Anonymous wrote:Does this grieving widow in her spangly, ill-fitting suit count as a Trump Woman?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The lip injection bruises on Karoline, woof. Her injector hates her.

I'm surprised they could find a lip to inject

She looks like a cute, normal girl in this picture.

People used to look like this, and have idiosyncrasies like smallish lips, and we could still call them attractive because they looked like regular humans.

Hot take I think she is still attractive.

I'm a few years older than Karoline but I think a lot of these "She's 28, I'm 35 and I look better" memes underestimate how unflattering that close-up-under-harsh-lights was. The lip injections were gross but other than that I see some visible pores (normal), some textured patches (normal), and a couple undereye lines (normal for late 20s/early 30s, especially fair skinned women like us). It didn't help that she had heavy makeup on, which you would too if you thought you were getting photographed for a national magazine at normal range.

I'm 32. I go to one of the better dermatologists in DC, and I go quarterly. I have been using Vitamin C and tretinoin daily since my mid-20s. My new coworker just told me she thought I was 28. I think my skin looks good. I still think I would fare poorly under the conditions Karoline was photographed under.

Btw, the feminist in me is pissed off that she's the ONLY one whose appearance we are talking about. Not that of JD Vance, who looks 50 when he's 41. Not that of Stephen Miller who looks like the swamp creature he is. We are literally only talking about the young woman.

You genuinely think this is the normal amount of wrinkles for under 35? I am 45 and would love this kind of photo taken of my skin to see what I might be missing, just wouldn't want it published

I hate this entire administration but this is unfair. Nobody looks good this close up.

This is not just a close up photo. This is a photo where the photographer deliberately set up sharp cold tone light - direct into her face and slightly above, the light that churns any make up into the mud; the light that gives the shadow from every slight wrinkle; the light that gives the skin a dead man shade. The photographer ignored diffusor and reflectors, probably stretched diaphragm (like during architectural photoshoot), to ensure that every pore on Karoline's face highlighted like Mariana Trench, that every spot on her skin looks like melanoma. No retouching, of course. But he added contrast and texture, just like a control shot.

There are rules for the portrait photography - soft, filtered side light (better the warmer than day light), reflector from the bottom to ensure that under eye wrinkles are softened, wide diaphragm, correct lensed. When professional make a portrait, he can remove 10-12 years from the face even without photoshop. But he can also add 10-12 years.

The fact that he didn't just do a close up photo, but put efforts to make her look this way for the sole purpose to humiliate the women is disgusting. But he is a man. What puzzles me the most that other women are buying this lie and keep humiliating this woman. We should be better regardless of our political views, and expose this "photographer" for what he has done.

You're an idiot. This is the photographer's style. There was an interview with him in The Washington Post (I don't have a subscription, I read it through Apple News, so I cannot share it here) where he discussed this. He has taken similar pictures of the Obamas. He has an entire book of close up shots. This was not political. It's unfortunate that Kaylee or Caroline or whatever her name is got lip shots the day of the photo shoot, but it's not his job to photoshop her bad face mistake.

You shouldn't be allowed to post here if you don't know the person's name.

Regardless, yes. He does specialize in close ups. Here are some pics from 2012 DNC/RNC:

Janna Ryan:


Ann Romney:


Caroline Kennedy:


Nikki Haley:


These are all MUCH more flattering than Karoline's portrait.

I will say, Michelle Bachmann's is truly frightening. Looks like a DUI arrest mugshot:

You think those are flattering? Wow. You must have quite the face, LOL!

Anonymous wrote:I fear some of you hate Erika Kirk so much (same tbh) that you think widows should be in black floor length mourning gowns for a year like in Victorian times lol. I could give two shits if she wears sequins or tight pants.

That suit is just plain ugly and cheap looking though.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The lip injection bruises on Karoline, woof. Her injector hates her.

I'm surprised they could find a lip to inject

She looks like a cute, normal girl in this picture.

People used to look like this, and have idiosyncrasies like smallish lips, and we could still call them attractive because they looked like regular humans.

Hot take I think she is still attractive.

I'm a few years older than Karoline but I think a lot of these "She's 28, I'm 35 and I look better" memes underestimate how unflattering that close-up-under-harsh-lights was. The lip injections were gross but other than that I see some visible pores (normal), some textured patches (normal), and a couple undereye lines (normal for late 20s/early 30s, especially fair skinned women like us). It didn't help that she had heavy makeup on, which you would too if you thought you were getting photographed for a national magazine at normal range.

I'm 32. I go to one of the better dermatologists in DC, and I go quarterly. I have been using Vitamin C and tretinoin daily since my mid-20s. My new coworker just told me she thought I was 28. I think my skin looks good. I still think I would fare poorly under the conditions Karoline was photographed under.

Btw, the feminist in me is pissed off that she's the ONLY one whose appearance we are talking about. Not that of JD Vance, who looks 50 when he's 41. Not that of Stephen Miller who looks like the swamp creature he is. We are literally only talking about the young woman.

You genuinely think this is the normal amount of wrinkles for under 35? I am 45 and would love this kind of photo taken of my skin to see what I might be missing, just wouldn't want it published

I hate this entire administration but this is unfair. Nobody looks good this close up.

This is not just a close up photo. This is a photo where the photographer deliberately set up sharp cold tone light - direct into her face and slightly above, the light that churns any make up into the mud; the light that gives the shadow from every slight wrinkle; the light that gives the skin a dead man shade. The photographer ignored diffusor and reflectors, probably stretched diaphragm (like during architectural photoshoot), to ensure that every pore on Karoline's face highlighted like Mariana Trench, that every spot on her skin looks like melanoma. No retouching, of course. But he added contrast and texture, just like a control shot.

There are rules for the portrait photography - soft, filtered side light (better the warmer than day light), reflector from the bottom to ensure that under eye wrinkles are softened, wide diaphragm, correct lensed. When professional make a portrait, he can remove 10-12 years from the face even without photoshop. But he can also add 10-12 years.

The fact that he didn't just do a close up photo, but put efforts to make her look this way for the sole purpose to humiliate the women is disgusting. But he is a man. What puzzles me the most that other women are buying this lie and keep humiliating this woman. We should be better regardless of our political views, and expose this "photographer" for what he has done.

You're an idiot. This is the photographer's style. There was an interview with him in The Washington Post (I don't have a subscription, I read it through Apple News, so I cannot share it here) where he discussed this. He has taken similar pictures of the Obamas. He has an entire book of close up shots. This was not political. It's unfortunate that Kaylee or Caroline or whatever her name is got lip shots the day of the photo shoot, but it's not his job to photoshop her bad face mistake.

You shouldn't be allowed to post here if you don't know the person's name.

Regardless, yes. He does specialize in close ups. Here are some pics from 2012 DNC/RNC:

Janna Ryan:


Ann Romney:


Caroline Kennedy:


Nikki Haley:


These are all MUCH more flattering than Karoline's portrait.

I will say, Michelle Bachmann's is truly frightening. Looks like a DUI arrest mugshot:

You think those are flattering? Wow. You must have quite the face, LOL!

All the above photos (and photos of Obamas) taken from below the face. Levitt's photo is taken purposely from above, to emphasize pores and wrinkles. So it is clearly not his style.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The lip injection bruises on Karoline, woof. Her injector hates her.

I'm surprised they could find a lip to inject

She looks like a cute, normal girl in this picture.

People used to look like this, and have idiosyncrasies like smallish lips, and we could still call them attractive because they looked like regular humans.

Hot take I think she is still attractive.

I'm a few years older than Karoline but I think a lot of these "She's 28, I'm 35 and I look better" memes underestimate how unflattering that close-up-under-harsh-lights was. The lip injections were gross but other than that I see some visible pores (normal), some textured patches (normal), and a couple undereye lines (normal for late 20s/early 30s, especially fair skinned women like us). It didn't help that she had heavy makeup on, which you would too if you thought you were getting photographed for a national magazine at normal range.

I'm 32. I go to one of the better dermatologists in DC, and I go quarterly. I have been using Vitamin C and tretinoin daily since my mid-20s. My new coworker just told me she thought I was 28. I think my skin looks good. I still think I would fare poorly under the conditions Karoline was photographed under.

Btw, the feminist in me is pissed off that she's the ONLY one whose appearance we are talking about. Not that of JD Vance, who looks 50 when he's 41. Not that of Stephen Miller who looks like the swamp creature he is. We are literally only talking about the young woman.

You genuinely think this is the normal amount of wrinkles for under 35? I am 45 and would love this kind of photo taken of my skin to see what I might be missing, just wouldn't want it published

I hate this entire administration but this is unfair. Nobody looks good this close up.

This is not just a close up photo. This is a photo where the photographer deliberately set up sharp cold tone light - direct into her face and slightly above, the light that churns any make up into the mud; the light that gives the shadow from every slight wrinkle; the light that gives the skin a dead man shade. The photographer ignored diffusor and reflectors, probably stretched diaphragm (like during architectural photoshoot), to ensure that every pore on Karoline's face highlighted like Mariana Trench, that every spot on her skin looks like melanoma. No retouching, of course. But he added contrast and texture, just like a control shot.

There are rules for the portrait photography - soft, filtered side light (better the warmer than day light), reflector from the bottom to ensure that under eye wrinkles are softened, wide diaphragm, correct lensed. When professional make a portrait, he can remove 10-12 years from the face even without photoshop. But he can also add 10-12 years.

The fact that he didn't just do a close up photo, but put efforts to make her look this way for the sole purpose to humiliate the women is disgusting. But he is a man. What puzzles me the most that other women are buying this lie and keep humiliating this woman. We should be better regardless of our political views, and expose this "photographer" for what he has done.

You're an idiot. This is the photographer's style. There was an interview with him in The Washington Post (I don't have a subscription, I read it through Apple News, so I cannot share it here) where he discussed this. He has taken similar pictures of the Obamas. He has an entire book of close up shots. This was not political. It's unfortunate that Kaylee or Caroline or whatever her name is got lip shots the day of the photo shoot, but it's not his job to photoshop her bad face mistake.

You shouldn't be allowed to post here if you don't know the person's name.

Regardless, yes. He does specialize in close ups. Here are some pics from 2012 DNC/RNC:

Janna Ryan:


Ann Romney:


Caroline Kennedy:


Nikki Haley:


These are all MUCH more flattering than Karoline's portrait.

I will say, Michelle Bachmann's is truly frightening. Looks like a DUI arrest mugshot:

You think those are flattering? Wow. You must have quite the face, LOL!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hopefully now political figures - or anyone in the public eye - will be very wary about allowing this photographer to take their picture.

He is no one. His career will be done after this photo. Knocking women to the gourd and kicking her is not something to be proud of.

I doubt it. If anything the hatred for the Trump admin. will make him more famous.

I agree he knocked her to the ground and kicked her while she was down but he is objectively someone lol. He has photographed dozens of other political figures.

… and he has photographed them up close like that VERY often in the past.

DP. I feel it was obvious that this photographer intended to show how they are both ugly on the inside and on the outside. Kudos to him.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The lip injection bruises on Karoline, woof. Her injector hates her.

I'm surprised they could find a lip to inject

She looks like a cute, normal girl in this picture.

People used to look like this, and have idiosyncrasies like smallish lips, and we could still call them attractive because they looked like regular humans.

Hot take I think she is still attractive.

I'm a few years older than Karoline but I think a lot of these "She's 28, I'm 35 and I look better" memes underestimate how unflattering that close-up-under-harsh-lights was. The lip injections were gross but other than that I see some visible pores (normal), some textured patches (normal), and a couple undereye lines (normal for late 20s/early 30s, especially fair skinned women like us). It didn't help that she had heavy makeup on, which you would too if you thought you were getting photographed for a national magazine at normal range.

I'm 32. I go to one of the better dermatologists in DC, and I go quarterly. I have been using Vitamin C and tretinoin daily since my mid-20s. My new coworker just told me she thought I was 28. I think my skin looks good. I still think I would fare poorly under the conditions Karoline was photographed under.

Btw, the feminist in me is pissed off that she's the ONLY one whose appearance we are talking about. Not that of JD Vance, who looks 50 when he's 41. Not that of Stephen Miller who looks like the swamp creature he is. We are literally only talking about the young woman.

You genuinely think this is the normal amount of wrinkles for under 35? I am 45 and would love this kind of photo taken of my skin to see what I might be missing, just wouldn't want it published

I hate this entire administration but this is unfair. Nobody looks good this close up.

This is not just a close up photo. This is a photo where the photographer deliberately set up sharp cold tone light - direct into her face and slightly above, the light that churns any make up into the mud; the light that gives the shadow from every slight wrinkle; the light that gives the skin a dead man shade. The photographer ignored diffusor and reflectors, probably stretched diaphragm (like during architectural photoshoot), to ensure that every pore on Karoline's face highlighted like Mariana Trench, that every spot on her skin looks like melanoma. No retouching, of course. But he added contrast and texture, just like a control shot.

There are rules for the portrait photography - soft, filtered side light (better the warmer than day light), reflector from the bottom to ensure that under eye wrinkles are softened, wide diaphragm, correct lensed. When professional make a portrait, he can remove 10-12 years from the face even without photoshop. But he can also add 10-12 years.

The fact that he didn't just do a close up photo, but put efforts to make her look this way for the sole purpose to humiliate the women is disgusting. But he is a man. What puzzles me the most that other women are buying this lie and keep humiliating this woman. We should be better regardless of our political views, and expose this "photographer" for what he has done.

You're an idiot. This is the photographer's style. There was an interview with him in The Washington Post (I don't have a subscription, I read it through Apple News, so I cannot share it here) where he discussed this. He has taken similar pictures of the Obamas. He has an entire book of close up shots. This was not political. It's unfortunate that Kaylee or Caroline or whatever her name is got lip shots the day of the photo shoot, but it's not his job to photoshop her bad face mistake.

You shouldn't be allowed to post here if you don't know the person's name.

Regardless, yes. He does specialize in close ups. Here are some pics from 2012 DNC/RNC:

Janna Ryan:


Ann Romney:


Caroline Kennedy:


Nikki Haley:


These are all MUCH more flattering than Karoline's portrait.

I will say, Michelle Bachmann's is truly frightening. Looks like a DUI arrest mugshot:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The lip injection bruises on Karoline, woof. Her injector hates her.

I'm surprised they could find a lip to inject

She looks like a cute, normal girl in this picture.

People used to look like this, and have idiosyncrasies like smallish lips, and we could still call them attractive because they looked like regular humans.

Hot take I think she is still attractive.

I'm a few years older than Karoline but I think a lot of these "She's 28, I'm 35 and I look better" memes underestimate how unflattering that close-up-under-harsh-lights was. The lip injections were gross but other than that I see some visible pores (normal), some textured patches (normal), and a couple undereye lines (normal for late 20s/early 30s, especially fair skinned women like us). It didn't help that she had heavy makeup on, which you would too if you thought you were getting photographed for a national magazine at normal range.

I'm 32. I go to one of the better dermatologists in DC, and I go quarterly. I have been using Vitamin C and tretinoin daily since my mid-20s. My new coworker just told me she thought I was 28. I think my skin looks good. I still think I would fare poorly under the conditions Karoline was photographed under.

Btw, the feminist in me is pissed off that she's the ONLY one whose appearance we are talking about. Not that of JD Vance, who looks 50 when he's 41. Not that of Stephen Miller who looks like the swamp creature he is. We are literally only talking about the young woman.

You genuinely think this is the normal amount of wrinkles for under 35? I am 45 and would love this kind of photo taken of my skin to see what I might be missing, just wouldn't want it published

I hate this entire administration but this is unfair. Nobody looks good this close up.

This is not just a close up photo. This is a photo where the photographer deliberately set up sharp cold tone light - direct into her face and slightly above, the light that churns any make up into the mud; the light that gives the shadow from every slight wrinkle; the light that gives the skin a dead man shade. The photographer ignored diffusor and reflectors, probably stretched diaphragm (like during architectural photoshoot), to ensure that every pore on Karoline's face highlighted like Mariana Trench, that every spot on her skin looks like melanoma. No retouching, of course. But he added contrast and texture, just like a control shot.

There are rules for the portrait photography - soft, filtered side light (better the warmer than day light), reflector from the bottom to ensure that under eye wrinkles are softened, wide diaphragm, correct lensed. When professional make a portrait, he can remove 10-12 years from the face even without photoshop. But he can also add 10-12 years.

The fact that he didn't just do a close up photo, but put efforts to make her look this way for the sole purpose to humiliate the women is disgusting. But he is a man. What puzzles me the most that other women are buying this lie and keep humiliating this woman. We should be better regardless of our political views, and expose this "photographer" for what he has done.

You're an idiot. This is the photographer's style. There was an interview with him in The Washington Post (I don't have a subscription, I read it through Apple News, so I cannot share it here) where he discussed this. He has taken similar pictures of the Obamas. He has an entire book of close up shots. This was not political. It's unfortunate that Kaylee or Caroline or whatever her name is got lip shots the day of the photo shoot, but it's not his job to photoshop her bad face mistake.

You shouldn't be allowed to post here if you don't know the person's name.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have fewer under eye wrinkles than that and I am 75.
She must be a natural blonde with sun damage in her youth. I have my Gallego dad's thick creamy white skin. When I got facials in my 40s they said I had "good skin" and I didn't know what they meant. Now I do. But I do have lines around my mouth.

For God's sake, no you do not.

If any of us had a close up taken in light as harsh as that and then the photographer adjusted the photo to emphasize those lines then yes, we'd all look like this. Even at 30 or 35.

+1
The photo was *very deliberately* set up and taken. And then, of course, published.

She chose to mess up her face.

Getting lip filler is not "messing up her face," you idiot. She's a 28yo woman and that's the style.

Anonymous wrote:Does this grieving widow in her spangly, ill-fitting suit count as a Trump Woman?