Comments on: The Politics of Wardrobe Costs

By: There’s a Blog in my Soup - And the Next Big Mccain Supporter is… Al Quaida?

Thu, 23 Oct 2008 04:30:32 +0000

[...] The Politics of Wardrobe Costs [...]

By: I Don't Like You Either

I Don't Like You Either — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 22:27:12 +0000

Ladies in Red: Bachmann

by Blue Stockings | First, check out Bill Maher’s dis: Then check out these reports of current woes:

By: Denverdan33

Denverdan33 — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 22:00:18 +0000

If the RNC can buy Govener Palin a $1,000 dress at Needless Mark Up then perhaps they should also pay for Tine Fey's wardrobe as well.Just where is that money from the RNC comming from anyway?

By: pacatrue

pacatrue — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 21:44:04 +0000

Hee-hee. I always thought of Jos. A. Bank as a very expensive store. My one suit is from Mens' Warehouse.

By: Davebo

Davebo — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 21:06:25 +0000

Clothing (and hair and makeup) just cost a LOT more for women than for men.

Perhaps if you buy your suits at Jos. A. Bank. But I've got at least one suit in my closet that cost more than twice what I paid for my first car.

But in fairness, I'll probably use it for at least 10 years.

By: pacatrue

pacatrue — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 20:25:32 +0000

As I said in another comment chain, I believe this is primarily between the donors to the campaign and the campaign itself. The die-hards will keep giving money no matter what. But will some McCain-leaning donors decide not to click the donate button, thinking their $50 is just going to go to 1/3 of Palin's daily haircut?

By: DLS

DLS — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 19:47:21 +0000

The overreaction to this is laughable. (Is Palin going to use Nancy Reagan's fine china or does she shop at the same shoe stores as Imelda Marcos?) This was poor PR and a country-club-plus-GOP “gimme” for libs and Dems, but some long-overdue maturity from the latter would be refreshing. [sigh]

By: Hisui

Hisui — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 19:08:52 +0000

Reading some of the comments where people recognized what she was wearing, I wonder if the RNC could have gone about this in a much better fashion. Rather then buying the clothes and simply auctioning them off later (likely to people who will spend more, as someone pointed out in a previous thread) they should have treated it much like a movie set. Ask (new?) American designers to basically loan the clothing to her. It would be largely advertised on Palin as a way to pay for it. Then, hold an auction for them, but restrict it to small businesses or women who wear suits often, but can't afford to buy many.
Now that would have been a plan.

By: jchem

jchem — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 18:41:20 +0000

But didn't she buy some diapers at a Wal Mart last week?

I don't care what people wear, or how much their haircut cost them. But it seems like the same people who made such a fuss over Edwards' $400 grooming are now bitten by the same arguments they made against him. Perhaps they are getting what comes to them. But I find it a bit ironic that many who didn't think much of it with Edwards are now making it a pretty big issue with Palin. Its another role reversal just like the whole Joe the Plumber/Grame Frost issue turned out to be. If an issue such as this really affects how people will vote, then we are in some serious trouble.

On a side note, I can only imagine what the "fashion experts" would be saying if Palin ran around on the campaign trail looking less than stately.

By: mlhradio

mlhradio — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 17:57:18 +0000

The other counter-point to make over this six-figure extravagance is to point to Michelle Obama, and the dress everyone was talking about this summer:

http://blogs.trb.com/entertainment/celebrities_...

That little number that sent everyone rushing to the stores cost only $148.

I fully understand that makeup and clothing is expensive - but if Palin is trying to run a campaign as an "everywoman", this does not play well with Joe and Joann Six-Pack who are scraping by on $25,000 a year in Indiana or Pennsylvania, keeping an eye on those $8.88 price-busters at Wal-Mart.