I have a theory on why Sanders is not conceding or endorsing at this poinjt

[Hortensis]

17. Don't know where it came from,

but even at 9 and 10 I was offended by happy references to "Camelot" and "America's royal family." Unfortunately we do have real family dynasties with "traditions of public service," (vomit!) but it takes more than one or even two single-service generations to be one. The Bushes are a real one, very powerful, but at least "dauphin" was used as a term of contempt and rejection, not respect and admiration.

I very much even dislike the term "czar" to describe heads of large federal institutions. It implies being overly powerful and above the control of the people, but no accident that it came from conservatives determined to destroy those institutions. Using it degrades the whole idea of a department of education or ERA and thus helps their enemies destroy them.

Your use of these royalty allusions really is pretty mild and I know it just comes from the pervasiveness of those terms, but just look at the worst of the people talking that way. Some are literally hatemongers, some are conservative trolls or operators, while others are conspiracists eagerly casting off whatever rationality once anchored them to political reality. Imo, just not something to encourage.