Elect a president and you elect another politician and another power centre.

Hi Bazz,

You're absolutely right.

I doubt if Australians will accept that.

I certainly won't.

I can't help but wonder - what if Dutton
would have succeeded in ousting Turnbull.
Could the Governor-General have intervened?

Does anyone know?

Foxy,

Gough Whitlam changed all that and removed any reference to the Queen being Queen of Great Britain and instead introduced the title "Queen of Australia", hence she is an Australian.

I do wish you'd catch up on things, it's do dreary having to continually correct you.

Is Mise,

Not according to the Constitution she's not.

The British royals are also the monarchs of
more than a dozen other countries and they
do not represent any Australian interest
internationally. But worse, we have a monarch
and royal family who actively work against our
national and international interests wherever it
suits their real constituency - Britain.

To support Australian interests is just not part of
their job description. And it never will be.

Foxy,

" Turnbull says we should
have a plebiscite"

Well as explained above, he wants that because he knows that's the only way he could get the type of republic he wants. And even that's no certainty.

"I doubt if Australians will accept that [ie an elected president]."

At the time of the referendum, polls showed that electing the president was the most popular option. Had Turnbull offered that option, we would be a republic now.

"I certainly won't.[ie accepted an elected president]"
There's the rub. So if offered the choice of an elected president or the current system, you'd vote for the monarchy?

You see that's what happened in 1999. Lot's of those who wanted an elected president voted to keep the monarchy rather than accept what they considered to be a second best republic.

I thought you might like this... (cheeky grin)

http://catallaxyfiles.com/files/2020/04/IMG_1932.jpg