The Queen's visit to Leicester

[FuriousFox46]

And while you reign we follow, we follow, we follow!

Cos' we're part of the empire, the empire, the empire

and that's the way we like it, we like it, we like it

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOAH!

:scarf: :scarf: :scarf: :scarf: :scarf: :scarf:

[Zingari]

It's another one, where you may not agree with what the Pope stands for, his beliefs, or what he represents, however, the reality is that he has a global significance with a huge amount of goodwill.

i'm not really in agreement or disagreement , but just making the point that a person who has got to a position of influence by effort and dedication , can be as popular in people's minds as a monarch who's only reason is chance of birth.

The argument seemed to be saying that only figures with mythical god given status can be so revered .

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

Did anyone see her in Morrison's?

[lavrentis]

Did anyone see her in Morrison's?

She had a trolley full of bratwurst's

[Zingari]

She had a trolley full of bratwurst's

and sauerkraut

[Daggers]

The evidence is the numbers of people who turn up to see the Queen when she visits. Unfortunately, I do not have the figures (as I don't think the data is collected) so the evidence is anecdotal, however, if the queen visits a foreign country, far more people stay out to see her than they do Cameron, or Sarkozy, the president of a country with a similar amount of international prestige to us. As I say, you may not like that, but it's true.

There you go again: telling me that something you've just made-up is true. It isn't. The only truth behind it is that you believe it to be true (or really want to) in the same sense that some people believe mankind is descended from the two sons of Adam. Patently nonsense.

Leicester has a population of 285,000 according to the 2004 census. The county at large has a population of 648,700. According to the BBC 4,000 people turned out to see her and the Guardian says that the council gave away 10,000 flags (see, you don't have to make up stuff, facts exist).

Therefore, between 0.8% and 1.5% of the population of Leicestershire bothered to stand around like a lemon and view a couple of OAPs. There's a fact. This means that 98.5% to 99.2% couldn't give a rat's arse that she was in town.

Now, as for "if the queen visits a foreign country, far more people stay out to see her than they do Cameron, or Sarkozy, the president of a country with a similar amount of international prestige to us" - again this is another piece of absolute nonsense. You have zero data to back up this claim, in the way you had nothing for her visit to Leicestershire. Which visits are you referring to? Which countries? (And you need to bear in mind that you have to cite similar visits to the same country for this to be in any way a comparable test.)

Please stop making stuff up.

[Webbo]

I'd have gone if I wasn't working.

[Daggers]

I'd have gone if I wasn't working.

Maybe a whole number who attended would have preferred to have had a job and been at work if the Tories could get around to creating some?

[sphericalfox]

There you go again: telling me that something you've just made-up is true. It isn't. The only truth behind it is that you believe it to be true (or really want to) in the same sense that some people believe mankind is descended from the two sons of Adam. Patently nonsense.

Leicester has a population of 285,000 according to the 2004 census. The county at large has a population of 648,700. According to the BBC 4,000 people turned out to see her and the Guardian says that the council gave away 10,000 flags (see, you don't have to make up stuff, facts exist).

Therefore, between 0.8% and 1.5% of the population of Leicestershire bothered to stand around like a lemon and view a couple of OAPs. There's a fact. This means that 98.5% to 99.2% couldn't give a rat's arse that she was in town.

Now, as for "if the queen visits a foreign country, far more people stay out to see her than they do Cameron, or Sarkozy, the president of a country with a similar amount of international prestige to us" - again this is another piece of absolute nonsense. You have zero data to back up this claim, in the way you had nothing for her visit to Leicestershire. Which visits are you referring to? Which countries? (And you need to bear in mind that you have to cite similar visits to the same country for this to be in any way a comparable test.)

Please stop making stuff up.

Actually Daggers, the percentage and/or number of Leicestershire persons attending that you've calculated will probably lower than that, unless they made everyone bring their council tax bills as proof, as tourists and other county dwellers will have mooched into our fair city to catch a glimpse of mediocrity and the possibility she might plant some shit.

[Daggers]

Actually Daggers, the percentage and/or number of Leicestershire persons attending that you've calculated will probably lower than that, unless they made everyone bring their council tax bills as proof, as tourists and other county dwellers will have mooched into our fair city to catch a glimpse of mediocrity and the possibility she might plant some shit.

Yep, I knows it.

But, seeing as I'm carping on for some facts I thought it unfair to start making some some stuff up of my own - especially as someone would have gone "Aha! Well those 26 tourists will have all bought a sandwich from Greggs and contributed to the city's economy!"

I really didn't want to go down that road.

[breadandcheese]

There you go again: telling me that something you've just made-up is true. It isn't. The only truth behind it is that you believe it to be true (or really want to) in the same sense that some people believe mankind is descended from the two sons of Adam. Patently nonsense.

Leicester has a population of 285,000 according to the 2004 census. The county at large has a population of 648,700. According to the BBC 4,000 people turned out to see her and the Guardian says that the council gave away 10,000 flags (see, you don't have to make up stuff, facts exist).

Therefore, between 0.8% and 1.5% of the population of Leicestershire bothered to stand around like a lemon and view a couple of OAPs. There's a fact. This means that 98.5% to 99.2% couldn't give a rat's arse that she was in town.

Now, as for "if the queen visits a foreign country, far more people stay out to see her than they do Cameron, or Sarkozy, the president of a country with a similar amount of international prestige to us" - again this is another piece of absolute nonsense. You have zero data to back up this claim, in the way you had nothing for her visit to Leicestershire. Which visits are you referring to? Which countries? (And you need to bear in mind that you have to cite similar visits to the same country for this to be in any way a comparable test.)

Please stop making stuff up.

Would you be so kind as to compare the numbers for those who turned out to see the Queen when she visited Leicester as opposed to those who turned out to see Gordon Brown the then PM when he visited Leicester in 2007?

I think that would be a good base case to compare the interest in a visit from the Royal Family as opposed to one from the Prime Minister.

With regards how the Royal Family is viewed around the world, the photos of Prince Harry in Brazil show many people cheering for Prince Harry. I don't remember any of the general population of Brazil giving a sh*t when William Hague visited in January of this year.

[Rincewind]

I was on my way to the beer fest when they arrived. Held me up. Crowds blocking my way just to see a car go by. It was over in five seconds. Made me late. I had other places to go and not bothered about the ruddy Queen.

[Phube]

I'd have gone if I wasn't working.

Ditto, plus my wife and daughter.

Daggers, see that's 4 more people!

[Rincewind]

Couldn't get away from it even at the beer fast. Some one decided to lead a chorus of god save the Queen, then go in the other room and do it all over again. To add to the crap they then had somebody on a harmonica accompanying another version. Enough to send anyone mad. I noticed though they did not do all the verses especiall the ones where it brags about killing Scotsmen.

I remember a few years back when she visited. Our factory was empty except for 2 or 3 blokes. All the women decided that she was more important than working and helping keep the business they were working for alive.

[Daggers]

Would you be so kind as to compare the numbers for those who turned out to see the Queen when she visited Leicester as opposed to those who turned out to see Gordon Brown the then PM when he visited Leicester in 2007?

No.

How about you:

• Provide the figures
  
• Explain how a visit to a police station & the Walkers (as was) compares even slightly to a walkabout of the city? Where were the cheering hordes meant to wait for him? The toilets in L-block?!
  

I think that would be a good base case to compare the interest in a visit from the Royal Family as opposed to one from the Prime Minister.

I'm beginning to think you don't have a strong grasp on reality. You are not comparing like with like - if he went on a walkabout then give me some evidence of it and that they had received equal publicity prior to the event...otherwise let this one go too.

I've clearly demonstrated to you that next to no one actually gives a stuff about the Royals using, something you seem to feel is irrelevant, facts.

With regards how the Royal Family is viewed around the world, the photos of Prince Harry in Brazil show many people cheering for Prince Harry. I don't remember any of the general population of Brazil giving a sh*t when William Hague visited in January of this year.

This is getting tiresome; you are constantly comparing chips to peas in order to prove that pizzas are best. Your argument is wholly nonsensical.

You can not use a couple of pictures you've seen in your Daily Mail as evidence that the entire world loves the fvcking Royal Family. They don't:

• Malvinas protest in Brazil
  
• 'Slave Master' Harry
  
• If he's so popular why the need for the soldiers?
  
• Allez vous faire futre, Wills
  

Facts, Ploughman's Lunch boy, facts.

[Daggers]

Ditto, plus my wife and daughter.

Daggers, see that's 4 more people!

Blimey, it's like the rush for Chelsea tickets.

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

Actually Daggers, the percentage and/or number of Leicestershire persons attending that you've calculated will probably lower than that, unless they made everyone bring their council tax bills as proof, as tourists and other county dwellers will have mooched into our fair city to catch a glimpse of mediocrity and the possibility she might plant some shit.

Oh dear, what a sad post. :thumbdown:

[Guest MattP]

You can't seriously suggest how many people who turned up actually gives an indication for Royal Support??

It was a Wednesday afternoon, the vast majority of people wont be anywhere near the town centre at the that time. Around the same number turned out for the servicemans march but you wouldnt say because of that 98% of Leicester folk don't give a shit about the armed forces.

[Rincewind]

Not sure how many turned up but I know loads were blocking my way when I left to go down the beer festival. All for a glimpse of a car going by and a hand raised. Saddos.

[breadandcheese]

No.

How about you:

• Provide the figures
  
• Explain how a visit to a police station & the Walkers (as was) compares even slightly to a walkabout of the city? Where were the cheering hordes meant to wait for him? The toilets in L-block?!
  

I'm beginning to think you don't have a strong grasp on reality. You are not comparing like with like - if he went on a walkabout then give me some evidence of it and that they had received equal publicity prior to the event...otherwise let this one go too.

I've clearly demonstrated to you that next to no one actually gives a stuff about the Royals using, something you seem to feel is irrelevant, facts.

Mr Gradgrind, it is you who does not have a grasp on reality. If Gordon Brown could have drawn in the numbers like the Queen did, his spin doctors would have been all over it, to make our ex-PM look good.

Mr Brown did have a couple of photo appearances out with the general public when launching his manifesto in Braunstone, but there wasn't much interest.

So in a comparison of number of attendees to a visit from the queen or from our then PM, the queen wins.

I understand Mr Gradgrind, that facts, dear boy and nothing but facts, facts, facts are the only things that you will accept, even though the anecdotal evidence speaks for itself, so here are some from the recent Royal wedding.

- 27 million watched the Royal Wedding in the UK. That number does not include those who went to London or street parties. So you're talking nearly half the population of the UK.

- 6 million people in Australia watched the Royal Wedding. That's a quarter of the population.

- 23 million people in America watched the wedding. That's 7.5% of the population (or in terms of percentage of households, approx 13-14%). Simon Cowell would love those figures for his American X Factor where he picks up half that.

All in all, it seems that there is a large amount of affection and interest for the Royal Family.

This is getting tiresome; you are constantly comparing chips to peas in order to prove that pizzas are best. Your argument is wholly nonsensical.

You can not use a couple of pictures you've seen in your Daily Mail as evidence that the entire world loves the fvcking Royal Family. They don't:

• Malvinas protest in Brazil
  
• 'Slave Master' Harry
  
• If he's so popular why the need for the soldiers?
  
• Allez vous faire futre, Wills
  

Facts, Ploughman's Lunch boy, facts.

Now now Gradgrind, the comparison between William Hague's visit and prince Harry's shows how the people of Brazil care more about a visit from our Royal Family than a representative of our government. Even your counter-argument of a few articles highlighting a couple of small protests are evidence of that. How many protests were there when William Hague went to Brazil. Who even cared that there were any? Prince Harry goes to Brazil and these small protests get some exposure because people care about his visit, both here and in Brazil. It's a shame that David Cameron is not visiting Brazil any time soon as we would be able to compare the reaction from the Brazilian public, but I can say quite safely that David Cameron will not get as welcoming a reception as prince Harry.

[Daggers]

[Rincewind]

So people take more interest in the monarchy than in politics?. What this says about the people of this Country I will leave open to debate but waving a flag and saying 'Ooh isn't she looking luverly? is not going to improve schooling, hospitals, reduce unemployment improve the standard of the less well off or find houses for the homeless. Unless we move them into Buckingham palace or one of the other empty Palaces around the country..

[sphericalfox]

Oh dear, what a sad post. :thumbdown:

And yet you took the time to respond to it with smiley faces and everything. I've seen your posts. I'd keep a lid on it mate. <insertsthumbsupsmileyface>

[I am Rod Hull]

So people take more interest in the monarchy than in politics?. What this says about the people of this Country I will leave open to debate but waving a flag and saying 'Ooh isn't she looking luverly? is not going to improve schooling, hospitals, reduce unemployment improve the standard of the less well off or find houses for the homeless. Unless we move them into Buckingham palace or one of the other empty Palaces around the country..

What this says about the country is that they don`t trust politicians, but believe in a constitutional monarchy

What`s the difference between waving a flag and saying "Ooh isn't she looking luverly" and wearing a football shirt and saying "Ooh he`s good"?... Going to a beer festival and saying "Ooh that`s a nice pint".....