Dress like you want to be President

[Jovan]

... didn't I already suggest that, JMS? lol

 

[J. M. Stovall]

You sure did, apologies. I didn't remember.

 

[Jovan]

No worries.

 

[Mark from Plano]

The fact is that there are consultants to each campaign that strictly control the dress of each candidate. These consultants all share a similar viewpoint on dress. They want their candidate to look Presidential without looking like a Dandy.

As a part of this there are some common traits that you will see in all Presidential dress, especially during debates and other important televised speaches. These are not "rules" per se that are enforced by anyone, it's just the common understanding of how the American public (as distinct from clothing message board posters) view clothing:
1. Suits. Dark in color. This conveys authority and is offensive to no one. It should be nice, but not too nice. Please gawd don't let it get out that you buy your suits custom-made. If you do, you've just lost the working man's vote (it's as bad as letting it get out that you get $400 haircuts). No adornments. You should look good without looking like you gave it the first thought. Therefore no linen. No pocket squares and no shirt cuffs should show.

2. Shirts. White. There's no reason to wear anything else. Light blue perhaps, but please no stripes, they look funny on TV.

3. Ties. Red. Blue suit, white shirt, red tie reminds people of the American flag. What could be wrong with that? Any other color but red is a 2nd choice and everyone knows you're trying to differentiate on the basis of dress rather than on the basis of policy. Just wear the red tie and shut up about it.

Bottom line is to look presidential. Wait to show some personal style (assuming you have any) after you're elected. That's the way Reagan did it.

Not saying I like the rules, but there they are. At the end of the day, dressing like a presidential candidate is about not letting the clothing get in the way of the message. Joe Sixpack barely trusts these guys as it is, put a pocket square and a brown custom tailored suit on these guys and they don't make it out of Iowa.

You want democracy? You got it. There it is.

 

[BJBAmerica]

I think Reagan was the sharpest dressed president of the 20th Century, followed closely by Truman. Worst.....Carter comes immediately to mind, polyester, sweaters, not an appearance of leadership at all, IMO.

 

[Mark from Plano]

Really, comparing Presidential dress before 1960 and after 1960 is irrelevant. TV changed everything. Presidents had much more latitude in expressing style (or not) before television. The 60's were probably a "shoulder" period, since even Nixon and his advisors underestimated the effect early on and it took a while for the "rules" to iron themselves out.

 

[Baron Kurtz]

The point is fully understood about "looking Presidential", whatever that might be, and about appealing to the common man. But then you can go too far. (sorry, i don't know any of the names).

Guy on far right, 4th and 6th from right: nicely fitted
2nd from right: raided dad's closet. Jacket is far too big and long for him.
5th from right: hard to tell due to stance
3rd from right: jacket a bit big, but not as bad as 2nd from right

There are messages in Presidential campaigns? My impression of them (experienced 2) was that they were message/policy light and pure personality battles.


Note to all: Get some damn brown shoes, for God's sake.


bk

 

[jamespowers]

I think Reagan was the sharpest dressed president of the 20th Century, followed closely by Truman. Worst.....Carter comes immediately to mind, polyester, sweaters, not an appearance of leadership at all, IMO.

The most important thing portrayed by the picture is that he looked comfortable dressed like that not like my 1 year old stuck in a suit whether he likes it or not.

 

[Mark from Plano]

The most important thing portrayed by the picture is that he looked comfortable dressed like that not like my 1 year old stuck in a suit whether he likes it or not.

Reagan was also the last president to wear semi-formal morning dress (a stroller) to his inauguration in 1980 (business suit in 1984). I suspect no advisor told him to do that. He had a well honed sense of style before he ever reached the White House. He also understood the "respect" aspect of dressing very well. He always wore his suit jacket in the Oval Office, for example, and expected others to do so as well as a sign of respect for the office. I'm certain no advisor told him to do that.

Great picture BTW.

 

[Mark from Plano]

There are messages in Presidential campaigns? My impression of them (experienced 2) was that they were message/policy light and pure personality battles.

Every campaign believes that it has a message to impart. You, of course, are free to disagree with that fact.

Note to all: Get some damn brown shoes, for God's sake.


bk

Oh. One thing I left off of the "rules" above. NO BROWN SHOES. Black shoes make people think you are serious. Brown shoes make people think you don't have any black shoes.

 

[Sin Khan]

Joe Sixpack barely trusts these guys as it is, put a pocket square and a brown custom tailored suit on these guys and they don't make it out of Iowa.

I don't believe that for a minuet and any so called "advisor" worth his weight of salt wouldn't either. Why? It is because a suit only enhances who you all ready are.
Edited for content. Read HERE and choose words wisely before posting.

Dressing like your at a funeral only fools people for about 2 seconds because as soon as the public hears a candidate speak and has the ability to observe their manerisms then the candidate will be found out completely whether he is a complete idiot or not. It wasn't the suit that Nixon wore that lost him the famous debate, it was the way that he presented himself.

A "good" advisor would advise a presidential candidate to wear what enhances his personality, not what may attempt to cover it up. President Bush should wear light grey suits and not black ones most of the time. Why? Because he is a care free speaker and wearing black suits while he jokes with the audiance only confuses the public about his message. IE: he should only wear a black suit if he is in a deadly serious mood and he will show the self control to conveiy that message and not joke around. Then, his message will be strong and not conflicted with mixed messages.

As well, if he is going to be light and in a fun mood then he should wear less formal looking clothing. This goes for anyone, not just Presidents. Would you wear a yellow golf shirt to a sales presentation? Of course not. And neither should you wear a suit when you are going to go golfing.

These candidates are listening to the wrong people. They should listen to reason and not formulas. The same advice that goes for you and I goes for all. Wear what you want to wear given the appropriotness of it. Wear a suit to a business affair, but what kind of suit to wear should be decided by what makes you as a person, what what you message you "think" you are sending. Why? Becuase whenever you talk that is when you will convey a message. Once you open your mouth, then whatever message the suit started is then ruined if what you say doesn't "jive" with what your wearing. So, the best advice is to wear what you feel comfortable wearing as a person, not as an advertisement.

 

[dostacos]

Can I quote myself? snip balance .

at our hospital when a resident would ask me an orthotics related question I always answered " In the definitive paper on this subject, I wrote....."

 

[dostacos]

There are very strict rules (agreed upon by the candidates) during the debates that could (and probably do) prevent any one candidate from looking better than another (clothing-wise). The Kennedy/Nixon debate, first televised Presidential debate, would have been a great victory for JFK if for no other reason than he just plain looked better than Nixon. This was recognized, and now great pains are taken to make everyone "look the same".

as I understand it, most people that LISTENED to the debate thought Nixon won, those who WATCHED it thought Kennedy did.

When the election was over Nixon was seriously considering a challenge to the election [too many "Chicago" votes] Kennedy privately talked to Nixon and admitted that he was not sure which one of them had REALLY won but a challenge would tear the country apart and it would be best for the Nation to accept the defeat. Nixon agreed, probably leading to most if not all of the issues he had during his presidency. I will stop now for fear of really getting into politics. suffice to say [at least for me] at that time BOTH men, showed class.

 

[Sonoma Jack]

The fact is that there are consultants to each campaign that strictly control the dress of each candidate. These consultants all share a similar viewpoint on dress. They want their candidate to look Presidential without looking like a Dandy.

This is true. There is the additional consideration of color and pattern as captured by cameras. Blues and solids work best simply because they distort the least on television. Ever notice the red shift on most TVs? Patterns tend to squirm, hence no pronounced pinstripes.

Elections are battles over who controls the most favorable image. Those rumpled suits you see on the debates are very well calculated and are precisely the attire required for the job of campaigning. As for the notion of a candidate wearing what he or she see fit--perish the thought. Anyone remember Richard Nixon wearing slacks and leather shoes while walking on the beach?

 

[cookie]

as I understand it, most people that LISTENED to the debate thought Nixon won, those who WATCHED it thought Kennedy did.

When the election was over Nixon was seriously considering a challenge to the election [too many "Chicago" votes] Kennedy privately talked to Nixon and admitted that he was not sure which one of them had REALLY won but a challenge would tear the country apart and it would be best for the Nation to accept the defeat. Nixon agreed, probably leading to most if not all of the issues he had during his presidency. I will stop now for fear of really getting into politics. suffice to say [at least for me] at that time BOTH men, showed class.

Your analysis was not only spot on historically but you were kind to JFK...

 

[PADDY]

What it confirms to me is...

That if you want to look like a leader in this world, generally speaking you still have to dress like one, and that means 'jacket and tie!'

Sure I could jump on the bandwagon here and start criticising the cut of the cloth..etc, but let's look beyond that, these guys are flying the flag for 'the classic look.' It might not be perfect, but no one 'ever' gets it perfect for everyone. And when we see national teams dressing in shirt, tie, suits..etc, again it's all 'a small step forwards' in selling the image that classic look is classy cool!!

What it's also saying on the other side of the coin is that...Hoods, jeans, baseball caps, tee shirts, trainers..etc just do not cut it ladies and gents, when you want to look 'like somone on the global stage' and I think 'we' know that.

These guys (politicians, sports people..etc) are trying on the 'classic style' stakes, and let's give them credit for 'that' rather than taking cheap shots at them because they haven't gone the full hog and splashed out a few thousand on a little bespoke number from Manhattan or Saville Row...

 

[Briscoeteque]

At the end of the day, dressing like a presidential candidate is about not letting the clothing get in the way of the message. Joe Sixpack barely trusts these guys as it is, put a pocket square and a brown custom tailored suit on these guys and they don't make it out of Iowa.

You want democracy? You got it. There it is.

I guess I'm not a big fan of democracy than, because if Joe Sixpack is really ultimately responsible for all political decisons that effect anyone, than I don't consider that a wise rule. Call me an elitist, a jerk, callous, whatever, but I'm sorry, homogonizing our culture to appeal to lazy slobs, and then ultimately depending on those lazy slobs to run everything is not really my kind of government.

And politicians really aren't doing better things with their time then looking good, I'm terribly sorry to disappoint you. If a politician doesn't care about his wardobe, it's not because he's too busy staying up all night making calls trying to get politics done or whatever, but it's because he's too lazy to care. They already put an enormous amount of thought and effort into their appearence. Why not just be honest about it, instead of trying to conceal it by dressing in a highly caluclated to make them appear like they don't care.

I may not be a big fan of Regan's policies, but I will say he was a very well dressed man for his time. That alone of course would not get him my vote, but I at least can salute him for that.

 

[Orgetorix]

That if you want to look like a leader in this world, generally speaking you still have to dress like one, and that means 'jacket and tie!'

Sure I could jump on the bandwagon here and start criticising the cut of the cloth..etc, but let's look beyond that, these guys are flying the flag for 'the classic look.' It might not be perfect, but no one 'ever' gets it perfect for everyone. And when we see national teams dressing in shirt, tie, suits..etc, again it's all 'a small step forwards' in selling the image that classic look is classy cool!!

What it's also saying on the other side of the coin is that...Hoods, jeans, baseball caps, tee shirts, trainers..etc just do not cut it ladies and gents, when you want to look 'like somone on the global stage' and I think 'we' know that.

These guys (politicians, sports people..etc) are trying on the 'classic style' stakes, and let's give them credit for 'that' rather than taking cheap shots at them because they haven't gone the full hog and splashed out a few thousand on a little bespoke number from Manhattan or Saville Row...

Paddy, I don't think that politicians (especially Presidents and Presidential candidates) generally deserve praise simply for wearing a suit and tie. They don't, by and large, do it because they're "flying a flag" for anything. They don't do it because they enjoy dressing up or looking good. They do it because they have to. Because politics is one area where people still expect public figures to be dressed up. Jimmy Carter tried bucking the trend in the '70s, wearing sweaters for his television addresses, and it was a disaster. Probably directly contributed to his not getting re-elected.

 

[funneman]

.

When I first saw this picture I thought I had stumbled on a police line-up in that mug shot thread we had going for a while. lol

 

[dostacos]

I would have worn a brown vest suit cream shirt, yellow pattern tie and pocket hankie, and maybe even brown spectators and a nice fedora PROPERLY tailored

watch the State of the Union the guys are mostly dressed the same as the picture that started this BUT the women in the House and senate tend to be dressed in bright colors [cameras will make them stand out of the crowd] lol