Usha Vance Dresses

[Anonymous]

The frumpy outfits are to signal that she's better than the gaudy women of the RNC. She wants you to know she's smarter than you. She doesn't need to wear makeup (that's for dumb girls) or dress nicely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't look like she wears a lot of makeup. Is she just naturally fresh faced or is she wearing some very natural makeup? I see lip gloss and maybe some blush. That stage lighting would not look as forgiving on me!

This kind of exemplifies why this place is nuts. Until Monday, Usha could have been a frequent DCUM poster: DC lawyer mom with three small kids and a husband who seems pretty focused on his own career and seems to have evolved in a pretty negative way through the years. But suddenly this (mostly) normal person is getting all this criticism that she did not put enough makeup on to deal with the convention and TV lights? C'mon I have been clicking on some of your fashion links for years. Let me say I am skeptical that the vast majority of DCUM posters would have made better fashion choices in the same circumstances.

There is a difference between the scenarios you are describing. My coworker with three little kids and a shitty husband doesn’t wear makeup to work? Fine. No qualms from me, do whatever you want.

Woman - whose husband’s party has some pretty regressive views about women - goes on stage at a televised convention with no makeup and ratty hair? No one is calling her a troll just saying what was she thinking.

Her dress was fine. But yes I would’ve gotten a blow out and at least put on more than lip balm to sell America on why they should vote for my misogynist husband who complains about other women being “frumpy cat ladies.”

Her dress, hair, and makeup look fine. I remember many people ripping on Amy Coney Barett for not having a blowout. What is this, 1982 feminism? As long as she’s groomed and dressed appropriately, she’s fine. She doesn’t need 90 minutes in the makeup chair to be in the spotlight.

SHE WASNT GROOMED OR DRESSED APPROPRIATELY. That is the argument people are making. A jersey lounge dress and unkempt hair is not appropriate!

Amy Coney Barrett looked lovely. She didn’t look like she overslept and threw on a dress.

ACB was up for a job HERSELF. This lady is the spouse of someone up for a job. She doesn’t owe anyone jacksh!t.

ACB’s dresses got a lot of praise here IIRC. The only thing wrong IMO was that it looked like she didn’t know what hair conditioner was for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She needs a little more makeup to not seem to washed out.

Yes why couldn’t they do her hair and makeup professionally? Awful.

[Anonymous]

They are such an odd looking couple. intent in a million other together based on looks alone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was surprised that she wore blue and that her husband had a blue tie.

Yes! Same. I couldn’t stop drifting back to that during his entire [horrifying] speech.

His wife is beyond beautiful though. And I kind of hate that she seems so likable and relatable, like a parent I’d enjoy chatting with during a school function or while in line at a store.

She is a Yale law gunner. I doubt the small talk would be all that enjoyable for you unless you would enjoy her humblebragging about how smart her kids are while subtly putting yours down.

"Gunner." What the jealous bottom half of the law school class calls the top 20%.

LOL. Ok. You got me. I barely graduated top half and it was from a top 50 state school. I've moved into another field and am very happy with my level of success.

But I think you have proved my point very well.

* have proven, PP

Past participle

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She's beautiful in a natural way with a very fit body and she's accomplished and intelligent. You would be surprised how many men are attracted to that combination, so she isn't "look at me." Women waste a lot of time on procedures and hair extensions and preventative botox and all that blah-blah-blah thinking that makes you attractive.

Sounds like something a woman would say. A frumpy woman.

[Anonymous]

She is the most appealing of the 4 by 1000 miles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She's beautiful in a natural way with a very fit body and she's accomplished and intelligent. You would be surprised how many men are attracted to that combination, so she isn't "look at me." Women waste a lot of time on procedures and hair extensions and preventative botox and all that blah-blah-blah thinking that makes you attractive.

Truly don't understand any of the posts saying she's beautiful. She's somewhat plain looking but not ugly. I think she's a little too thin, but a lot of people consider a physique like hers to be ideal. So, overall, I think she look fine...and I can see how someone would say she's above average given her body. But I simply don't get where this notion that she's some great beauty is coming from.

She really should get better clothes and makeup, though. I'm really surprised there was literally not a single makeup artist at the RNC that could help her. I'm in tech and not highly visible, and they have had makeup artists available to me for far smaller appearances.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I want a boat neck, cape sleeve, forgiving fabric, longer midi travel dress like she wears. I found one but I don't do full price in this range. Is there something similar at more affordable price?


https://www.meandem.com/us/travel-tailoring-boat-neck-midi-dress-navy?glCountry=US&glCurrency=USD&gad_source=1&gbraid=0AAAAADtaHAJ5VfUcpM3gAUfKUXasbTCr7&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIscTf596whwMVATbUAR34Aw7xEAQYASABEgLCmvD_BwE#288=1805

OP have you never been in an old navy? How is this website selling a viscose dress for $425 and calling it “luxury quality, fair price?”

I can get a slinky viscose dress for $30 from TJ Maxx and it’ll look great. If I’m paying $$$ at least give me a nice material!!! So many “luxury” brands pull this crap.

Yes. That ME+EM dress looks bad on the skinny model and downright matronly on the normal size model. It's terrible. The one Usha Vance wore is a thumbs down in the color department, but the fit at least has something going for it.

Whereas I see the drab dress as a poor fit. Reminds me of the weird fit of Meghan Markles dress. Similar unflattering side gathers and looks like she's wearing the wrong bra. Pretty women, bad dresses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was surprised that she wore blue and that her husband had a blue tie.

That blue looked pretty on her.

+1
She looked great.

[Anonymous]

Those espadrilles are SO bad. Reminds me of my 10 year old Jack Rogers. My DH would be mortified if I went to a work function of his in those shoes (unless it was a picnic)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't look like she wears a lot of makeup. Is she just naturally fresh faced or is she wearing some very natural makeup? I see lip gloss and maybe some blush. That stage lighting would not look as forgiving on me!

This kind of exemplifies why this place is nuts. Until Monday, Usha could have been a frequent DCUM poster: DC lawyer mom with three small kids and a husband who seems pretty focused on his own career and seems to have evolved in a pretty negative way through the years. But suddenly this (mostly) normal person is getting all this criticism that she did not put enough makeup on to deal with the convention and TV lights? C'mon I have been clicking on some of your fashion links for years. Let me say I am skeptical that the vast majority of DCUM posters would have made better fashion choices in the same circumstances.

+ a million

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't look like she wears a lot of makeup. Is she just naturally fresh faced or is she wearing some very natural makeup? I see lip gloss and maybe some blush. That stage lighting would not look as forgiving on me!

This kind of exemplifies why this place is nuts. Until Monday, Usha could have been a frequent DCUM poster: DC lawyer mom with three small kids and a husband who seems pretty focused on his own career and seems to have evolved in a pretty negative way through the years. But suddenly this (mostly) normal person is getting all this criticism that she did not put enough makeup on to deal with the convention and TV lights? C'mon I have been clicking on some of your fashion links for years. Let me say I am skeptical that the vast majority of DCUM posters would have made better fashion choices in the same circumstances.

There is a difference between the scenarios you are describing. My coworker with three little kids and a shitty husband doesn’t wear makeup to work? Fine. No qualms from me, do whatever you want.

Woman - whose husband’s party has some pretty regressive views about women - goes on stage at a televised convention with no makeup and ratty hair? No one is calling her a troll just saying what was she thinking.

Her dress was fine. But yes I would’ve gotten a blow out and at least put on more than lip balm to sell America on why they should vote for my misogynist husband who complains about other women being “frumpy cat ladies.”

Oh, yay - it's the blowout poster. She DID have a blowout, twit. That's how her hair looks, and frankly, I think it looks great. It's funny that such an angry person with obviously regressive views of your own fancies herself qualified to judge another woman's hair and makeup. Post your own picture.
DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't look like she wears a lot of makeup. Is she just naturally fresh faced or is she wearing some very natural makeup? I see lip gloss and maybe some blush. That stage lighting would not look as forgiving on me!

This kind of exemplifies why this place is nuts. Until Monday, Usha could have been a frequent DCUM poster: DC lawyer mom with three small kids and a husband who seems pretty focused on his own career and seems to have evolved in a pretty negative way through the years. But suddenly this (mostly) normal person is getting all this criticism that she did not put enough makeup on to deal with the convention and TV lights? C'mon I have been clicking on some of your fashion links for years. Let me say I am skeptical that the vast majority of DCUM posters would have made better fashion choices in the same circumstances.

There is a difference between the scenarios you are describing. My coworker with three little kids and a shitty husband doesn’t wear makeup to work? Fine. No qualms from me, do whatever you want.

Woman - whose husband’s party has some pretty regressive views about women - goes on stage at a televised convention with no makeup and ratty hair? No one is calling her a troll just saying what was she thinking.

Her dress was fine. But yes I would’ve gotten a blow out and at least put on more than lip balm to sell America on why they should vote for my misogynist husband who complains about other women being “frumpy cat ladies.”

She is good the way she is.

For school pickup

And if she had shown gotten all dolled up with thick makeup and glamorous hair/dress, you'd be calling her a typical "Trump Barbie." She is herself and she looks great. It's fun to see how triggered you are by her. DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't look like she wears a lot of makeup. Is she just naturally fresh faced or is she wearing some very natural makeup? I see lip gloss and maybe some blush. That stage lighting would not look as forgiving on me!

This kind of exemplifies why this place is nuts. Until Monday, Usha could have been a frequent DCUM poster: DC lawyer mom with three small kids and a husband who seems pretty focused on his own career and seems to have evolved in a pretty negative way through the years. But suddenly this (mostly) normal person is getting all this criticism that she did not put enough makeup on to deal with the convention and TV lights? C'mon I have been clicking on some of your fashion links for years. Let me say I am skeptical that the vast majority of DCUM posters would have made better fashion choices in the same circumstances.

There is a difference between the scenarios you are describing. My coworker with three little kids and a shitty husband doesn’t wear makeup to work? Fine. No qualms from me, do whatever you want.

Woman - whose husband’s party has some pretty regressive views about women - goes on stage at a televised convention with no makeup and ratty hair? No one is calling her a troll just saying what was she thinking.

Her dress was fine. But yes I would’ve gotten a blow out and at least put on more than lip balm to sell America on why they should vote for my misogynist husband who complains about other women being “frumpy cat ladies.”

Her dress, hair, and makeup look fine. I remember many people ripping on Amy Coney Barett for not having a blowout. What is this, 1982 feminism? As long as she’s groomed and dressed appropriately, she’s fine. She doesn’t need 90 minutes in the makeup chair to be in the spotlight.

SHE WASNT GROOMED OR DRESSED APPROPRIATELY. That is the argument people are making. A jersey lounge dress and unkempt hair is not appropriate!

Amy Coney Barrett looked lovely. She didn’t look like she overslept and threw on a dress.

Anyone making that "argument" has a screw loose. She looked perfectly appropriate. She looked lovely. I bet you consider yourself a feminist, right?