[ad_1]
NEW DELHI: A royal expert has expressed skepticism about Meghan Markle‘s potential in politics.
According to a report in The New York Post, royal biographer Angela Levin stated that the Duchess of Sussex ,42 , may be too “thin-skinned” to succeed in such a career. Levin suggests that Markle’s attachment to her royal title and the challenge of shedding it make her pursuit of a political career unlikely.
During an interview with Sky News Australia, Levin voiced doubts about Markle’s political ambitions.
“She’s clinging onto them for dear life, so I don’t think there’s a chance in hell that she’d ever get anything in parliament,” she said.
She explained, “Meghan Markle could never really be a politician. She’s got very, very thin skin, and she also would have to lose her titles as I believe Harry would as well. She’s clinging onto them for dear life, so I don’t think there’s a chance in hell that she’d ever get anything in parliament.”
Furthermore, Levin dismissed the idea that popular US series ‘Suits’ famed actress could enter politics at a high level, deeming it “ludicrous” and highly improbable.
While rumors have circulated about Meghan Markle’s interest in a political career, with unconfirmed reports of her networking with prominent Democrats since stepping back from royal life in 2020, Levin’s skepticism remains, New York Post reported.
President Biden’s sister, Valerie Biden Owens, has reportedly expressed support for Markle as a potential candidate for the White House.
According to the report, Governor Gavin Newsom of California had previously interviewed Markle for a senatorial position in October 2020, ultimately choosing another candidate to replace then-Senator Kamala Harris. While it may not be impossible, Markle’s transition to politics is regarded as a “long shot” by those close to the situation.
Historically, actors like Arnold Schwarzenegger and Ronald Reagan have ventured into politics after their careers in Hollywood. Nevertheless, Meghan Markle’s path to political office appears to be met with significant skepticism and challenges, given her current status and perceived sensitivity to criticism.
According to a report in The New York Post, royal biographer Angela Levin stated that the Duchess of Sussex ,42 , may be too “thin-skinned” to succeed in such a career. Levin suggests that Markle’s attachment to her royal title and the challenge of shedding it make her pursuit of a political career unlikely.
During an interview with Sky News Australia, Levin voiced doubts about Markle’s political ambitions.
“She’s clinging onto them for dear life, so I don’t think there’s a chance in hell that she’d ever get anything in parliament,” she said.
She explained, “Meghan Markle could never really be a politician. She’s got very, very thin skin, and she also would have to lose her titles as I believe Harry would as well. She’s clinging onto them for dear life, so I don’t think there’s a chance in hell that she’d ever get anything in parliament.”
Furthermore, Levin dismissed the idea that popular US series ‘Suits’ famed actress could enter politics at a high level, deeming it “ludicrous” and highly improbable.
While rumors have circulated about Meghan Markle’s interest in a political career, with unconfirmed reports of her networking with prominent Democrats since stepping back from royal life in 2020, Levin’s skepticism remains, New York Post reported.
President Biden’s sister, Valerie Biden Owens, has reportedly expressed support for Markle as a potential candidate for the White House.
According to the report, Governor Gavin Newsom of California had previously interviewed Markle for a senatorial position in October 2020, ultimately choosing another candidate to replace then-Senator Kamala Harris. While it may not be impossible, Markle’s transition to politics is regarded as a “long shot” by those close to the situation.
Historically, actors like Arnold Schwarzenegger and Ronald Reagan have ventured into politics after their careers in Hollywood. Nevertheless, Meghan Markle’s path to political office appears to be met with significant skepticism and challenges, given her current status and perceived sensitivity to criticism.
[ad_2]
Source link