#notes
Has anyone here set up a task force? I have. You have goals, assign tasks, set up a reporting structure, bring in the required resources, and so on, and then complete the project.
Meghan, with the support of her loyal sidekick, is going to rule the world, save the world, change the world with word salad!
Love the recipe book for 101 Recipes for Bananas You Never Wanted or Will Ever Use!
Polk County, Florida, is where an illegal alien pulled over at a traffic stop ran. When pursued, he shot and killed a K9, the K9 officer was shot six times with one of the bullets lodging in the spine, and illegal alien walked over to him and executed him with two shots to the head, stealing his weapon and ammo. Another officer was shot but was able to radio for help. Illegal alien shot at responding police, too, then hid. When law enforcement officers located executed officer's body, they were not happy. Next morning, when the murderer pointed a gun (later determined to belong to the deceased officer) at the police, he was shot 68 times with 110 shots being fired. The Polk County sheriff, when asked why deceased illegal alien had been shot 68 times, answered that they'd probably run out of ammunition.
Well, SS certainly knows that expressing an opinion is perfectly legal here whether somebody likes it or not. Why are they trying to convince people in the UK? Are they trying to intimidate THEM?
We should do a MM themed cookbook, it can be a group project, so everyone can participate. Title: 101 Recipes for Bananas You Never Wanted or Will Ever Use
How to use bronzer on your roast chicken!
I haven't heard that about the cover. It is odd that they would go with an old photo, however being that it's a gossip magazine, I'm not sure if a royal would want to do a photoshoot for the cover. Have other royals done so in the past? I wonder how well the issue is selling. If people don't buy it, she won't be on many covers in the future... we can hope.
Gone midnight here so signing off. My last post took forever as I had an endless CAPTCHA loop despite great WiFi. I think Princess Meghan is driving me into an advanced state of paranoia. As I see what seems like the 100th set of traffic lights pop up, I imagine her cackling manically from a control room surrounded by frogs, stopping me from expressing 'controversial' views.
Wish me luck with this one ...
I missed where they said maybe six months in the USA for H and M. Noooooooo.
And I agree with Scones. This fighting has to stop.
"I’m not sure who they were polling."
Telephone polls are notoriously unreliable. Nutty laid out some of the reasons. Many people won't answer the phone if they don't recognize the number. If they do answer the telephone, many are unwilling to answer survey questions. Of the ones who answer the questions, you have to hope they are being truthful and not giving you the responses they think you want.
Often times candidates will try to use polling to get more votes. There are a lot of people who think voting is a popularity contest and vote for who they think will win and not who they want as their representative. They will also use polling to suppress the vote. Many people will look at a poll and decide their preferred candidate has no hope of winning, so they stay home on election day, failing to vote.
I don't see anything legally happening to Samantha regarding this cyber bullying issue. I think it's a scare tactic being employed by MM to scare Samantha into being quiet again. Since when is responding to another's statements and offering a truthful opinion "cyber bullying"? What a waste of law enforcement time and resources. There are real crimes these investigators could be working on.
Actually, I believe that Samantha may have a case of her own for being bullied. Crybullies never think about that.
Let's not fight. Let's save the insults for you know who's next outfit.
Seems hypocritical for woke, progressive types to object to freedom 9f speach. MM isn't the only one.
Re the cookbook, hope MM disinfected the turkey baster.
I agree with the others who are weary and worn from the infighting on here. I just scroll on and avoid and ignore. If we don't simply ignore when someone gets ugly at us, then the blog becomes nothing but a torn up room. That's exactly what the trolls want to happen. They hold seminars on how to tear up a great blog like this one and sadly, it works most of the time by using divide and conquer.
Mischi, Swampy and Natural Observer, it's fine to disagree without discounting each other or using ad hominem attacks. So, please kiss and make up.
@Knitwit, pour me one too please. It's been a long day.
I tried cooking a pork loin in hard apple cider in the Instant Pot. It didn't turn out as well as I'd hoped. The taste was meh (at best) and the loin was dry. (Ain't gon' do that again.) Since I am new to Instant Potting, I may have overcooked it. I like to cook low and slow on dryish meats so I'll probably stick to the oven or the crock pot.
So, here I am, with 5 bottles of hard apple cider. Well. It was 5 bottles. Now it is 3 bottles. If I make it 2 bottles, I may not make it out to feed the dogs and cats.
Now that is a truly horrifying thought!
Hey, KnitWit, I have been meaning to ask you whether you are allowed to take knitting needles on flights again? I have to think that having a knitting needle jabbed through one's eyeball or inserted between the ribs would ruin one's day. This makes me think that I should take up the hobby. (No, seriously, SwampMan is retiring soon and wants to get a traveling house on wheels to intimidate the unwary on the highway as we travel around. A portable hobby would be nice and I've always intended to try it. Which knitting method do you use/recommend for people that are less coordinated than most?)
Now, back to the MM topic. I just read some of the comments on the MM articles in the DM, and they are BRUTAL. It looks like all y'all have been sharpening up those cutting comments.
https://anonymoushouseplantfan.tumblr.com/post/188617936276/what-do-you-honestly-think-meghan-wanted-out-of#notes
I wonder if the BRF did do any research on MM before going along with the wedding and pulling out all stops in welcoming her to the family and giving her special treatment and limitless perks? If they had, surely they would have seen that she was trouble? Surely they cold see that the fallout when the PR nonsense was exposed would be massive?
The cognitive dissonance alone is massive (what is said in interviews vs actual behaviour; PR vs truth about her past) and people seem to deal with it by choosing a side and being fanatic about that.
I think they both will attend Remembrance events (I think there are three) and then go off to the USA until Christmas at Sandringham (awkward!). Problems in the marriage started before Archie was born and his arrival exacerbated the problems. Watch for signs of this and the efforts made to cover this up. However, I think the misery will continue because she does not have her global status (e.g. can she keep the foundation and the name?) nor the money in the bank (heck, she does not even have property) to go it alone and she is too old to go back to the full-time hustling of the past.
And colour meanings are relative, the Brits say her purple dress is a an "eff you" to the British royal family. I understand "The Color Purple" is a significant film in the African-American community. My mother OTOH dislikes purple because in Indonesia, the colour purple is associated with divorcées/widows (she regifts purple gifts). I personally think it's a spiritual colour associated with the 3rd Eye/Crown chakra. 💜
As for fake-looking wigs: I have an autoimmune disorder (so I'm always paranoid about my hair & keep a few wigs just in case the worst happens). What I've learned from YouTube is you can make them appear more realistic by applying dry shampoo to them.
But this has been on my mind for weeks now and since it's my off-Interwebz-hiatus day, I thought I'd come over here and get it off my chest:
Has anyone else noticed the uncanny resemblance between Meghan and Eddie Redmayne from a certain angle?
It's uncanny.
They even have the same freckles.
Every time I see her from that angle I have a bit of a "Twlight Zone" moment LOL.
And I don't mean that as an insult (Eddie was a very pretty lady in that Danish Girl film, or whatever the title was). I'm just saying. I'm surprised nobody has brought this up or noticed yet.
There, I said it.
I was afraid to say it. (NN in Gemini problems... Aaaaand the moon is currently in Libra.)
My question to the 46% of the respondents: Come on now, tell us what you REALLLLLLLY think. LMAO.
I too agree they must've been afraid of being labelled all sorts of things from "racist" to "sexist" to whatever else Millenials like to shift blame their lack of popularity on.
Personally, I wish her no harm. I think people are more afraid of just HER LAWLESSNESS in snatching random citizens' Instagram handles than they pose a threat to her. Legit *that* incident gave me anxiety! (IDK about you.)
I'm also surprised that in Nutty's last post about Meghan's inability to listen to her security team; of the 370 comments, Jussie Smollett was only mentioned once. (Granted I didn't read or even skim all of them, I used the search function.)
I thought Jussie' story was such a big deal for western society, I wrote a 999-word flash fiction about it. (FTR, it wasn't *entirely* based on him, it was also partly based on what I felt about Justin Trudeau in February 2019, but I thought it was a huge enough deal people would remember what he did in October of the same year.)
Also, the other day I was just watching Jonathan Pie's latest video. Apparently you're no longer allowed to tell "classist" jokes in England? (They make comedians sign an agreement not to do so at the door at the comedy clubs.) Does this mean we can't tell jokes about toffs anymore?
How incredibly sad?
Not everything is "posh-bashing", you know.
Not everything that is un-PC can falls in the "hateful" area of the Venn diagram of un-PC ribbing. It's like you can't even LOVE people properly anymore.
When I tells the Lulz about toffs, I promise it comes from a place of love. I even want to buy little toff hats for my cats... I mean, I love luvvies and toffs. I think they have nice accents (it's called the BBC accent or RP or something). I'd certainly marry one!
Of course, if you're going to marry a toff, it's best you test-drive him first to see what he's like in bed. (No point in marrying a man with an RP accent if he's just going to be quiet in bed.) So yeah that's my dating advice of the week. 🖤
Take care, everybody.
Upon waking up on this lovely Sunday morning, I had to spend 20 minutes deleting nasty infighting comments that had nothing to do with the topic at hand.
Please - Do Not Do This. It makes other people uncomforable, and it makes me annoyed.
Also, for those dealiing with CAPTCHA, in most cases you can simply skip the "I'm not a robot" box. I've been skipping it on CDAN for years with no ill effects.
Thank you so much for the hair tips. 💜💜💜💜💜 *Knocks wood*
Take care.
From the outside looking in (so I’m very open to being corrected), it appears that:
- Mischi noted feeling distressed with how she is treated at work (& a grad school class?)
- NeutralObserver & SwampWoman attempted to help by offering concrete advice.
- @Mischi feels frustrated & unheard, because her need for empathy wasn’t met.
- @SwampWoman & @NeutralObserver feel surprised (?) & possibly frustrated that their advice and attempt to concretely adress the situation weren’t appreciated.
This reminds me of the first fight I had with my college boyfriend.
I had gained the dreaded freshman fifteen, and felt very insecure about how I looked. So, in an attempt to receive reassurance, I said, “I feel fat.”
I wanted him to say “of course not,” “you’re perfect as you are,” or something romance-novelly.
What he said instead, in his attempt to be helpful, was “You could always work out.”
...
Suffice it to say, I was hurt and upset, bc my need for acceptance as i was wasn’t being met. And of course, I did not straight-forwardly ask for said reassurance, but had expected (?!) it anyway.
He, in turn, was surprised that his unasked-for advice was unappreciated and in fact upsetting. But, he wan’t wrong, per se. It just wasn’t the hoped-for response to the unspoken request.
We’ve been married 24 years, so he and I got it sorted in the end.
So, what I’m trying to say is, I think everyone meant well; unasked-for advice isn’t always appreciated or even wanted no matter the best of intentions; needs for acceptance and empathy were not met (nor were they directly asked for - thus some amount of mind-reading was required).
Can we agree to stop chiming in with how we’re offended by an off-shoot comment, so this particular situation can at least rest? Also, as many have said, I echo the request to avoid name-calling. Sarcasm towards one another, interpersonally, also can lead to hurt feelings - so lets avoid it, & join together in focusing our frustrations outwards at the intended agreed upon subject, the drama surrounding MM/Arch/PH/et.al.
Crown Office
In accordance with the direction of HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Letters Patent have passed the Great Seal of the Realm, dated the 16th July 2018 granting unto Her Majesty’s Grandson, His Royal Highness Prince Henry Charles Albert David of Wales, K.C.V.O., and the heirs male of his body lawfully begotten the dignities of Baron Kilkeel, Earl of Dumbarton, and Duke of Sussex.
Elaine Chilver
The response I got both mortified me, & made me feel awful for the responder. ( I don't think I've ever been called a POS, even by my brothers, who taught me how to survive merciless teasing, & I'm grateful). The response made me even reconsider my dislike for Megs. She worked for almost 20 years in an industry that mistreats & exploits women, & it's bound to have left its mark. I remember in a couple of interviews she said she'd never have to give up her seat for a more important man again, & that now that she was marrying Harry, she should tell the director who sent her out for ice cream or something would have to get her ice cream now. Perhaps some of her inexplicable behavior is due to residual rage over all those years of humiliation that Hollywood inflicts on people.
I think some of Megs' rabid supporters view her as taking on the patriarchy, & of course there are patriarchal elements in the British monarchy, although the Queen seems to have taken them in her stride quite well. Most of the men in the RF seem quite harmless, other than the unfortunate Andrew. I sort of see Megs as a con woman who's taking advantage of a family of elderly & naive people, but maybe I'm being too harsh. I don't know. Here in the US, we've seen so many idols & icons unmasked, I think it's one of the reasons people are drawn to Trump. He flaunts his more objectionable qualities without shame, so people at least know exactly what they're getting.
I'll try to post less often here. It's something I do to ward off dementia, like doing crossword puzzles, or playing Lumosity games.
I post comments here so I don't have annoy my friends with too long & wordy emails LOL!
Crown Office
In accordance with the direction of HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Letters Patent have passed the Great Seal of the Realm, dated the 16th July 2018 granting unto Her Majesty’s Grandson, His Royal Highness Prince Henry Charles Albert David of Wales, K.C.V.O., and the heirs male of his body lawfully begotten the dignities of Baron Kilkeel, Earl of Dumbarton, and Duke of Sussex.
Elaine Chilver."*
Oh goodness, that's almost as hard to read as one of Markles purple-prose word salads! However, am I right in reading it as saying that The Queen grant's Harry's 'lawfully begotten' male heirs the inheritability of the titles of Baron Kilkeel, Earl of Dunbarton, and Duke of Sussex? And given that we know that Archie is NOT going to have those titles when he is older, does that lend credibility to speculation that Archie is NOT lawfuly begotten in some way? Or am I misreading this?
If as you say, her rage is due to the humiliations inflicted upon her by Hollywood, then that would make her a Marvel Villain! 🤨🤔
What would her Marvel/DC Villian name be - The Claw??
lovely comment, and I whole heartedly agree.
I will admit that I was extremely startled having read the way she characterized your "attack" when you just pointed out the obvious and the "attack" was all on her part. I thought perhaps she had misunderstood. Nope, she doubled down with her written attacks on both of us.
I wish her well, and hope that she gets help from somewhere.
I used to have a fairly popular blog but I abandoned it several years ago while I was caring for a close family member's severe health problems/open heart surgery and stroke rehab. After a series of family deaths and then the death of a dear friend, I just didn't have the heart to restart it (and most everybody prefers Facebook). If I do start it again (heh, I don't remember my password), you would be most welcome to come chime in. I call 'em as I see 'em, don't entertain whining but instead focus on results, and am most un-PC and very opinionated.
Apparently Meg begged for UK tabloid exposure. Sounds more like it!
Thank you Nutty for this blog and for trying to find a way to make our comment responses easier for continuity.
PS: I hope I'm not confusing my MM gossip blogs but it's Sunday, so forgive me.
Also, about the Tatler cover itself, I feel this is a carefully planned PR move by her team. Tatler , a few months back, called her the social climber of the year. So to have her as the cover issue would be quite a coup for her team and goes a long way in rahibilitating her image and clap back at the social climber title. As for the picture, surely Tatler just has to aquire the photo from the agency that owns it, she wouldn't have much of a say in that right?
I’ve been posting for a while here, but there’s another poster with a very similar name, and I don’t want to be confused for the other person (nothing sinister I assure you)! So I’ve changed my name to one of my favourite sweets! Lol
William will eventually become The Prince of Wales. His children will then be "Prince George of Wales" and so forth. If William is
not yet King when Prince George marries, then King Charles could make George a royal Duke upon marriage. When William
becomes king, George will become Prince of Wales. Louis will be Prince Louis of Wales when William becomes POW and can also receive a royal dukedom upon marriage; it does not have to be Cambridge.
It is different for Harry because his Duke of Sussex title is the highest title he will ever have. That's why these are inheritable titles. I believe that comment in the DM is tomdraw attention tot he fact that Archie is not a lawful son because Archie has no title. Another comment I read stated that the DM has proof and thatbis what the lawsuit is really about.
Someone please correct me if I am wrong.
I think you’re right about the PR team wanting to get her on the cover after the whole social climber of the year thing. As for the picture chosen, it might be her team or an editorial choice but either way I think it’s not an innocent one. It’s rather interesting that the photo was taken in 2015 I.e. before she even met Harry. Either she chose it as a way to show her independence from the BRF, or the editorial team wanted a picture to go along with the word “divisive” used to describe her. It’s all in the eyes: the luscious and daring way she’s looking at the camera. Either way, there’s nothing royal about MM in this picture.
Archie could only inherit the title upon Harry’s death, he can’t be a Duke (the same time as his Father), at most an Earl. Besides, Prince Charles has stated many times (it’s publicly well documented) he wants to slim down the monarchy, so he’s just as like to stay as he is (a Mr) or upon Charles ascent to throne he’ll make him a Prince.
‘When William becomes king, George will become Prince of Wales. Louis will be Prince Louis of Wales when William becomes POW and can also receive a royal dukedom upon marriage; it does not have to be Cambridge.’
You are correct KitKat. The only thing I’d add, neither son is likely will become the Duke of Cambridge, only upon death will that title be freed up. So another unused Dukedom will be used when George marries (however, he will become the PoW if William is King when George marries). The second eldest son usually takes the tile of The Duke of York, yes, we have to assume the current one will be dead by the time Louis marries.
With the line of succession, The Queen only made changes to the line of succession before George was born, that was be it boy or girl, she or he would become King or Queen regardless of the gender of the firstborn.
Royal titles and Dukedoms etc aren’t inherited in the exact same way as the aristocracy. With the aristocracy the title and assets are never passed down the female line due to primogeniture.
Archie could only inherit the title upon Harry’s death, he can’t be a Duke (the same time as his Father), at most an Earl. Besides, Prince Charles has stated many times (it’s publicly well documented) he wants to slim down the monarchy, so he’s just as like to stay as he is (a Mr) or upon Charles ascent to throne he’ll make him a Prince.
Yes, doesn’t ‘Prince Archie’ have a nice ring to it? Lol
Glowworm
Lol lol Almost normal, like as a used car salesmen moniker! ;o)
I really agree with you and the articles I've read suggest Samantha will come out fighting. Indeed going by readers' comments there's such a shift in opinion, in her favour, with people apologising for not having believed her earlier, that she could perhaps get crowd-funding for her legal bills!
I'm here Mimi.
I don't know. Sometimes people have a lot more to say about a particular topic than other times.
While I'm here, I'm in the take up knitting camp. Easy, portable (yes to airports unless you wind up with some agent with a not sticking to the it is ok rules) and you have something useful when you are done.
I thought it was a sly/mean way of rubbing the award/title in her face (I can just picture the editorial staff giggling their way through this issue) and the "divide et impera" headline was a reference to her [allegedly] isolating Harry from his family? I think it looks terrible for her image.
But then again that's just my perception as a foreigner. I think it's a dig, not for her benefit. If I were her, I'd rather forget Tatler even exists. Maybe things are getting lost in translation for me?
BUT I really believe the choice of using a photo from 2015 is like their way of rejecting/refusing to acknowledge the post-2016 Meghan. It's like a snotty way of saying, "you're still pre-Duchess Meghan to us. We will not curtsey to you, fellow pleb."
I actually feel a bit bad for her now, just a little teensy-weensy bit (even if I probably laughed the hardest when I learned titles like that existed in England, I thought it was kind of like the Razzies LOL).
But what do I know about analysing the foreign media? Huh.
I'll go tssssslinking back into my tsssssocial media hiatussssss now. 🐍🐍🐍🐍🐍 (Pottermore says I'm a Slytherin. 💚)
I hope I haven’t offended everyone. I definitely did not mean to imply anyone should stop or decrease their posting.
And I did not mean to judge or shame anyone.
I strongly recognize all parties were doing the best they could in that moment.
It was just a plea for civility and some calm order, because it felt like the group dynamics were sort of spiraling, and we needed a way out. So I was willing to be the fall-guy (fall-gal?). And maybe being frozen out is what the fall-gal should expect.
I wonder if maybe there were quite unpleasant responses to my post that Nutty removed? That would explain the seeming complete silence that met my post, In which case, I’d like to try shouting “Hi!” into the void, in hopes of feeling like I was heard.
However, if you strip all of that away, what is left is what she has shown herself to be ... a domineering, controlling hustler who is not a team player, with an entitled attitude and who sprouts a lot of word salad with a heavy dollop of untruths as dressing. She seems to have no interest in British culture or history, nor have respect for the monarchy other than how she can use it in her biggest hustle yet.
1. The PDA is not unique to M&H; William and Kate also display PDA occasionally. With the former, it is so over the top and persistent that it seems odd and increasingly M uses it to control and direct. With the latter, it seems natural and never interferes with professionalism.
2. The whole M pregnancy was weird, and the weirdest of all was what I call the coat flicking (the constant belly cupping was just annoying). What was that about?
3. The woke IG is just tacky and comes across as seeking popularity rather than a public servant keeping the public informed, and occasionally sharing something personal.
4. The overspending (very expensive clothes, dozens and dozens of rings and other bits of cheapish jewellery, jetting around and staying in very expensive hotels) started to come across as vulgar and greedy.
I can easily keep going until I get to ten or more ... I think she can manipulate and talk her way out of trouble and play the victim within the BRF for a while, but she keeps tripping over her own character. She seems careless as well, and those careless actions are causing great unhappiness to the man she professes to love. So, no matter how much PR she buys and how many friends step forward to defend her, she leaves a trail of messy stuff behind her and keeps talking her way into trouble.
She will not want to stay if they don't give her the castle, the tiaras (and other splendid jewellery) and the really high profile events (state dinners, BAFTA awards, global humanitarian awards ...), but she is not going to leave without her global brand and guaranteed big funding for the rest of her life. (BTW I think one of her problems is that she does not have a carefully thought-out plan but bounces from one idea to another).
Maybe one day someone will write a complete and accurate account of the MM episode, but I think the gossip and myths will persist (e.g. a lot of what people say about Wallis Simpson is very far from the truth but they state it as fact, and this happens even though a couple of thorough and accurate books have been written about her). Wallis did not change the course of the BRF (Elizabeth would simply have become queen much later if David had not abdicated). Neither will MM.
There have been times when I've written a comment about Markle that I've read back and winced at how uncharacteristically venomous I sound. But I think theres a real sense of frustration and anger growing with this situation and the monarchies seeming inability to bring the Sussexes to heel. Markle isnt just some annoying celebrity that you can just ignore if they're not your cup on tea. She's a public servant. A PAID public servant. My tax money supports her whether I like it or not. It's difficult to explain to people outside of the UK why this is such a personal issue for so many Brits, but it really is. I'm a single mother of two. I work two jobs to get by, and what little spare time I have I spend studying for a degree part time. I haven't had a foreign holiday in twenty years. The idea that my taxes are supporting this vacuous parasite to live a life of opulence and luxury only so that she can turn around and spin things so that she is the victim, I am a bully and an oppressor, and by the way could working class people stop flying so much (because that is absolutely the implication of Harry's speech) makes me sick to my stomach. Some of our comments might verge into the petty or the nasty, but people are fed up. We've tried polite disagreement and nobody at the palace seems to be listening. And the PR just never lets up. Its article after article, day after day. Every time Markle farts she makes the news. People are DONE. They're so, so frustrated, and its beginning to sour public feeling towards the wider monarchy.
At least PM was always immaculately dressed on duty though. Think how far the bar has falled with Meghan. We'd think she'd improved on duty if we could see she'd brushed her hair.
Saw your above comment, so went back to a read your original one. I think it was perfectly fine and well intentioned. This thread hasn't had as many comments as others, so I doubt Nutty had to delete some nasty replies or anything like that. I think people will have just read what you said, had a think, and then moved on without comment.
@raspberry ruffle
Is that you, JL?! If so, great change, and also one of all time fave chockie bars too.
"Regarding statistics, I am reminded of two things:
1. that famous seen from Yes, Prime Minister
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0ZZJXw4MTA
2. the saying " Lies, damned lies, and statistics"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7621137/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-considering-creating-second-base-US.html
Also, the Katie Hind story should hopefully get more traction as time goes on. Thinking it over, it really confirmed the perceptions of her without being overtly mean: she was thirsty, hounding Hind like mad, seeking whatever foothold she could. Read between the lines, sugars: this was no love match. This was a calculating fame-obsessed woman. The only interests she has at heart are her own.
No, I wasn’t JL, but agree another similar name to your own. ;o) I mostly only eat the bars, you don’t see the individual sweets so often.
Ah right! I prefer the bars (too small to make you feel guilty, and a nice texture when refrigerated!)
Yes, I saw the DM piece too. I wondered if it was another article to pave the way for a move, so people aren't that surprised if/when it happens. As you say, they could be testing the waters. I haven't checked the comments yet...
From what Katie said, MM was on the prowl for a British guy. If only Katie hadn't directed her away from Ashley Cole, maybe she wouldn't have set her sites on PH when she did.
Watching H & M is becoming like watching Brexit, but with less serious repercussions. Will Brexit ever happen? Will the RF ever come clean about Archie's origins? Will the BRF & H & M sever their ties, or will just Meghan leave, with or without Archie? It seems like those things will happen, but will they?
I think Meghan has blundered her attempt at global fame & adoration. If she had done the normal things, stood on the hospital steps, announced who her doctors were, shared a few authentic photos of her child, she & her little family probably would have really been so loved that they would almost eclipse the rest of the BRF. The only reason I can think of for not doing so, is that there is something a bit off about Archie's birth. There is no way the British tabs would have missed a royal convoy (even a pared down, discreet one) going to any of the logical hospitals, & I speak as a commoner who traveled by a long taxi ride from Kensington to St. John's Wood to give birth to one her children. ( The London cab drivers in those days were wonderful, they treated an expectant mother like gold, & drove slowly & carefully. Megs' RPOs & chauffeurs would have probably driven faster, but would have been much more conspicuous.) The British tabs know what they're doing, & they know how to get around in the London area.
As it is, Megs is producing something like a mashup of Ab Fab & Shameless. I haven't watched Shameless, but I loved Ab Fab, & even have all the DVDs in case the streaming services stop showing it. Jennifer Saunders is a genius, & did some very, very funny episodes on Hollywood surrogacies, & her character, Edie even tried to merch her daughter Saffy's adorable little mixed race baby in a Lacroix ad! ( I think it was Lacroix, & may have been another designer). I remember a NY Times article on Ab Fab marveled that some of its fans actually wanted to be like crazy Edie & Patsy, they thought that they were role models. Maybe Megs was one of them.
As an American, it's none of my business what the Brits do about either Brexit or the RF, but our countries are united by history, culture & language. Many of us, including me, have ancestral ties as well. To me, it's impossible not to wish Britain good & happy outcomes as it struggles with all of these things. We're having horrific issues in the US as well. The Megs & Harry show is a bit of amusing distraction, with a huge historical twist.
Thanks to Nutty & all of the posters here for providing so much fun & interest.
"I think Meghan has blundered her attempt at global fame & adoration. If she had done the normal things, stood on the hospital steps, announced who her doctors were, shared a few authentic photos of her child, she & her little family probably would have really been so loved that they would almost eclipse the rest of the BRF."
I very much doubt it. She blotted her copybook way before the mysterious birth of Archie with the obscene baby shower trip to NY, amongst other things...
https://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/3726876-I-feel-for-Megan-AIBU?pg=1
For those not familiar with it, Mumsnet is the biggest site for - mostly - women in Britain. The majority who post are mothers, but by no means all are. So I think it gives a reasonable snap-shot of public opinion among British women. As I've said before, I think sites like this one can be misleading because the vast majority of Brits don't really follow the royals like people on this site do, and only take an interest in big royal gossip or events. Anyway, even though the poster was hoping for a sob-fest, the replies are overwhelmingly negative. And even in papers like The Guardian, which previously was so impressed by the new 'woke' duchess and hewed to the line that anyone who criticised her was a racist, you're beginning to see a lot of bafflement at the Sussexes' self-pity.
So I think it's fair to say that the duo have lost 'middle England'. Nobody likes a whiny royal.
Interesting. I agree with what you say too. They are clearly delusional to think that the documentary was going to put them in a more favourable light.
I saw a video today of her at One Young World. While she is standing and clapping you can see a folded piece of paper in her hand - people are guessing that it was a speech she had prepared, but then wasn't given the opportunity to do so. What a mighty relief if that was to be true!
RE: test balloon on moving to LA or somewhere in the USA
many comments are running along the lines of: pay for your own security, no more tax money, keeping him further from his family support system, once she goes that he will need all kinds of private jets to get back + optic that when they do split> he's doing the leaving and welcome from the IRS> we're happy to see you.
Still wondering what is percolating with the 2018 tax return. I know what I do for prepping it for the accountant but man, with them, all the different sources of money, receipts, different tax laws ... all I can think of it this is something you need to stay up on daily. Otherwise you won't remember much detail later and it will feel like the tsunami of paperwork is ever getting bigger (because it is).
Your comment (from the parts that I understand) wasn't offensive. I wouldn't worry too much about whether you get responses or not. There are so many, it's overwhelming and comments get overlooked. I think there's even one post on this blog that got over 700 comments.
I didn't respond to your comment about your first fight with your boyfriend in college because I've never had a real boyfriend before & probably if they ever fought with me, I'd break-up with them right away and never look back since I don't handle conflict well. (Plus, I read novels like "Fight Club" so I can't really relate to expecting a "romance-novely" response.) I have no experience in that department and had nothing to add.
Don't take stuff on here personally.
Things are just a bit off in the world right now. (In general.) So don't feel bad.
Do people think they will all be there? I really can't call it.
My really stupid question for the day:
can anyone tell me specifics of just how the monarchy has been or tried to be modernized by M or M&H?
I keep seeing the headlines saying it has happened or they tried to but I can't come up with anything concrete I can point to and say: Yeah, that's modernizing the monarchy?
thanks
Hugging us plebs?!