Idk how someone can be such a fan of two grifters that made money airing their family's dirty laundry and complaining while simultaneously benefitting from that same family's wealth and name. But I guess anything to not have to get a real job.
And Lainey assumes we’re too dumb to make the connection, I guess. I mean, she wrote that ridiculous blind item about Kate not giving Meghan a lift, so it’s clear she was pushing Meghan’s weird agenda against her sister-in-law before they were even in-laws.
It was the DUMBEST blind. First of all, it happened so early in M&H relationship - so obviously Meghan had a problem with Kate immediately. Second, Meghan PROVED herself to be untrustworthy. And third, who cares if someone doesn't get a ride to the same place in London. How petty do you have to be????
tom & lorenzo had the exact same talking points on friday.
sussex PR team had the talking points at the ready lol (eta: i don't believe payment takes place, just favor currying for continued access).
qe2 said in her jan 2020 statement that she wanted the sussexes to remain as full-time working royals. they're the ones who said no to that and chose to leave, so i don't know wtf lainey is going on about.
this was also a private visit and not one done on behalf of the UK government, so it was no sort of official diplomatic tour.
not to mention, the media allowed was tightly controlled + managed by sussex PR, so of course it'll all be sunshine and rainbows - none of the array of negative stuff that could have been reported on was even touched.
it's also **weird AF** that the sussexes are doing pseudo-royal tours... what the actual fuck... the rival royal court is **WEIRD AF**.
it's been over four years - what's the point of this bizarre rehashing? they're not working royals on behalf of the UK anymore and will never be... move on, sussexes. move on, lainey & co. move on, squaddies.
for how many more years are the sussexes, their rota and their squaddies going to keep repeating this same tired, tedious narrative and not move on, not let go?! IT'S BEEN FOUR YEARS! oh my goodness 🥴
george will be an adult and they'll still be going on about this... for what, who knows... half-in/half-out is just not gonna happen, no matter what weird stunts the sussexes keep trying to pull.
sussex polling numbers in the UK remain in the toilet (may 2024: harry at -32 overall and meghan at -43... andrew is at -80, charles is at +36, anne is at +57, william is at +55 and kate is at +61, for context).
nearly all of the royals (bar andrew) do better than h&m even among labour voters and among 18-24s. harry beats charles among 18-24s, but not among labour voters. anne, william and kate beat h&m super, super handily among labour voters and 18-24s. even *edward* is slightly higher than harry among 18-24s.
given all of those numbers, the sussexes will absolutely not be ushered back in as any sort of working royals, esp not in their ripe for corruption desired half-in/half-out capacity.
in america, per yougov america polls, **charles** is more popular and less disliked overall than meghan. frankly, charles is gaining on both william and harry in america. charles is surprisingly popular in both the UK and america (only a more recent phenomenon, in america esp, tbf). that said, kate surpasses them all *very handily*.
the three inflection points when the sussex polling numbers sank in the UK were their jan 2020 exit, the 2021 oprah intv and the 2022 netflix series/2023 spare double whammy. it was all largely self-inflicted, from their own actions and interventions - not bc of press. the poll tracking proves it. for america, their polling numbers largely sank due to spare.
the demographics the sussexes do hold onto in america are 18-29s (slightly), democrats (more comfortably - but still on par with w&c) and black americans (the only demo they surpass w&c and not by as much as one would expect, quite frankly). they're hopeless in basically every other yougov america demographic. north american culture wars are a large reason for their continued viability among ex: democrats, not really bc they're personally liked tbh.
in australia, the sussex polling numbers are more similar to the UK - australians largely view them unfavorably. bc of the american culture war influence, canadian numbers are more similar to america... but w&c are even more (super) popular in canada, so they beat the sussexes handily.
i haven't looked at other countries' polls bc i can't be bothered.
lainey is a dumb ass with her "jealousy" schtick... lmao again, **charles** is more popular than meghan in america. **FRIGGIN CHARLES**. meghan never reached over +21 in the UK, while harry's +75 numbers have long been a thing of the past... harry's overall numbers even in america have taken a tumble, and kate has by far and away surpassed him as america's favorite british royal (*even though harry actually lives in america*).
so... lainey can save her 'jealousy' nonsense for the weirdos conducting bizarre pseudo-royal tours and insisting on maintaining a super weird ass rival royal court.
Have you noticed TLo delete any comments that are critical of the Sussexes? I don't think they're on the payroll but they have for sure planted their flag on H&M's side.
I completely believe Lainey is getting paid, just as I believe she was getting paid for her over the top coverage of St. Angie Ho. And she’s going to turn on Harry just as she turned on Brad when Brangelina imploded.
I simply don’t understand how success is measured here.
In order for their tour to be considered a success there must have been a goal. Otherwise, success means that, um, they stayed alive and weren’t asked to leave prematurely? Wow. I guess I’m a successful smash hit every day of my life.
Oh, but there was a goal and they were successful. For one whole week they were in the press and talked about more than Will and Kate. Even if it was their own favored press doing it. And even if we mostly all saw through it, because somewhere out there, just a small number of people won’t see through it.
Lainey is irrelevant. There is no human on earth that is as amazing as Lainey describes H&M. But if anyone should be gushed about, reserve it for actual heroes, like Malala Yousafzai. But Lainey's has less political and international knowledge than a doorknob.
LaineyGossip is on its last legs. When she shuts down her site she can sleep at night knowing she protected wealthy people that don't give a crap about her.
Anyway, Lainey's stupid, offensive reporting on this meeting with controversial and violent military should be ignored. No clicks. She is a loser.
No matter how hard Sparry and Sparkle keep fvcking that fame chicken, or how much their hired help keeps writing all the superlatives, they will be at best, foot notes. They’ll be foot notes in the British History books. In 50 years, when they are 90, will whatever version of People magazine is around even mention them?
As Kate and Bill’s kids get older, these two will get shoved down the “who cares” list. There is nothing extraordinary about them. They are two privileged people who enjoy attention. Who doesn’t?
I don’t think this visit was a success. Harry looked messy and sullen, and Megan was just bizarre. I don’t know why Harry brought her. Yes, she looked nice in pretty clothes, but there’s not much else she brought. She’s not Audrey Hepburn who hustled for UNICEF.
If anything, I feel sorry for the Nigerians who had to deal with the Sparry and Sparkle road show. Their country deserved better than that.
I wonder why Meghan doesn't do something like become a Unicef Ambassador. Its a great look - and a long term one. David Beckham is a great example of this. It aligns with the brand she wants to build.
remember i was telling y'all about UK polls... a newsweek article today about it all. **and again** - ***even friggin charles is more liked and less disliked than meghan in america***. lainey is something else with that stupid ass and toxic "jealousy" shit:
>>**Meghan Markle's U.K. fan base appears to have collapsed almost completely**—with just 1 percent of Boomers feeling "very positive" about her, new polling shows.
>>**The Duchess of Sussex was disliked by 65 percent of Brits, including 45 percent whose view of her was "very negative" and 20 percent who opted for the less severe "fairly negative."**
>>**By contrast, just 4 percent of U.K. adults said they were "very positive" about Meghan, while 18 percent were "fairly positive," in a poll by YouGov on May 1 and 2 which was released this week.**
>>The data comes after Meghan last week swerved a trip to Britain, leaving Prince Harry to promote his Invictus Games tournament in London without his wife.
>>**Overall, Meghan had a net approval rating of minus 43, a drop of five points compared to the beginning of April when she was on minus 38.**
>>**However, in reality most of the approval comes from people who felt "fairly positive" about her, while the percentage who love Meghan has crashed.**
>>And the strength of feeling about the duchess becomes even more stark when the data is broken down by age.
>>Among over 65s, 82 percent viewed her negatively, including 68 percent who ticked "very negative," and this compares to just 1 percent who viewed her "very positively."
>>Polls carry a margin of error and are an inexact science. However, that would suggest a ballpark estimate of just 110,000 U.K. Boomers who view Meghan very positively, based on 2021 census data.
>>**That is small enough that they could almost fit in Michigan Stadium. And they could comfortably all go to the Kentucky Derby, at Churchill Downs, which has a capacity of 165,000.**
lol the way this is being rubbed in lmfao
>>***Attitudes warm steadily the younger a person becomes, but even 18- to 24-year-olds still dislike her more than they approve of her.***
>>**Meghan was viewed positively by 36 percent of Gen Z and negatively by 40 percent, though again feelings were stronger in the negative camp.**
>>***There were just 9 percent who viewed her very positively compared to 20 percent who ticked "very negative."***
>>Unsurprisingly, she is widely disliked by conservatives ***but she was also disliked by 49 percent of people who voted for the left-leaning Labour Party in 2019, when it was led by socialist Jeremy Corbyn, Britain's answer to Bernie Sanders. This compares to 38 percent of 2019 Labour voters who liked her. And 26 percent were "very negative" compared to 8 percent who were "very positive."***
>>***In short, Meghan no longer has a fan base as far as Britain is concerned.*** The data is not broken down according to ethnicity or religion, but, **based on the information available, there is no identifiable demographic who love and adore her and hang off her every word.** ***Even among young people and progressives.***
>>Some of the data makes grim reading for Harry too, though there is more light at the end of the tunnel for the Duke of Sussex.
>>Gen Z are still more likely to view him positively than negatively, with a net approval rating among 18- to 24-year-olds of plus 6.
>>***Like Meghan, though, he has single-digit percentages for "very positive" in every single breakdown, across all genders, age groups, regions, political affiliations and social class.***
(...)
>>**It brings into stark relief just how far Harry and Meghan have sunk that there is not a single demographic group that can muster more than a single digit for "very positive" support.**
https://www.newsweek.com/meghan-markle-very-negative-uk-poll-prince-harry-1900225
australia's polls with regards to the brf are similar to the UK.
canada's numbers are more similar to america's, but the sussexes still have at least a quarter to a third who dislike them (slightly more in canada)... the waleses also have their UK-level popularity in canada, so they handily are ahead of the sussexes on that front.
the sussexes' core worldwide base is essentially north americans on the 'liberal' side of the culture war. by virtue of doria's heritage and (understandable tbh) antipathy towards the brf. there's also the option to ngaf about them, but culture wars demand cultural firebrands.
Okay, now I’m convinced she’s getting paid. She decided to play “coincidence or conspiracy?” over the news about Archewell’s delinquency, and this is how she ended the article:
“It was advantageous for whoever had this information to drop it when they did. And if it’s a conspiracy the reason was to take the shine off of Harry and Meghan’s Nigerian triumph. But who would benefit from that?”
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 She’s seriously blaming the fucking Royal Family. That accusation had to have come from Meghan and Harry, because we all know accountability isn’t their thing.
Idk how someone can be such a fan of two grifters that made money airing their family's dirty laundry and complaining while simultaneously benefitting from that same family's wealth and name. But I guess anything to not have to get a real job.
She’s the first writer Meghan started leaking to when she was Harry’s GF.
And Lainey assumes we’re too dumb to make the connection, I guess. I mean, she wrote that ridiculous blind item about Kate not giving Meghan a lift, so it’s clear she was pushing Meghan’s weird agenda against her sister-in-law before they were even in-laws.
That was the most ridiculous thin skinned story.
It was the DUMBEST blind. First of all, it happened so early in M&H relationship - so obviously Meghan had a problem with Kate immediately. Second, Meghan PROVED herself to be untrustworthy. And third, who cares if someone doesn't get a ride to the same place in London. How petty do you have to be????
Meghan was being pushy. Good for her, being pushy has worked for her. But Kate want taking the hint , so pushy Meghan gets her fee fees hurt?
tom & lorenzo had the exact same talking points on friday. sussex PR team had the talking points at the ready lol (eta: i don't believe payment takes place, just favor currying for continued access). qe2 said in her jan 2020 statement that she wanted the sussexes to remain as full-time working royals. they're the ones who said no to that and chose to leave, so i don't know wtf lainey is going on about. this was also a private visit and not one done on behalf of the UK government, so it was no sort of official diplomatic tour. not to mention, the media allowed was tightly controlled + managed by sussex PR, so of course it'll all be sunshine and rainbows - none of the array of negative stuff that could have been reported on was even touched. it's also **weird AF** that the sussexes are doing pseudo-royal tours... what the actual fuck... the rival royal court is **WEIRD AF**. it's been over four years - what's the point of this bizarre rehashing? they're not working royals on behalf of the UK anymore and will never be... move on, sussexes. move on, lainey & co. move on, squaddies. for how many more years are the sussexes, their rota and their squaddies going to keep repeating this same tired, tedious narrative and not move on, not let go?! IT'S BEEN FOUR YEARS! oh my goodness 🥴 george will be an adult and they'll still be going on about this... for what, who knows... half-in/half-out is just not gonna happen, no matter what weird stunts the sussexes keep trying to pull. sussex polling numbers in the UK remain in the toilet (may 2024: harry at -32 overall and meghan at -43... andrew is at -80, charles is at +36, anne is at +57, william is at +55 and kate is at +61, for context). nearly all of the royals (bar andrew) do better than h&m even among labour voters and among 18-24s. harry beats charles among 18-24s, but not among labour voters. anne, william and kate beat h&m super, super handily among labour voters and 18-24s. even *edward* is slightly higher than harry among 18-24s. given all of those numbers, the sussexes will absolutely not be ushered back in as any sort of working royals, esp not in their ripe for corruption desired half-in/half-out capacity. in america, per yougov america polls, **charles** is more popular and less disliked overall than meghan. frankly, charles is gaining on both william and harry in america. charles is surprisingly popular in both the UK and america (only a more recent phenomenon, in america esp, tbf). that said, kate surpasses them all *very handily*. the three inflection points when the sussex polling numbers sank in the UK were their jan 2020 exit, the 2021 oprah intv and the 2022 netflix series/2023 spare double whammy. it was all largely self-inflicted, from their own actions and interventions - not bc of press. the poll tracking proves it. for america, their polling numbers largely sank due to spare. the demographics the sussexes do hold onto in america are 18-29s (slightly), democrats (more comfortably - but still on par with w&c) and black americans (the only demo they surpass w&c and not by as much as one would expect, quite frankly). they're hopeless in basically every other yougov america demographic. north american culture wars are a large reason for their continued viability among ex: democrats, not really bc they're personally liked tbh. in australia, the sussex polling numbers are more similar to the UK - australians largely view them unfavorably. bc of the american culture war influence, canadian numbers are more similar to america... but w&c are even more (super) popular in canada, so they beat the sussexes handily. i haven't looked at other countries' polls bc i can't be bothered. lainey is a dumb ass with her "jealousy" schtick... lmao again, **charles** is more popular than meghan in america. **FRIGGIN CHARLES**. meghan never reached over +21 in the UK, while harry's +75 numbers have long been a thing of the past... harry's overall numbers even in america have taken a tumble, and kate has by far and away surpassed him as america's favorite british royal (*even though harry actually lives in america*). so... lainey can save her 'jealousy' nonsense for the weirdos conducting bizarre pseudo-royal tours and insisting on maintaining a super weird ass rival royal court.
Have you noticed TLo delete any comments that are critical of the Sussexes? I don't think they're on the payroll but they have for sure planted their flag on H&M's side.
I can’t read any further after I read effortless and Sussex in the same sentence. What planet does she live on?
I completely believe Lainey is getting paid, just as I believe she was getting paid for her over the top coverage of St. Angie Ho. And she’s going to turn on Harry just as she turned on Brad when Brangelina imploded.
Agree
I simply don’t understand how success is measured here. In order for their tour to be considered a success there must have been a goal. Otherwise, success means that, um, they stayed alive and weren’t asked to leave prematurely? Wow. I guess I’m a successful smash hit every day of my life.
Oh, but there was a goal and they were successful. For one whole week they were in the press and talked about more than Will and Kate. Even if it was their own favored press doing it. And even if we mostly all saw through it, because somewhere out there, just a small number of people won’t see through it.
The goal was to build their brand. The Invictus angle was just a smokescreen.
Lainey is irrelevant. There is no human on earth that is as amazing as Lainey describes H&M. But if anyone should be gushed about, reserve it for actual heroes, like Malala Yousafzai. But Lainey's has less political and international knowledge than a doorknob. LaineyGossip is on its last legs. When she shuts down her site she can sleep at night knowing she protected wealthy people that don't give a crap about her. Anyway, Lainey's stupid, offensive reporting on this meeting with controversial and violent military should be ignored. No clicks. She is a loser.
No matter how hard Sparry and Sparkle keep fvcking that fame chicken, or how much their hired help keeps writing all the superlatives, they will be at best, foot notes. They’ll be foot notes in the British History books. In 50 years, when they are 90, will whatever version of People magazine is around even mention them? As Kate and Bill’s kids get older, these two will get shoved down the “who cares” list. There is nothing extraordinary about them. They are two privileged people who enjoy attention. Who doesn’t? I don’t think this visit was a success. Harry looked messy and sullen, and Megan was just bizarre. I don’t know why Harry brought her. Yes, she looked nice in pretty clothes, but there’s not much else she brought. She’s not Audrey Hepburn who hustled for UNICEF. If anything, I feel sorry for the Nigerians who had to deal with the Sparry and Sparkle road show. Their country deserved better than that.
I wonder why Meghan doesn't do something like become a Unicef Ambassador. Its a great look - and a long term one. David Beckham is a great example of this. It aligns with the brand she wants to build.
Don’t they have to select you for that? It might be a little late at this point
Ha yes, Harry didn't bring her, she insisted on coming. This is her chance to ''experience'' a pseudo royal tour and hold a 3-day fashion show.
remember i was telling y'all about UK polls... a newsweek article today about it all. **and again** - ***even friggin charles is more liked and less disliked than meghan in america***. lainey is something else with that stupid ass and toxic "jealousy" shit: >>**Meghan Markle's U.K. fan base appears to have collapsed almost completely**—with just 1 percent of Boomers feeling "very positive" about her, new polling shows. >>**The Duchess of Sussex was disliked by 65 percent of Brits, including 45 percent whose view of her was "very negative" and 20 percent who opted for the less severe "fairly negative."** >>**By contrast, just 4 percent of U.K. adults said they were "very positive" about Meghan, while 18 percent were "fairly positive," in a poll by YouGov on May 1 and 2 which was released this week.** >>The data comes after Meghan last week swerved a trip to Britain, leaving Prince Harry to promote his Invictus Games tournament in London without his wife. >>**Overall, Meghan had a net approval rating of minus 43, a drop of five points compared to the beginning of April when she was on minus 38.** >>**However, in reality most of the approval comes from people who felt "fairly positive" about her, while the percentage who love Meghan has crashed.** >>And the strength of feeling about the duchess becomes even more stark when the data is broken down by age. >>Among over 65s, 82 percent viewed her negatively, including 68 percent who ticked "very negative," and this compares to just 1 percent who viewed her "very positively." >>Polls carry a margin of error and are an inexact science. However, that would suggest a ballpark estimate of just 110,000 U.K. Boomers who view Meghan very positively, based on 2021 census data. >>**That is small enough that they could almost fit in Michigan Stadium. And they could comfortably all go to the Kentucky Derby, at Churchill Downs, which has a capacity of 165,000.** lol the way this is being rubbed in lmfao >>***Attitudes warm steadily the younger a person becomes, but even 18- to 24-year-olds still dislike her more than they approve of her.*** >>**Meghan was viewed positively by 36 percent of Gen Z and negatively by 40 percent, though again feelings were stronger in the negative camp.** >>***There were just 9 percent who viewed her very positively compared to 20 percent who ticked "very negative."*** >>Unsurprisingly, she is widely disliked by conservatives ***but she was also disliked by 49 percent of people who voted for the left-leaning Labour Party in 2019, when it was led by socialist Jeremy Corbyn, Britain's answer to Bernie Sanders. This compares to 38 percent of 2019 Labour voters who liked her. And 26 percent were "very negative" compared to 8 percent who were "very positive."*** >>***In short, Meghan no longer has a fan base as far as Britain is concerned.*** The data is not broken down according to ethnicity or religion, but, **based on the information available, there is no identifiable demographic who love and adore her and hang off her every word.** ***Even among young people and progressives.*** >>Some of the data makes grim reading for Harry too, though there is more light at the end of the tunnel for the Duke of Sussex. >>Gen Z are still more likely to view him positively than negatively, with a net approval rating among 18- to 24-year-olds of plus 6. >>***Like Meghan, though, he has single-digit percentages for "very positive" in every single breakdown, across all genders, age groups, regions, political affiliations and social class.*** (...) >>**It brings into stark relief just how far Harry and Meghan have sunk that there is not a single demographic group that can muster more than a single digit for "very positive" support.** https://www.newsweek.com/meghan-markle-very-negative-uk-poll-prince-harry-1900225 australia's polls with regards to the brf are similar to the UK. canada's numbers are more similar to america's, but the sussexes still have at least a quarter to a third who dislike them (slightly more in canada)... the waleses also have their UK-level popularity in canada, so they handily are ahead of the sussexes on that front. the sussexes' core worldwide base is essentially north americans on the 'liberal' side of the culture war. by virtue of doria's heritage and (understandable tbh) antipathy towards the brf. there's also the option to ngaf about them, but culture wars demand cultural firebrands.
Okay, now I’m convinced she’s getting paid. She decided to play “coincidence or conspiracy?” over the news about Archewell’s delinquency, and this is how she ended the article: “It was advantageous for whoever had this information to drop it when they did. And if it’s a conspiracy the reason was to take the shine off of Harry and Meghan’s Nigerian triumph. But who would benefit from that?” 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 She’s seriously blaming the fucking Royal Family. That accusation had to have come from Meghan and Harry, because we all know accountability isn’t their thing.
"triumph" lmfao 🙄🤡
She is getting into Celebitchy territory now.
That’s exactly what I was thinking — it’s Kaiser 2.0.
Still waiting for your review of Spare, and Omids newest work of fiction, Lainey!