Posted on 06/15/2015 3:18:00 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
At her campaign opening rally on Roosevelt Island on Saturday, Hillary Clinton donned her now-signature look: a bright blue pantsuit with a matching bright blue shirt underneath.
Clothes are a political tool like any other. And that is why it was interesting to learn that the pantsuit she wore at her Roosevelt Island rally had been made by Ralph Lauren.
Yet there’s a possible weak spot. Because for a candidate who has been pushing her connection to, and understanding of, the middle class — and whose speech while wearing the pantsuit was largely about closing the income gap — Ralph Lauren is a relatively inaccessible brand. It is also one often worn by and beloved of that sector of the population, the chief executives and financial wizards, she somewhat disavowed.
But that’s me. And to be honest, I would not be surprised if, in the end, Ralph Lauren does become a Clinton wardrobe mainstay. If the campaign can avoid elitism charges, the brand will make her look confident, and absolutely convincing on the global stage.
According to a spokesman, the designer already works with the candidate “regularly.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Ralph Lauren can be accessible if you buy it on Ebay or Amazon.
I don’t care for Ralph Lauren’s designs but his stuff is accessible and everywhere.
No thanks.
Very preppy and East Hampton. Not fit for my ethnic background, lol!
I bet they have them as a standing order and no matter how much weight she gains, they crank them out at the same size. If you look at her feet, you’ll see that often the pant legs are way too short. If she was smart, she’d go for a longer length and taller high heels. It would give her a slimmer look.
Somebody tell George C. Scott:
“There is a pantsuit gap, and we will eradicate it!!”
It’s the Times - I figured they’d be more interested in the crease in her trousers.
“Isn’t her pants suit called “O’l Crusty”?”
IIRC, it was Hillary herself whose nickname here on FR was “Ol’ Crusty” — not the pantsuit. Could work either way, though.
Re “Hillary wearing Ralph Lauren”.
That is as close to a man as she is ever going to get, ever.
Even Laz has standards. Just ask him.
Those awful outfits were from Lauren? She need to demand her money...er, our money...back. The fit is not good, and the cut of the pants is not flattering to her shape.
Well...obviously it helps a lot if you're not a sweathog.
And why does Hillary never ever wear a skirt or dress?
***
See post 17.
Or bathing.
When she went into Chipotle a cop saw her and yelled “Break it up!”
If they'really custom made why don't they fit?
BTW, I'm looking forward to the return of the FReeper Fashion Police. Maybe the only positive of her thighness running.
“I’m sure her suits are better than the basic ones,”
No doubt. They probably have a triple amount of Spandex in them to stretch over her ample @ss.
I haven't looked closely enough to see if they fit or not.
"BTW, I'm looking forward to the return of the FReeper Fashion Police. Maybe the only positive of her thighness running."
That's REALLY going to be fun. And so easy!
” Ralph Lauren is a relatively inaccessible brand.”
To the masses, Ralph Lauren is Polo, a middle class uniform that can be purchased at reasonable prices at outlet centers, discount racks and store sales.
She could mix it up. Maxi skirt with a nice wrap. Or even a midi with boots (if they can make them big enough for her calves) would hide a lot of her stumps.
Anything beside her cheesy pantsuits. A silk jacket or anything but the polyester look. Ick! Even when she dressed for the kids’ wedding, she looked dumpy and frumpy. Again, ICK!! She must have moochelle’s designer.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.