If so, I can only say that Hillary didn’t get much for her $12,500 other than the name (Armani). It does not demonstrate a wise use of $ and resources.
Rich Toscano
July 27, 2016 @
8:30 AM
ucodegen wrote:Is it relative [quote=ucodegen]Is it relative to something like:
If so, I can only say that Hillary didn’t get much for her $12,500 other than the name (Armani). It does not demonstrate a wise use of $ and resources.[/quote]
Pretty threadjackish on that last sentence there… let’s not take this thread down that road.
spdrun
July 27, 2016 @
10:50 AM
Wish them both the worst. Wish them both the worst.
njtosd
July 27, 2016 @
2:53 PM
spdrun wrote:Wish them both [quote=spdrun]Wish them both the worst.[/quote]
Both who? The two options are both referring to Hillary’s outfits . . .
ucodegen
July 27, 2016 @
4:31 PM
njtosd wrote:spdrun [quote=njtosd][quote=spdrun]Wish them both the worst.[/quote]
Both who? The two options are both referring to Hillary’s outfits . . .[/quote]
QED.
ucodegen
July 27, 2016 @
4:30 PM
Rich Toscano wrote:ucodegen [quote=Rich Toscano][quote=ucodegen]Is it relative to something like:
If so, I can only say that Hillary didn’t get much for her $12,500 other than the name (Armani). It does not demonstrate a wise use of $ and resources.[/quote]
Pretty threadjackish on that last sentence there… let’s not take this thread down that road.[/quote]
Please explain what the original ‘survey’ was for. The whole thing was weird. I got the feeling that the survey was ‘baiting’. I did an internet search on “Dr Evil Jackets Pantsuits” to see if I could figure out what the heck the question was about. I kept getting references in Google to links like the one above. As you know, I avoid threadjacking – just look at my history.
njtosd
July 27, 2016 @
4:53 PM
ucodegen wrote:Rich Toscano [quote=ucodegen][quote=Rich Toscano][quote=ucodegen]Is it relative to something like:
If so, I can only say that Hillary didn’t get much for her $12,500 other than the name (Armani). It does not demonstrate a wise use of $ and resources.[/quote]
Pretty threadjackish on that last sentence there… let’s not take this thread down that road.[/quote]
Please explain what the original ‘survey’ was for. The whole thing was weird. I got the feeling that the survey was ‘baiting’. I did an internet search on “Dr Evil Jackets Pantsuits” to see if I could figure out what the heck the question was about. I kept getting references in Google to links like the one above. As you know, I avoid threadjacking – just look at my history.[/quote]
Hillary has gotten a lot of flack for her clothing – way too much has been read into it, as far as I’m concerned. Apparently she decided to wear fewer (almost no) skirts and dresses back in the early 2000s. She wears pantsuits in bright colors, some of which include a “Dr. Evil” jacket. I don’t think it helps her position among women, though, as it appears she believes that she cannot be taken seriously wearing more traditionally feminine clothes. Or she is concerned about age related cankles, which isn’t unreasonable. Or she can no longer wear heels at her age – and flats with skirts can be a little hard to wear in a way that looks polished. In any event – I think it suggests that “feminine” and “powerful” cannot coexist – which is contrary to her message. She also is looking more and more like my mother – which is interfering with my take on her :).
Rich Toscano
July 27, 2016 @
6:18 PM
ucodegen wrote:Rich Toscano [quote=ucodegen][quote=Rich Toscano][quote=ucodegen]Is it relative to something like:
If so, I can only say that Hillary didn’t get much for her $12,500 other than the name (Armani). It does not demonstrate a wise use of $ and resources.[/quote]
Pretty threadjackish on that last sentence there… let’s not take this thread down that road.[/quote]
Please explain what the original ‘survey’ was for. The whole thing was weird. I got the feeling that the survey was ‘baiting’. I did an internet search on “Dr Evil Jackets Pantsuits” to see if I could figure out what the heck the question was about. I kept getting references in Google to links like the one above. As you know, I avoid threadjacking – just look at my history.[/quote]
The original “survey” just seemed like it was for laughs to me. Turning it into (serious, as far as I could tell) finger-wagging on her use of money and resources seemed kind of thread-jacky. Sorry if I misunderstood the intent.
ucodegen
July 27, 2016 @
7:08 PM
Rich Toscano wrote:
The [quote=Rich Toscano]
The original “survey” just seemed like it was for laughs to me. Turning it into (serious, as far as I could tell) finger-wagging on her use of money and resources seemed kind of thread-jacky. Sorry if I misunderstood the intent.[/quote]
That is why I Googled the terms to figure the real intent. If this forum was solely a group of people commenting solely individual style, then yes – my comment could be a threadjack. But I don’t think Piggington is “The View” or “Entertainment Tonight”. I also looked at who was posting. I don’t think “no_such_reality” is much into clothing. This place does get into serious stuff, while “The View” and “Entertainment Tonight” is all appearance and very shallow types of thought. I was also trying to gauge where this was going – that is why also the reference (link) I provided. It is a sensitive/volatile/flame-ignition type of subject.
If this thread is as “njtosd” is commenting – then not for me an I’ll exit the thread.
no_such_reality
July 28, 2016 @
7:42 AM
Well, to be honest, I did Well, to be honest, I did have a hard time deciding between the pantsuits questions and Trump: Teeny tiny tanlines or orange glow full monty?
But I figured the tiny hands thing and orange glow had already been covered.
It’s just a irrelevant meant to be humorous question. It’s also a bit flippant on where political discussion is in our country.
For my personal opinion, I don’t think her clothing choices help her, kind of like a really bright hardworking tech person but they’re always kind of disheveled, but hey, at least she isn’t orange.
NotCranky
July 28, 2016 @
9:39 PM
Cankles over pantsuits any Cankles over pantsuits any day.
I drove them to CC with Uber. I drove them to CC with Uber. They were doing a website about women of comiccon. Actually very pushy, all three (guy with them) kept telling me how to drive.
Balboa [quote=Balboa]Hehe. http://qz.com/743526/hillary-clintons-hu…
[/quote]He he, how appropo … “Bubba Style!” Bill was decked out in JCP … off the rack. It didn’t quite fit him right, but it matches Hillary … most of the time. It’s “good enough” for a “retired `househusband’.” :=]
svelte
July 29, 2016 @
12:41 AM
I find the entire topic kind I find the entire topic kind of distasteful.
A woman running for president and we’re discussing her clothing choices.
Then again, she could chose to wear clothes that blend in, like men’s suits do, and we probably wouldn’t be discussing it.
So I’m conflicted.
Balboa_Again
July 29, 2016 @
7:46 AM
The discussion would just The discussion would just shift to her “menswear-inspired” choices. She’s in a sartorial no-win situation…because that’s where a lot of people choose to put her.
July 26, 2016 @ 11:47 PM
Is it relative to something
Is it relative to something like:
http://clashdaily.com/2016/07/wow-guess-much-less-ivankas-dress-cost-vs-hillarys-dr-evil-jacket/
If so, I can only say that Hillary didn’t get much for her $12,500 other than the name (Armani). It does not demonstrate a wise use of $ and resources.
July 27, 2016 @ 8:30 AM
ucodegen wrote:Is it relative
[quote=ucodegen]Is it relative to something like:
http://clashdaily.com/2016/07/wow-guess-much-less-ivankas-dress-cost-vs-hillarys-dr-evil-jacket/
If so, I can only say that Hillary didn’t get much for her $12,500 other than the name (Armani). It does not demonstrate a wise use of $ and resources.[/quote]
Pretty threadjackish on that last sentence there… let’s not take this thread down that road.
July 27, 2016 @ 10:50 AM
Wish them both the worst.
Wish them both the worst.
July 27, 2016 @ 2:53 PM
spdrun wrote:Wish them both
[quote=spdrun]Wish them both the worst.[/quote]
Both who? The two options are both referring to Hillary’s outfits . . .
July 27, 2016 @ 4:31 PM
njtosd wrote:spdrun
[quote=njtosd][quote=spdrun]Wish them both the worst.[/quote]
Both who? The two options are both referring to Hillary’s outfits . . .[/quote]
QED.
July 27, 2016 @ 4:30 PM
Rich Toscano wrote:ucodegen
[quote=Rich Toscano][quote=ucodegen]Is it relative to something like:
http://clashdaily.com/2016/07/wow-guess-much-less-ivankas-dress-cost-vs-hillarys-dr-evil-jacket/
If so, I can only say that Hillary didn’t get much for her $12,500 other than the name (Armani). It does not demonstrate a wise use of $ and resources.[/quote]
Pretty threadjackish on that last sentence there… let’s not take this thread down that road.[/quote]
Please explain what the original ‘survey’ was for. The whole thing was weird. I got the feeling that the survey was ‘baiting’. I did an internet search on “Dr Evil Jackets Pantsuits” to see if I could figure out what the heck the question was about. I kept getting references in Google to links like the one above. As you know, I avoid threadjacking – just look at my history.
July 27, 2016 @ 4:53 PM
ucodegen wrote:Rich Toscano
[quote=ucodegen][quote=Rich Toscano][quote=ucodegen]Is it relative to something like:
http://clashdaily.com/2016/07/wow-guess-much-less-ivankas-dress-cost-vs-hillarys-dr-evil-jacket/
If so, I can only say that Hillary didn’t get much for her $12,500 other than the name (Armani). It does not demonstrate a wise use of $ and resources.[/quote]
Pretty threadjackish on that last sentence there… let’s not take this thread down that road.[/quote]
Please explain what the original ‘survey’ was for. The whole thing was weird. I got the feeling that the survey was ‘baiting’. I did an internet search on “Dr Evil Jackets Pantsuits” to see if I could figure out what the heck the question was about. I kept getting references in Google to links like the one above. As you know, I avoid threadjacking – just look at my history.[/quote]
Hillary has gotten a lot of flack for her clothing – way too much has been read into it, as far as I’m concerned. Apparently she decided to wear fewer (almost no) skirts and dresses back in the early 2000s. She wears pantsuits in bright colors, some of which include a “Dr. Evil” jacket. I don’t think it helps her position among women, though, as it appears she believes that she cannot be taken seriously wearing more traditionally feminine clothes. Or she is concerned about age related cankles, which isn’t unreasonable. Or she can no longer wear heels at her age – and flats with skirts can be a little hard to wear in a way that looks polished. In any event – I think it suggests that “feminine” and “powerful” cannot coexist – which is contrary to her message. She also is looking more and more like my mother – which is interfering with my take on her :).
July 27, 2016 @ 6:18 PM
ucodegen wrote:Rich Toscano
[quote=ucodegen][quote=Rich Toscano][quote=ucodegen]Is it relative to something like:
http://clashdaily.com/2016/07/wow-guess-much-less-ivankas-dress-cost-vs-hillarys-dr-evil-jacket/
If so, I can only say that Hillary didn’t get much for her $12,500 other than the name (Armani). It does not demonstrate a wise use of $ and resources.[/quote]
Pretty threadjackish on that last sentence there… let’s not take this thread down that road.[/quote]
Please explain what the original ‘survey’ was for. The whole thing was weird. I got the feeling that the survey was ‘baiting’. I did an internet search on “Dr Evil Jackets Pantsuits” to see if I could figure out what the heck the question was about. I kept getting references in Google to links like the one above. As you know, I avoid threadjacking – just look at my history.[/quote]
The original “survey” just seemed like it was for laughs to me. Turning it into (serious, as far as I could tell) finger-wagging on her use of money and resources seemed kind of thread-jacky. Sorry if I misunderstood the intent.
July 27, 2016 @ 7:08 PM
Rich Toscano wrote:
The
[quote=Rich Toscano]
The original “survey” just seemed like it was for laughs to me. Turning it into (serious, as far as I could tell) finger-wagging on her use of money and resources seemed kind of thread-jacky. Sorry if I misunderstood the intent.[/quote]
That is why I Googled the terms to figure the real intent. If this forum was solely a group of people commenting solely individual style, then yes – my comment could be a threadjack. But I don’t think Piggington is “The View” or “Entertainment Tonight”. I also looked at who was posting. I don’t think “no_such_reality” is much into clothing. This place does get into serious stuff, while “The View” and “Entertainment Tonight” is all appearance and very shallow types of thought. I was also trying to gauge where this was going – that is why also the reference (link) I provided. It is a sensitive/volatile/flame-ignition type of subject.
If this thread is as “njtosd” is commenting – then not for me an I’ll exit the thread.
July 28, 2016 @ 7:42 AM
Well, to be honest, I did
Well, to be honest, I did have a hard time deciding between the pantsuits questions and Trump: Teeny tiny tanlines or orange glow full monty?
But I figured the tiny hands thing and orange glow had already been covered.
It’s just a irrelevant meant to be humorous question. It’s also a bit flippant on where political discussion is in our country.
For my personal opinion, I don’t think her clothing choices help her, kind of like a really bright hardworking tech person but they’re always kind of disheveled, but hey, at least she isn’t orange.
July 28, 2016 @ 9:39 PM
Cankles over pantsuits any
Cankles over pantsuits any day.
July 27, 2016 @ 3:12 PM
Bright colored jackets?
Saw
Bright colored jackets?
Saw this at the Convention Center last week.
July 27, 2016 @ 3:38 PM
Pink hair 😉
Pink hair 😉
July 28, 2016 @ 10:19 PM
I drove them to CC with Uber.
I drove them to CC with Uber. They were doing a website about women of comiccon. Actually very pushy, all three (guy with them) kept telling me how to drive.
July 27, 2016 @ 7:27 PM
Hehe.
http://qz.com/743526/hi
Hehe.
http://qz.com/743526/hillary-clintons-husband-wore-a-fetching-pantsuit-to-honor-her-nomination-for-us-president/
July 27, 2016 @ 11:34 PM
Balboa
[quote=Balboa]Hehe.
http://qz.com/743526/hillary-clintons-hu…
[/quote]He he, how appropo … “Bubba Style!” Bill was decked out in JCP … off the rack. It didn’t quite fit him right, but it matches Hillary … most of the time. It’s “good enough” for a “retired `househusband’.” :=]
July 29, 2016 @ 12:41 AM
I find the entire topic kind
I find the entire topic kind of distasteful.
A woman running for president and we’re discussing her clothing choices.
Then again, she could chose to wear clothes that blend in, like men’s suits do, and we probably wouldn’t be discussing it.
So I’m conflicted.
July 29, 2016 @ 7:46 AM
The discussion would just
The discussion would just shift to her “menswear-inspired” choices. She’s in a sartorial no-win situation…because that’s where a lot of people choose to put her.