GOP spends $150k on Palin family wardrobe
 

Politico.com reports that the GOP has spent an unheard of $150,000 outfitting the Palin family in designer duds.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14805.html

I can't figure out if I should be outraged or not! :confused: While $150,000 is a lot of money to spend on clothes and hair, I can't help but think of the ribbing the Palin's would get from the national media if they were to make public appearances in their Alaskan attire. She obviously does not have the financial means that the other candidates have, but $150,000?!!!??!! Also, while stylish, the expensive outfits really take away from the whole 'I'm just like you' image that the GOP was really playing up early on. What do you all think?

Perception is reality; image is incredibly important in elections.

We know that attractive people fare better than unattractive people, from decades of decision-making research, and we know that people implicitly judge others based on their clothing choices. Additionally, nonverbal communication is often triggered off image and style - simply put, words carry different meaning depending on the image the speaker projects.

Put it all together, and the GOP would be remiss to fail to properly outfit Palin and her (RIDICULOUSLY LARGE) familial entourage that was on stage with her. If that costs $150,000 (out of the tens of millions McCain has already spent), so be it.

I generally find it difficult to judge the amount of money that an individual spends on clothes, shoes and accessories. If they can afford it, then great for them. In this situation, it's unfortunate that Palin's been focused on being middle class, etc when she and her family are dressed in high end designer clothing. It definitely looks hypocritical. For what it's worth I don't think it takes shopping at Saks and NM to look put together and portray an attractive image. I think Michelle Obama has shown that by wearing clothes from J.Crew, H&M and other similar stores.

^^Agreed ^^^
I was somewhat put off when I found out that the jacket she wore at the Convention was about $1400!! Wasn't she telling us that she was just like me and you while she was wearing that jacket? By the same token I was thrilled when the media made a big deal about her wearing really stylish $89 shoes! I was able to relate to that and it helped me to relate to her on a certain level. Maybe she really is a 'hockey mom' just like us!!! Like KSig said, image is important but I think it needs to be consistent with the message.

On the plus side, maybe they were able to save a little coin on Bristol's wardrobe, I'd expect she can raid Mom's closet for the maternity clothes she just came out of and she's growing in to... :p:D *ducks and runs*

Except these individuals did not pay for it themselves; the contributors to the McCain campaign did.

Did Sarah Palin not have professional clothes that a governor/mayor would typically have? After all, she must've worn *something* to those meetings with the "old boys club" of the oil business.

An unheard of 150k? What are you comparing that to? How much did Obama and Biden spend? If that is really an issue then you should post both amounts for comparison.

And how much did Obama and Biden spend?

Gahh, I can only imagine.

The very fact that the GOP had to "outfit" them with it, says alot about Palin's character, I think.

What exactly does it say? I don't see how anyone can spin the campaign spending $150k on clothing for her and her family (in 2 months!) as a good thing. But good luck with that.

Per the Politico.com article:

The business of primping and dressing on the campaign trail has become fraught with political risk in recent years as voters increasingly see an elite Washington out of touch with their values and lifestyles.

In 2000, Democrat Al Gore took heat for changing his clothing hues. And in 2006, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) was ribbed for two hair styling sessions that cost about $3,000.

Then, there was Democrat John Edwards’ $400 hair cuts in 2007 and Republican McCain’s $520 black leather Ferragamo shoes this year.

A review of similar records for the campaign of Democrat Barack Obama and the Democratic National Committee turned up no similar spending.

But all the spending by other candidates pales in comparison to the GOP outlay for the Alaska governor whose expensive, designer outfits have been the topic of fashion pages and magazines.

I don't know more than that, and I don't have time to go through FEC filings to figure it out. Of course, it's a violation of FEC rules to spend campaign funds on personal items. I guess all of these clothes (apparently the REC filings call them "campaign accessories") belong to the campaign, not to Palin or her family.

We can be results-oriented here, I think, without too much danger - if it worked (i.e. people think she looked better more than they care about the amount going against message) then that's a demonstrably good thing, right?

Right.

I think EW's point (to which OtterXO was responding) was that it was a good thing because the fact that Palin didn't already have all the great clothes shows she's not that different from most people.

I think it says that she's a very plain person and not so ostentatious. She doesn't own these things (and never needed them), so the Republican party had to fix her up. Queer Eye for the Straight Guy style.

So if Obama or Biden spent more than Palin then will you vote for McCain?

Aw, I think it's cute, EW, that you want to think of her as "Sarah Plain and Tall", but really, she's no different from any other politician. I don't fault her any more than anyone else since so many of them do it, but it certainly plays against any kind of label of "maverick", "reformer" and god knows, "fiscal conservative".

Another report of pretty free-flowing spending on the Alaska taxpayers' dime: AP Investigation: Alaska Funded Palin Kids' Travel

A snippet: