Opinion of King Charles III

[Sir Mohamed]

Mixed, but Tilt FF. Far from the worst member of his family.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

FF

[Boobs]

Even worse than the mother

[Lechasseur]

FF

God Save the King!

[LM Brazilian Citizen]

 FF. I hope he manages to have a good reign.

[Catholics vs. Convicts]

Will wait to see, but lean FF royal. God Save the King.

[Lechasseur]

FF. I hope he manages to have a good reign.

Me too

[parochial boy]

[Alcibiades]

A very unique man…

[nicholas.slaydon]

Mega FF

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Odd mix of sympathetic and deeply annoying, with a certain amount of sinister.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

Among the biggest FFs in the British Royal Family, so a strong lean HP.

[All Along The Watchtower]

The bin Laden family's relationship with the prince's charities has never previously been disclosed and does not appear in public documents. Charities are not required to disclose their supporters.

However, it is not the first time the prince has been embroiled with the bin Laden family. He dined with Bakr to discuss the Islamic faith in October 2001, just two weeks after the September 11 attacks.

According to an account of their initial meeting in 2000, the pair were introduced by Prince Khalid Al-Faisal Al Saud, the third of eight sons of the late King Faisal bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud, during a fundraising dinner for the Oxford Centre of Islamic Studies, of which Charles is patron.

The prince is widely reported to have asked Bakr: "What's your brother up to these days?"

https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/prince-charles-accepted-million-pounds-family-osama-bin-laden

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Terrible. It's not entirely his fault he's like that, but then, that can be said of almost anyone.

[Statilius the Epicurean]

Not a fan of his behind the scenes extra-constitutional lobbying.

[Frodo]

As a Princess Diana sympathizer (yes, I remember where I was when she lost her life in that car accident), I hold a deeply negative opinion of (now) King Charles III.  Here is to hoping his reign will be relatively brief, and that we will soon see King William V assume the throne.  

[LBJer]

As a Princess Diana sympathizer (yes, I remember where I was when she lost her life in that car accident), I hold a deeply negative opinion of (now) King Charles III.  Here is to hoping his reign will be relatively brief, and that we will soon see King William V assume the throne.  

I voted FF.

While you're certainly entitled to your opinion, isn't there a time to let go and let bygones be bygones?  Continuing to be mad at Charles for not being the world's greatest husband to Diana (and perhaps for marrying her in the first place) is not going to bring Diana back to life.

[HillGoose]

HP just like all royals ever

[Benjamin Frank]

FF

A strange person, but highly intelligent.

[sting in the rafters]

Lean HP. Diana was wayyyyyy too young for him, no wonder he likes Islam so much.

[VPH]

FF because he supports organic family farming and dislikes modern architecture

[President Johnson]

FF until proven otherwise.

I think his commitment against climate change is pretty real and he seems like a straight shooter. I hope he can somewhat step out of his mother's shadow and be his own man as king.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

As a Princess Diana sympathizer (yes, I remember where I was when she lost her life in that car accident), I hold a deeply negative opinion of (now) King Charles III.  Here is to hoping his reign will be relatively brief, and that we will soon see King William V assume the throne.  

I voted FF.

While you're certainly entitled to your opinion, isn't there a time to let go and let bygones be bygones?  Continuing to be mad at Charles for not being the world's greatest husband to Diana (and perhaps for marrying her in the first place) is not going to bring Diana back to life.

It's less about Diana qua Diana and more about what treating one's young wife like that for many years says about one's character and values in general, although I am sympathetic to the argument that at least Charles, unlike most British royals, more or less means what he says and says what he means most of the time.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

He will be on the throne to we get 70, 2050 so we are gonna get use to it, he's not abdicating or is sick the only thing the Crown would cease to exist is in it's territory not UK itself, it's a Constitutional monarchy if he did abdicate which is zero probability it would be if he was incapacitated

[LBJer]

As a Princess Diana sympathizer (yes, I remember where I was when she lost her life in that car accident), I hold a deeply negative opinion of (now) King Charles III.  Here is to hoping his reign will be relatively brief, and that we will soon see King William V assume the throne.  

I voted FF.

While you're certainly entitled to your opinion, isn't there a time to let go and let bygones be bygones?  Continuing to be mad at Charles for not being the world's greatest husband to Diana (and perhaps for marrying her in the first place) is not going to bring Diana back to life.

It's less about Diana qua Diana and more about what treating one's young wife like that for many years says about one's character and values in general, although I am sympathetic to the argument that at least Charles, unlike most British royals, more or less means what he says and says what he means most of the time.

Charles' behavior in that regard may have made him a bad husband (to Diana, that is--obviously we're not talking about in his current marriage to Camilla), but it doesn't make him a bad person in general in my book.