The Clinton-Obama debate last night made us realize that the time has finally come for us to discuss one of the more serious issues that will play an increasingly important role in the upcoming presidential election. 

Of course we’re talking about the outfits. 

Here’s the thing:  When it comes to a public image, Obama Gets It, but Hillary, (bless her heart)...doesn’t. 

Which surprises us, considering how meticulously the Clintons and their staff research voter reactions and preferences. 

While there’s no doubt in our minds that everything Hillary puts on has been carefully chosen by a team of consultants whose job it is to know what will have the most favorable effect on the largest numbers of voters, we would think that Ms. HRC would know by now that personal style, like a political platform, needs to be made up of more than just polling data results. 



This is not to say that Obama doesn’t have his own image consultant(s).  In fact, we’re certain he does.  His are just way better. 



A look at a few pictures will show you what we mean:

Hillary’s default uniform has long been the black or navy “mannish” pantsuit.  Whether this is for feminist reasons or because she prefers to keep her cankles hidden isn’t clear, but either way, this is obviously what she feels most comfortable in.   Which is why we actually think this is her best look, at least if it were done right.  (Like, for instance, if the above suit actually fit her it would look a lot better.) 

But her Image Team obviously felt that HRC needed to soften things up a bit, so lately she’s been wearing a more feminine version of the pantsuit, consisting of a long, small-lapeled jacket paired with a long, usually belted knit top underneath.

We see the logic behind this switch: The longer jacket supposedly minimizes wider hips while the high-belted waist visually elongates the legs and draws the eye up.
And it works, mostly, except for the fact that the bottom of the shirt brings the eye right back down to that vast expanse of tummy region, which is not, I’m guessing, what Clinton wanted to emphasize.  (Or maybe she did--was her audience that day made up of predominantly post-menopausal women voters?  We just can’t tell...although the lady sitting behind her certainly seems like she’d be sympathetic to a little midsection bloat.)

She also switched from a cool palette of blacks, blues and reds to the warmer brown-based tones and has started wearing colorful jewelry. 

We’re not sure if this is another campaign strategy to appeal to a certain voting segment (it’s an old cliche that working-class and academic types favor brown and tan suits and white-collar and financial types favor black and gray) or whether she simply   ”had her colors done”  as part of her image-enhancement (”Why, Hillary, you’ve been a Spring all along!” ) , but the peach lipstick and the bright  jewelry around her face is obviously designed to warm up the Senator’s image.

In theory, this all has a nice, fuzzy Tim Gunn Makeover feel to it, and she does look pretty, but in practice, it just doesn’t work for us.  Hillary Clinton is a strong, no-nonsense woman who looks about as comfortable in a  and a necklace/ earrings set as a dog in a Halloween costume. 



Barack Obama’s image transformation, interestingly enough, is kind a reverse-version of Hillary’s.

The fact that it’s hard to believe he wasn’t born in his meticulously tailored charcoal two-button suit is a testament to the power of the right uniform on the right person. 

But look at him a year and a half ago in this baggy brown suit:

(Anyone who thought Obama had an unfair advantage when it comes to clothes because he’s blessed with a model’s physique can see here that the difference between looking trim and looking scrawny is sometimes just a matter of good tailoring.)


And this short-sleeved shirt and pleated khakis getup makes him look like, well, a big dork:

The difference between that outfit and this more recent jacketless look

is like the difference between Jerry Lewis and Carey Grant. 
Guess which one we’d rather have as president?

But perhaps the most ingenious component of Barack’s look is the fact that it’s always the same now.  (White shirt, dark pants, dark suit. )  Not only does this make him make him seem more consistent and reliable, but it also means that people are less likely to be distracted from his message by what he’s wearing.  

So how can Hillary use some of Barack’s strategies for her own image?

Well, for one thing, there’s no reason why Hillary should have given up her old look--it just needed some up-scaling to better fabrics and tailoring.  (Why politicians feel like they have to dress in cheap, unflattering suits is beyond us).  A fitted, buttoned jacket and boot-cut trousers would, in our opinion, be far more flattering to her pear shape than a long boxy jacket and tapered pants, and if she wears jewelry at all it should be simple and sculptural--and we’d lean towards precious metals and gems.  (How great would a blue topaz and platinum necklace look with those icy eyes? And why on earth would she ever wear a strand of pearls, which are practically synonymous with “politician’s wife”? )  

Seriously, Hill--lace and pearls?

The truth is, there’s nothing wrong with a menswear- oriented look when it’s done well-- heck, Diane Keaton and Ellen Degeneres have been doing it for years.

In fact, we wish Ellen had done an intervention on this hideous outfit when they were hanging out in New York City together last fall :

See, Hillary, how my pants go straight down and not in at the ankles like yours?  And how much more flattering my loose-but-not-baggy sweater--with the visual interest on the upper half-- is than your top that has what looks like a map of Asia splayed across your abdomen?  And what’s with the huge baggy jacket sleeves and the puckery seams on those pants--you didn’t throw them in the washer, did you?  Tell me you did NOT put dry-clean only pants in the washing machine...”

We will say that at least last night, her jacket fit well and not too big in the shoulders, which is a step in the right direction.  But the style win still clearly goes to Obama, who gets bonus points for ignoring the long-ingrained red-or-blue-striped tie rule and going with a “time for a change” silver medallion-pattern. 

Now there’s a candidate who’s image matches his message. 
Or at least we think it does.  Wait--what is it he stands for again?  Maybe we should start watching these things with the sound turned up…