She was all over CNN today, and in every image, she is wearing a horrible, shapeless “tunic” or pantsuit that frankly, reminds me of something right out of North Korea.
And it makes perfect sense if she was wearing a vest. Is she? Would she need to? Doesn’t she have a butt-load of Secret Service guys, and has for years and years?
Many of the photos were of her in speeches at indoor events. You wouldn’t think she would need a vest at those events.
It’s possible but there is no way for anyone that is not involved with security to know. There may have been some unusually credible threats made or intercepted by the Secret Service. She is going through a vulnerable time because she can’t restrict large public appearances much during the height of campaign season and it isn’t considered to be good form to release the type or number of threats being made to a candidate.
Even most sitting Presidents in the modern era have had multiple attempts on their lives despite being in even more controlled environments. Some of them like Ford only made it out unscathed because of luck. The Secret Service is generally very effective but they can’t protect against everyone and everything especially in largely open public venues. In any case, I am sure that they have procedures for her (and even Trump) to wear bulletproof body armor so that they can still make scheduled appearances if the threat warrants it.
Her outfit suggests that she might have been wearing it today but she hasn’t ever been known as the snazziest dresser either.
If it makes a difference, I’m not having any problemcoming up with other images of her wearing similar style clothing (namely a big shapeless top). Also, this one in particular isn’t just designer, it’s right off the runway.
Maybe she is wearing armor under it (though I doubt it), maybe she’s not, but I don’t think this outfit is the reason to think she is. Not only does she have a history of wearing clothes almost exactly like this, but also, I’m sure, if she wanted to, she could wear clothes that fit differently and still hide body armor.
I’m so looking forward to four years (or possibly even eight years) of endless criticism of everything she’s wearing. I wonder how often previous Presidential candidates have been criticized for their style choices?
It’s easier for a man. There’s a uniform for men in that sort of position. You can go out and buy a couple of suits that fit well, and there’s likely zero interesting comments to make about what you are wearing. But because women have choices, and are expected to execute those choices, they will be criticized.
I hope to spend the next few years grinding my teeth over random comments about her outfits, and not about Trump’s toupé.
That is the good thing about being a guy…one type of outfit and hairstyle for each occasion all the time. It is boring but there aren’t too many ways to screw up it as long as it fits the mold…standard suits, jeans and t-shits, khakis, a few button down shirts and a Tux for a rare formal event - done.
It isn’t really a sexism thing or at least it’s not because of men. She could have many equivalents of the conservative men’s executive suit tailor made just like male Presidents do. If they can make custom suits that look decent on people like Chris Christy, Hillary could look like a model if she just found the right tailor that told her to cut out trying to impress other women with her fashion sense because it doesn’t work for her.
I remember her getting criticized for wearing pantsuits all the time. And yet, that’s basically the female equivalent of a man’s business suit. No one says anything when Obama, GWB or Bill Clinton wore business suits every day. So why can’t her pantsuits be similarly ignored?
well, I do. What do you want her to wear, a bikini? A miniskirt? a burqa? I presume she wears what she wears for reasons that are her own business, such as perhaps finding it comfortable. Who cares what politicians wear? I want to know about what they DO.
It isn’t quite as simple as that. Most people want an executive to look like an executive whether they are male or female. I admit, I think it would be really cool if Obama showed up at daily press conferences in a Hawaiian shirt, shorts and sandals but most people don’t see it that way. There isn’t much precedence for a female U.S. President but even Margaret Thatcher got it mostly right across the pond a couple of decades ago as the ‘Iron Lady’. Hillary is never going to be a Princess Diana or Kate Middleton but she is still unusually bad at looking like somebody just grabbed some random clothes off the discount rack at K-Mart and told her to wear them 10 minutes before a speech.
Believe it or not, even male politicians generally put a lot more thought and time into their appearance than she seems to (they wear tons of makeup too). If she is putting in the time, she is doing it wrong. A big part of any politician’s job is glib and glam whether we like it or not.
I agree with you in general. I don’t care if they show up in their underwear every day if they are effective overall but the general public doesn’t see it that way.
It’s my understanding that it’s common for Presidents these days (and likely prospective ones) to wear clothing made of bullet resistant materials. I recall reading an article about Reagan where it mentioned how in one picture a normal-looking coat that he was wearing was actually bullet resistant (and he had more reason than most to appreciate the necessity after John Hinckley Jr. shot him).
With the amount of crazy-hate Hillary gets I wouldn’t be surprised if most of what she wears in public is armored.