Michelle VS Ann: Battle of the Convention Dresses...

[Blue Belle]

A lot has been said about the emotional appeal and authenticity of their speeches (Michelle's Speech delivered where Ann's speech looked like something one would deliver if her husband was running for PTA President), but another stark contrast is in what they wore - or more specifically, who they wore.

Michelle, noted for being able to set style trends while still maintaining affordability, wore a Tracy Reese dress (which will run around $500) and her shoes were one she bought herself from J Crew ($245). The only jewelry she wore was her wedding set and some ear rings. Essentially, her outfit cost: $745 (if you count the shoes she already had).




Ann, on the other hand tried to match the GOP's version of the circa 1950's house wife in a red Oscar de la Renta shirt-dress ($1900). She paired it with black pumps and chunky gold jewelry (no source on the price tags of those items).




The Verdict
Basically, it comes down to this: the Democrats spent $500 in order for Michelle to look like the modern, American, woman. The Republican's spent $1900 for Ann to emulate June Cleaver. Now... in terms of spending and overall image, who do you trust with your budget, women's issues, and your future?

Sources:
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/entertainment/post/2012/09/michelle-obama-wears-xxx-for-her-speech-at-dem-convention/1
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/09/fancy-dress-face-ann-romney-vs-michelle-obama/56535/
http://blogs.houstonpress.com/artattack/2012/09/first_lady_michelle_obama_ann.php
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/30/fashion/ann-romneys-dress-by-oscar-de-la-renta-starts-the-conversation.html

[Drunken Irishman]

1. Ann's dress was really $2,000?

Yikes.

[haele]

7. Oscar de La Renta "ready to wear" dresses start around $1000 and go up into the $5000s.

Most are between $1700 and $2500 - and frankly fugley - psuedo vintage chic in expensive silks, wools, and linens that look rather hap-hazard.

I just hope the quality of the stiching makes up for the cost. A well-made, fashionable, lined wool coat that still looks and wears as if it were new after 50 to 60 years (like my great-aunt's bright maroon with black lambswool Dior coat from the 1940's) is an investment and well worth the equivilent of $1000.

Haele

[gkhouston]

73. No kidding. I had a couple of off-the-rack dresses very much like that one back

in the 80's that were about $60.

[MADem]

89. One thousand, nine hundred and ninety dollars--for a "Donna Reed" housedress. nt

[Cleita]

2. I'm not going to fault either of them on their fashion style,

however, Michelle can wear sleeveless and look fabulous in it.

[etherealtruth]

17. I'm with you

... on both points!

[SickOfTheOnePct]

26. I agree 100%

And I wouldn't expect a 60-something grandmother to wear the same style or have the same style as a 40-something mom of young teens/pre-teens.

[PatSeg]

60. I agree

Ann Romney looked great in that dress. I thought it was tasteful and attractive. I wasn't terribly impressed with her speech, but she looked good while she gave it.

As for Michelle, it would be really hard to top her any day.

[Honeycombe8]

40. Yeah, I think they both looked great. They're both rich (one much more so than other), so

their outfits would cost a lot more than anything you or I could buy.

[amandabeech]

45. Completely agree.

I've noticed more shirt-dresses around lately, so it is possible that the shirt-dress is a trendlet, particularly for those of us who are a little older. Mrs. Romney definitely looked better than Mrs. Laura Bush, though.

Michelle's dress was super. It really flattered her shape and the color was very nice. Those arms--I'm very jealous!

[Cleita]

49. I just found one earlier this year at Ross.

I bought it for work, but since I got laid off have yet to find a place to wear it.

[amandabeech]

68. Good luck getting a new job for that dress!

Really, I do wish you the best of luck.

Amanda

[Cleita]

69. I know. My only hope is to get hired temporarily for Christmas.

Maybe with luck it will be permanent.

[amandabeech]

75. I'm really sorry.

I'm doing temp work myself, but I get paid decently for it. No bennies, though. It's better than nothing, but I guess that you see it much the same way.

[Cleita]

78. I don't really need bennies because I get

Medicare, which is what I need. I do get Social Security so I'm not starving. It's not enough for my expenses though, which is why I need to work.

[amandabeech]

79. I'm a few years away from Medicare,

but I'll be working, at least part time, until I can't.

People talk about being less generous with SS and Medicare, but they seem to not know or not care that many seniors, esp.women, often can't make it on SS as it is.

[Cleita]

80. Our COLA hasn't kept up with the cost of living since the Bush years and most

of our expenses have really doubled and some tripled since gas went up to an average of $4 a gallon. Even if you don't have a car, it affects your expenses across the line particularly food and medicine because the cost of transporting those items gets passed on to the consumer.

[amandabeech]

87. Yes, energy prices drive everything up.

The COLA is biased to the low end because it employs substitution and hedonics. Substitution means that if the price of beef goes up, people will buy cheaper chicken, but since the people still get protein, there is no inflation. Hedonics means that if the price of an item goes up and it's supposed to get better (more features, lasts longer, etc.), then there's no inflation because the product is better, even if you don't want or need the new features.

I think that the COLA as it is now calculated is a fraud, even if the economists say everything is hunky-dory.

My Mom was having trouble living on her SS and small pension in recent years because of the inadequate COLA. I gave her what I could, but it was tight for both of us. She's too old to do any work. Thank heavens she received a nice sum from her bachelor brother when he passed two years ago. A little extra really helps.

Well, I need to go to bed. I don't pray much, but I'll say a little one for you.

Hang in there, Cleita.

[Cleita]

88. Thank you. I appreciate that. n/t

[Tx4obama]

3. Michelle Obama pays for all of her own clothes. n/t

[Heather MC]

4. JCrew is located in my home town Lynchburg Virginia

I love that the first lady wears J. Crew she keeps a lot of my friends and family employed!!!!

[LiberalAndProud]

5. It is rather parabolic.

Designer: Tracy Reese

What's so great about that designer: She's a pioneer. Reese is, according to The New York Times, "a successful self-made businesswoman who happens to be African-American, which on Seventh Avenue is a rare breakthrough."

Price: Between $395 and $450, based on similar designs.



Designer: Oscar de La Renta

What's so great about that designer: He's a first lady tradition. De la Renta has dressed every first lady since Nancy Reagan -- except Michelle Obama. (He said mean things about Obama and then took them back.)

Price: $1,990 from the pre-fall collection.

[Cahow]

42. Two Thumbs Up!

Tim Gunn and I both approve this post!

By the way, on Chicago's evening news, they were saying that on Twitter, the Hot Topic was folks trying to figure out what shade of 'greyish-plum' her nail polish was and who made it. Gotta love the Fashionista's!

[Luminous Animal]

6. It's a good thing that our candidates wife doesn't look like Eleanor Roosevelt or we'd be screwed...

WTF is this vapid shit?

[Blue Belle]

9. Well, I'm glad it wasn't so beneath you ...

to kick in your two cents. You completely missed my point, but I'm glad the dignity police have weighed in to tell me that my post was sub-par.

[Cha]

27. Bam!

[Tarheel_Dem]

30. Hey Blue Belle, remember this?

Just brush it off. A certain group managed to run off DU'er Jackeens simply because she had the temerity to post what were considered "vapid" picture diaries of the first family.

YOU ROCK!!!! REC'd.

[NYC Liberal]

31. Jackeens has her own terrific site now (theobamadiary.com)

[Tarheel_Dem]

34. I know. I've been a frequent visitor, in the past, but I still miss her here. It was a bright spot

and a break from the daily vitriol.

[NYC Liberal]

36. I totally agree. The vitriol was particularly strong back then

and her posts were a welcome relief. But I'm glad she is still active and has a place of her own if not here.

[Tarheel_Dem]

37. Agreed!

[Blue Belle]

46. Thanks, Tarheel...

[Luminous Animal]

58. I never once criticized Jackeen for her posts. My criticism in regards to this OP is not the

admiration expressed for Michelle's dress, which is lovely (although, for that price, at the very least, the designer should have insisted that the pattern matched at the seams), but for the dubious political point that the OP tried to make. Michelle has been known to wear dresses that cost enough to feed a person for a year. In light of that, what does it reveal about her budgeting advantage compared to Ann? In my opinion, absolutely nothing. Thus my characterization of the OP as being vapid, i.e. offering nothing that is stimulating or challenging.

[Blue Belle]

71. And again...

Thank you for weighing in. I didn't realize this site was policed for content so much. I should really consider that before posting something again. Did you also weigh in on the post about Natalie Portman and Scarlett Johanson being at the DNC tomorrow? It seems like your policing duty is busy tonight...

[Luminous Animal]

32. I can't quite figure out your point. You do know, don't you that Michelle has been known to wear

fabulously expenses dresses. What does this info reveal to you?

[Blue Belle]

38. I do know the Michelle Obama has some fabulous and expensive outfits...

a lot of which are donated by designers who in an effort to bring exposure to their clothing line. There have been tons of stories about Mrs. Obama wearing an outfit on a talk show and the designer/store selling the outfit out within a matter of hours. You may see fashion as frivolous and vapid, but it's also a business. Again, you're missing the point. In my opinion, this contrast between what Ann Romney and Michelle Obama are wearing in terms of price and style really reflects the type of campaign - especially concerning women's issues, income inequality, etc. - both parties are running and it speaks volumes about how they feel in regard to how they spend money and how they see women. One woman is wearing an out fit that is economical and modern, the other spent $2000 on an a dress that makes her look like a 50's house frau waiting for hubby to get home so she can mix up some martinis and rub his temples. These outfits are an extension of the overall presentation. But again, obvioulsy this entire post is beneath DU standards. We should all just just forget about this nonsensical fashion crap and get back to focusing on the tweets of Seth Rogan.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

61. I don't think the OP was vapid or beneath DU standards

but I think the point that you claim, i.e., what type of dress each woman wore is somehow indicative of anything political is ridiculous.

And quite frankly, I don't find a $500 dress to be economical, but maybe that's just me. Don't get me wrong, it's Michelle's money, she can spend it however she likes, and as First Lady, she does need to dress very well. But let's not kid ourselves that her $500 dress is something that most women could afford to just run out and buy on a whim.

As for Ann Romney's dress, I thought she looked great, and not at all like a 50s house frau. She is a couple of decades older than Michelle Obama, and one would expect that their style wouldn't be the same.

[Luminous Animal]

65. I don't see fashion as frivolous and never said so. I see trying to compare the prices of these

particular outfits and then concluding that Michelle can be trusted with a budget. Clearly, if a $500 clothing budget is your standard with which Ann should be judged, then their has been many many times that Michelle has blown it. Here she is in a $6800 top (and while beautiful, says nothing about her ability to budget:

[Blue Belle]

70. Again.. you're missing the point.

But I'm loving the photos you are posting.

[Luminous Animal]

72. I am not missing the point. You don't have one. Ann wears a $1900 dress and you say she doesn't know

how to budget. Michelle wears a $3500 dress (near one quarter of a U.S. minimum wage job - the fastest growing jobs available in the U.S.) and you say that she is creating jobs.

You offered up a cheap shot with nothing to back it up. Yes, many of Michelle's outfits are lovely and some are dull and some are WTF. Not one of them make a political statement.

[Logical]

55. And stupid posts like this dont help matters.

[Raine]

59. Ok geesh sorry, is that better.

[Logical]

64. Sorry, I meant the OP, not yours.

[Luminous Animal]

57. Pitting one women's taste in clothing against another to score a dubious political point is vapid.

[Luminous Animal]

66. Thank you for the apology.

[HiPointDem]

84. +1. who cares about this shit?

[tallahasseedem]

8. I actually liked both of their outfits...

but that's just me, I guess.

[enough]

19. I agree, they both looked great, given what they wanted to project.

Ann looked exactly like an excellent example of the modern Republican matron, and Michelle looked like her beautiful, marvelous, unique, vibrant, exuberant, dignified, inspiring SELF!

[Cahow]

44. Write On!

Tee-Hee! LOVE the use of the word "matron" to describe Ann and her role.

And really love your description of Michelle!

[Kahuna]

20. I agree. They both look nice. nt

[sakabatou]

10. Michelle Obama's dress is better to me

Ann... WAY to much red. It hurts my eyes, literally, to look at that pic.

[mindfulNJ]

11. Must we do this?

Compare their speeches, compare their accomplishments, but must we always talk about the way women look? Both women look lovely anyway...c'mon people.

[Nye Bevan]

13. Ooooh, on DU you are not supposed to say that a Republican woman looks "lovely"

at least not without some disclaimer regarding her "cold eyes", "evil heart", "inner ugliness", etc.

[mindfulNJ]

14. Uh oh...you re right

Ann looks lovely in an evil, cold eyed, Stepfordish way, probably trying to hide her inner ugliness!

[Nye Bevan]

16. That's more like it.

[Nye Bevan]

12. When is the thread comparing the candidates' suits going to be posted?

This stuff is important in helping me to decide who to vote for.

[justgamma]

21. Even more important!

How much does Mitt spend on a haircut?

[amandabeech]

47. I want to know what hair goop Mitt uses.

His hair never moves!

[HiPointDem]

85. +1.

[mojo2012]

15. Ann must be seeing red!

Ann is probably livid that the talk is all about Michelle Obama! Like all aristocrats, she believes she is the "First Lady" and how dare someone would up stage her.
She has already showing her angst and her words are getting more snippy and indignant and her fingers wagging more fiercely. "you Women, WAKE UP!". It won't be long before her fangs come out and she shows her true colors. I can't wait! Her ego can't take it!

[standingtall]

18. There never has been a

First lady, or a potential first lady I didn't like. Until Ann Romney. What a snob. I can't stand the thought of her being first lady.

[Carly]

25. I totally agree

I didn't give her much thought but then saw her interview on Rock Center and ugh, what a smug and snotty woman.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

22. is there a f*&%ing point to this sh%t?

it's a dam$ed dress. either of those outfits is much more than most people can afford... and is someone seriously trying to compare THE F*&%ING WIVES' DRESSES TO WHO CAN BETTER MANAGE THE BUDGET? DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW F*&%ING STUPID THIS LOOKS?

Concentrate, people...

sP

[MissMarple]

28. +1 excepting the "language", of course.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

29. of course, MissMarple...

i get bent out of shape sometimes...

sP

[Tarheel_Dem]

33. "Hide Thread" is your friend. Like it or not, fashion is an "Industry", and it EMPLOYS people.

There are two very happy designers today who are thrilled to bits that their clothing lines are being talked about. Hopefully, Ms. Reese will be encouraged to hire a few more seamstresses, or models trying to break into the industry. She's a small business owner, whose brand just went international. Lighten up.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

90. the thread isn't about the 'fashion industry'...

and you know it.

sP

[Tarheel_Dem]

93. I know, your crew has turned it into a "Leave Ann Romney Alone" thread.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

94. my crew, aye?

i guess that would be all the people who think it is as stupid 'as all fuck' to decide anything about a person by the way they are dressed. but hey, you don't like that the post was stupid...insipid...moronic...over the top ridiculous...nonsensical...brainless...without merit...

sP

[Luminous Animal]

35. Michelle must have gone off budget when she purchased this $3510.00 Jason Wu dress for her Barbara

Walters interview in 2008



http://blogs.wsj.com/runway/2008/12/01/the-michelle-obama-career-launcher-for-emerging-designer-jason-wu/

[Blue Belle]

41. Yep... And she helped launch a career for an up in coming designer...

She also buys stuff online from J Crew - which employs a lot of Americans. Fashion is a business... and Michelle Obama is one of the most photographed women in the world. That $3510 she spent probably created more jobs than Mitt did with Staples.

[Luminous Animal]

56. Seems to me that it blows your point on who to trust with a budget.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

63. Bingo n/t

[Blue Belle]

43. Sorry... didn't get the memo...

I was alwas under the impression that people could use their hide a thread option or simply not read a post. Thanks for weighing in.

[bigwillq]

23. I like Michelle's dress better

I like the pattern and the different colors.

[GigiMommy]

24. The First Lady's Dress designed by a Detroiter.

That beautiful, elegant dress was designed by Tracy Reese, a native of Detroit, Michigan and Cass Technical High School Alum. As a fellow Motown girl and Cass Tech Alum (though I graduated earlier than Tracy); I'm very proud.

[amandabeech]

50. It's great to see talented Michiganders do well!

Congratulations to Ms. Reese for designing that lovely dress-- from a Michigan native

[WinkyDink]

39. Any news on men's suits yet?

[LiberalAndProud]

51. I haven't read anything about suits. Men's footwear, howev has been a topic of interest in the past.

[LiberalAndProud]

52. And did you know

that Mitt Romney wears mom jeans?

[Retrograde]

83. Sharpton has an interesting wardrobe choice

Last edited Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:33 AM - Edit history (1)

Striking, but I don't think it really works: I think the suit should be darker. Schmidt (is that the token GOP guy?) can use some help selecting his ties.

At least their jackets all fit well around the neck and shoulders - unlike Paul Ryan's. Ill fitting jackets are my big menswear peeve.

ETA: IMHO, the guy with the pale lilac shirt and pistachio tie could use some help with colors as well.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

48. Romney's dress looks stiff

[Raine]

54. It's a matter of individual taste. I like Michelle's dress better but I would look better in Ann's.

I'm the same age and Ann and don't have the arms of Michelle so unless there was a way of having sleeves put onto Michelle's dress ... I would wear Ann's.

[dsc]

67. frankly I would love to look as good at age 63 as Mrs. Romney does

she is a full 15 years older than Michelle Obama. Yes, Michelle is a great looking lady, but frankly your OP is just plain out of line.

[Beacool]

76. Superficial crap and sexist.

Both women spend a vast amount of money on clothing. What does it matter? We all know that neither is poor. I prefer Hillary's response to a reporter who asked her who designed the outfit she was wearing. She responded, "would you ask this of a man?"

I find it offensive and demeaning to pit Michelle and Ann against each other based on their clothes. They are both smart women with divergent political opinions, their choice of outfits and designers is irrelevant.

[Sophiegirl]

81. I happen to agree with you.

Were I in a position to be viewed by millions on national TV, I would want to put my best foot forward. And if I spend my own money for my clothes, no one should care.

I don't get this argument about who dressed better or cheaper. This is not about the issues that face the country.

I love the First Lady's style. I do. But it isn't about what the clothes cost. If I want to spend $700 or $7,000 for an outfit (not that i would) to wear in a venue such as this, so what. It isn't relevant.

It is more about the message and not the clothes.

Maybe it is perception. I don't know.

Why is this such a big deal. I don't get it. This is beneath the integrity of the honorable folks on this board. If I had a fantastic message, but could only afford Walmart or Target clothes, would that make my message less relevant?

So now, let the bashing against my opinion begin.

[Sophiegirl]

82. Having said that.

Never mind the clothes.

I sure wish I had Michelle's arms.

If only I could look that good in a sleeveless dress. I need to know her workout regime.

[Luminous Animal]

86. A pair of dumbells would do for the arms and their are oodles of exercise

advice on the internet on how to use them. To me it looks like Michelle pays too much attention to her upper arms and neglects the lower. At her age, she should slow down and reduce the upper arm muscle mass (while maintaining tone) and build up the lower arms to create symmetry.

[Marrah_G]

91. Hi Bea :)

I agree!!

[SoCalDem]

77. But..Queen Ann could save lots if money by recycling

some of these delightful frocks from another "vintage" First Lady

What Would Laura Wear?

[Laura PourMeADrink]

92. I didn't really like either. Personally hate straps that curve in like that. just me. I think

Michelle should have gone a bit more conservative. But LOVED her dress last night