Does Shoppergate hurt Palin's hockey mom image?
By spalladino
@spalladino (17891)
United States
October 23, 2008 9:04pm CST
While I understand that campaigning means a lot of public appearances requiring many wardrobe changes, I do find the latest revelations about the Palin family spending sprees to be excessive and not in keeping with the family-next-door image they've been trying so hard to present. There have been excuses given that Palin herself did not purchase the clothing, that someone else just happened to do all that shopping...for her and her entire family it seems..but then there's the issue of $4,716.49 on hair and makeup through September alone?
The McCain campaign suddenly looks like an exercise in excess while thousands of Americans are struggling just to make it through the month.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14805.html
The Republican National Committee has spent more than $150,000 to clothe and accessorize vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin and her family since her surprise pick by John McCain in late August.
According to financial disclosure records, the accessorizing began in early September and included bills from Saks Fifth Avenue in St. Louis and New York for a combined $49,425.74.
The records also document a couple of big-time shopping trips to Neiman Marcus in Minneapolis, including one $75,062.63 spree in early September.
The RNC also spent $4,716.49 on hair and makeup through September after reporting no such costs in August.
The cash expenditures immediately raised questions among campaign finance experts about their legality under the Federal Election Commission's long-standing advisory opinions on using campaign cash to purchase items for personal use.
Politico asked the McCain campaign for comment on Monday, explicitly noting the $150,000 in expenses for department store shopping and makeup consultation that were incurred immediately after Palin’s announcement. Pre-September reports do not include similar costs.
Spokeswoman Maria Comella declined to answer specific questions about the expenditures, including whether it was necessary to spend that much and whether it amounted to one early investment in Palin or if shopping for the vice presidential nominee was ongoing.
“The campaign does not comment on strategic decisions regarding how financial resources available to the campaign are spent," she said.
But hours after the story was posted on Politico's website and legal issues were raised, the campaign issued a new statement.
"With all of the important issues facing the country right now, it’s remarkable that we’re spending time talking about pantsuits and blouses," said spokeswoman Tracey Schmitt. "It was always the intent that the clothing go to a charitable purpose after the campaign."
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.
What hasn’t been apparent is where the clothes came from – her closet back in Wasilla or from the campaign coffers in Washington.
The answer can be found inside the RNC’s September monthly financial disclosure report under “itemized coordinated expenditures.”
It’s a report that typically records expenses for direct mail, telephone calls and advertising. Those expenses do show up, but the report also has a new category of spending: “campaign accessories.”
September payments were also made to Barney’s New York ($789.72) and Bloomingdale’s New York ($5,102.71).
Macy’s in Minneapolis, another store fortunate enough to be situated in the Twin Cities that hosted last summer’s Republican National Convention, received three separate payments totaling $9,447.71.
The entries also show two purchases at Pacifier, a top-notch baby store, suggesting $196 was spent to accommodate the littlest Palin to join the campaign trail.
An additional $4,902.45 was spent in early September at Atelier, a high-class shopping destination for men.
4 responses
@soccermom (3198)
• United States
24 Oct 08
Well, this soccermom never identified with the "hockey mom" to begin with. However, I do have to say that I would have had more respect for her if this story went more along the lines of "The RNC offered me an expensive wardrobe, and I said thanks, but no thanks, and went to Sears."
Here's what I'm wondering. Although it sounds good that they are donating the clothes or whatever proceeds they bring to charity, will this count as a charitable donation tax write off for the RNC? I'll bet they figure out some loophole so it does.
IT is remarkable that we're spending all this time talking about Palins new clothes, but really, what else has the McCain campaign given us to talk about?
1 person likes this
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
25 Oct 08
I never bought that folksy bit but I agree, someone in the campaign should thought about the poor woman's image before they headed off to those high end stores with the RNC credit card.
1 person likes this
@ZephyrSun (7381)
• United States
24 Oct 08
I think that it does I mean I don't know many Joe six packs and hockey moms that would be able to afford that much on clothes in a life time. I was watching GMA just now and they released a statement about this and here is the quote from her that GMA played but I could only find it on the Huffington Post,
""That whole thing is just, bad!" she said. "Oh, if people only knew how frugal we are.
"It's kind of painful to be criticized for something when all the facts are not out there and are not reported," said Palin, saying the clothes are not worth $150,000 and were bought for the Republican National Convention. Still, she has been wearing pricey clothes at campaign events this fall. She said they will be given back, auctioned off or sent to charity. Most of them, she said, haven't even left the belly of her campaign plane."
They haven't left the plane? That's sad to waste that much money.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/23/palin-denies-150000-cloth_n_137408.html
1 person likes this
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
25 Oct 08
Excessive *and* wasteful? What a combination! I saw a statement that her favorite store was a consignment shop in Alaska and I couldn't help but laugh. Maybe with your own money...which I doubt...but definitely not with free money from the taxpayers.
@Bd200789 (2994)
• United States
24 Oct 08
It does kind of tarnish her "hockey mom" image doesn't it? She's trying to reach out to working class people. Well, spending like this isn't going to help her any.
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
25 Oct 08
That's how I feel about it. You can't promote yourself as Down Home and spend money like Paris Hilton.
@chameleonsdream (1230)
• United States
24 Oct 08
A while back some pundit quipped that Palin lovers would forgive her just about anything short of cannibalism. My 16 year old shook his head and responded, "No way. She HAD to eat those people." I find it pretty amusing that the campaign screaming about Obama's 'cult of personality' doesn't recognize it in themselves. Honestly? I think it only resonates for those people who already were inclined to see her faults. For everyone else - you know, she HAD to have those clothes. They look at their Sarah and they see themselves - and know that given the chance and the money to buy $3500 Valentino jackets, they'd be wearing it in a heartbeat. Instead of seeing excess, they see Cinderella - and who doesn't love a good Cinderella story?
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
25 Oct 08
I thought that most of us outgrew Cinderella but I think you're right. Even though they also used campaign funds to purchase items for Todd and the kiddies, it's apparently okay with some folks.
"No way. She HAD to eat those people." LMAO!!!