Derek Lam, Marc Jacobs & Phillip Lim don’t want to dress Melania Trump either


You know what truly surprises me? That this whole “will designers agree to dress Melania Trump?” thing has turned into a major story. Who would have thought that Sophie Theallet’s letter – wherein she announced her refusal to work with Melania and encouraged other designers to make the same choice – would be the talking-point in the VENN diagram of politics, celebrity and fashion? We already know how Theallet feels, and we already know how Tom Ford feels (he refused to dress Melania YEARS ago). We also heard that Tommy Hilfiger was up for dressing Melania, should she choose to go that way. Now Women’s Wear Daily contacted other American designers to see what they had to say.

Diane von Furstenberg: Donald Trump was elected and he will be our president. Melania deserves the respect of any first lady before her. Our role as part of the fashion industry is to promote beauty, inclusiveness, diversity. We should each be the best we can be and influence by our example.

Marc Jacobs: I have no interest whatsoever in dressing Melania Trump. I didn’t see [Sophie Theallet’s] letter. Personally, I’d rather put my energy into helping out those who will be hurt by [Donald] Trump and his supporters.”

Cynthia Rowley: In the midst of this heated debate, the question actually seems somewhat irrelevant. She can simply purchase whatever she wants, so how can we control it? Just because she’s shown wearing a designer does not mean that designer is endorsing her, her husband or any of their beliefs. Checking someone’s ethical beliefs before they’re allowed to purchase, sets up an exclusionary dynamic that feeds into the exact mentality that is preventing us from moving forward in a positive direction. Some people say fashion and politics should never mix, but when given the choice, I think you should address and dress your conscience.

Thom Browne: Out of respect for the position of the first lady of our United States, I would be honored to be considered to design for any first lady of the United States.

Derek Lam: What a tough question to answer now that the election has been decided! I’ve been slammed on social media when expressing an opinion about the election outcome. I was warned by people that I should not make an opinion which could alienate a client. Having been duly warned, my response is, while I have incredible respect for our country’s political institutions, I find it challenging to be personally involved in dressing the new first lady. I would rather concentrate my energies on efforts towards a more just, honorable and a mutually respectful world. I don’t know Melania Trump personally, so I don’t wish my comments to seem I am prejudging her personal values, but I really don’t see myself getting involved with the Trump presidency.

Phillip Lim: It’s been such an emotional roller coaster of an election process. The result has only confirmed my belief that we must stand for what we represent as a brand, so my sentiment is still the same. As a global brand, we are always looking to partner with individuals that we have authentic relationships with — ultimately, women and men that share similar set of values, desires and ideologies: inclusion, diversity, justice, consciousness, innovation…. With that said, we do not have a current relationship with Mrs. Trump and I don’t foresee a relationship developing under the Trump administration.

Vera Wang: We have not been contacted by the Trump campaign or administration thus far. But the first lady-elect should support American fashion, as did her predecessors.

[From WWD]

I think Cynthia Rowley makes a very interesting point, which is that Melania could simply go out and buy a Tom Ford dress and tell everyone that she’s wearing Tom Ford and what could he do about it? Nothing. Because you really can’t control who buys your products, you can only control who you agree to “dress,” as in you can only control who you work with, the bespoke items you might create for the FLOTUS, and whether or not you want to exert some control over the “style” of the sitting First Lady. Now, that being said, I think ultimately most American designers will refuse to create looks for Melania or work with her in any way. She might choose to wear those designers’ clothes off-the-rack anyway, and if so, that’s the way the cookie crumbles. But I think for her few public appearances – because I am growing more and more certain that Melania will be mostly invisible as FLOTUS – she will probably go with the few designers who agree to dress her, whether or not they’re American.



Photos courtesy of WENN.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

222 Responses to “Derek Lam, Marc Jacobs & Phillip Lim don’t want to dress Melania Trump either”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Shambles says:

    Damn, Women’s Wear Daily. Thank you for outing all of these people for who they truly are.

    • Locke Lamora says:

      Who are they really, capitalists? I am constantly surprised by people expecting decency from bussiness people. All they care about is profit.

      • Shambles says:

        That doesn’t mean I have to respect people who would sell their souls for money.

      • Locke Lamora says:

        I didn’t say you have to respect them. But you sounded surprised. I guess I read your post wrong.

      • Shambles says:

        Not really surprised, because I can’t be surprised by anyone since the election.

        I know shady business people are shady, but it’s just interesting to see it all laid out in front of me like that. I guess I am still amazed by the fact that people will openly support this idiot and his family, even though I shouldn’t be.

        You didn’t read the post wrong, you just looked at it in a deeper way 😊

      • Nic919 says:

        This applies to more than just fashion designers. It is rare for people who run businesses to do so in a conscientious way and to follow all the rules and treat employees well. The majority of the time their goal is to make money and if they can get away with something to make more money, then they do it.

        You don’t get rich by being nice to others. It is done on the backs of the weaker people.

        There are some decent people but making money tends to be the bottom line and normally at the expense of others.

      • littlemissnaughty says:

        I didn’t expect decency but I was still surprised. Because Melania Trump stands for so much more than just “First Lady” and we all know what that is. She married a hateful orange toddler and stands by his side. So if a fashion house wants to be associated with that, fine. But I would’ve expected the fashion world, which is full of gay men and in general full of so-called liberals, to simply see it as a bad business move to actively participate in dressing her. After this election, things are pretty black and white for many people. You’re for or against him and by extension her. You’re for him? You try to justify it? A LOT of anti-Trump people will not accept that. But maybe they know better who their peers and customers are and I have a completely wrong image of the fashion world.

        Also, I don’t understand Vera Wang’s comment. And Diane has already gotten into the Christmas punch I see.

      • Megan says:

        @Nin919 As a small business owner, I disagree. While profit is important, attracting and retaining quality employees is our foremost priority. We play by all the rules and treat our employees extremely well. And we are not a rare exception. I’ve worked for many great businesses and organizations.

      • hmmm says:

        @Locke Lamora

        Not all business people lack decency. Geez. What a depressing world to inhabit with such a belief.

        But then, we have the Orange Abomination, businessman extraordinaire as exhibit A and adored role model for total lack of decency.

    • Rosemary says:

      This is so stupid. They are stupid designers, that’s all. Think about it, they make expensive clothes. That’s all. If they think that they have any relevance to almost everyone in the world, they need to lay off the coke for a while,

      • yas says:

        Respectfully disagree. Really great designers ultimately influence fashion, even if it’s clothing that ends up being sold off the rack by brands that aren’t designers. So they do serve a purpose culturally even if the public collectively as a whole can’t thread the needle.

  2. Nicole says:

    Welp I don’t disagree with their stances. Why should they focus their energy into dressing someone who’s husband might create policies that are against their way of life?
    She can buy of the rack but lets be real people will know. It’s like when actresses buy of the rack for big shows it’s noticeable.

    She will probably go international for a look which if Michelle did that she would be crucified but we all no it will be perfectly fine for Melania

    • Dani says:

      There’s a difference between buying off the rack at Bloomingdale’s and going to a Tom Ford store and buying off of their rack. Only the people who truly shop those designers would know. The quality of the designs that get sent to department stores is not the same as the quality featured in store

      • K says:

        That’s not true… what is sent to department store is the same quality as their stores. What is often different is exclusive product but the quantity is the the same to say otherwise is a lie that you made up.
        I work in fashion and no house is risking their image or relationship with wholesale by sending lesser product.

    • SUSAN says:

      Michelle did wear foreign designers. She wore Versace for the last Vogue cover. Here, some of Mrs. O’s favorites—Riccardo Tisci – Givenchy , Jason Wu, Prabal Gurung, Tanya Taylor, Thom Browne, Thakoon, Azzedine Alaia, Michael Kors, Naeem Kahn, Narciso Rodriguez.

      • Really? says:

        What do you mean by foreign? Try Wikipedia. Prabal Gurung is an American fashion designer of Nepalese descent. Jason Wu went to Parsons in NYC and established his business in NYC. He describes his fashion as American sportswear. Thom Browne is also an American designer who grew up in Allentown, PA. Thakoon is a Thai American fashion designer who grew up in Nebraska. Michael Kors is well known as the all-American sportswear designer from Long Island. Naeem Khan is an Indian American designer who also opened his business in NYC. Narcisco Rodriguez is also a well known American designer from New Jersey of Cuban descent. Are you just looking at their names and thinking, “Must be foreign, their names aren’t as apple pie as Tommy Hilfiger?” Has the Trump presidency already made all non-Anglo Saxons foreign?

  3. Hulrs says:

    Somehow I don’t think Trump’s supporters would be losing any sleep over this.

    • Ashamed 2 b a Fl girl says:

      They’ll be too busy worrying about what happened to their health insurance.

    • Melly says:

      I may be wrong, but I don’t think most Trump supporters can afford most of these brands.

    • Josefina says:

      This wasn’t supposed to be a reply, sorry.

    • SusanneToo says:

      They’ll be out looking for those jobs that are (never) coming back.

    • OhDear says:

      Dunno, a lot of Trump supporters have a huge persecution complex. For example, Breitbart News wants to wage “war” against Kellogg’s because they (Kellogg’s) pulled their ads from Breitbart’s site.

      • hmmm says:

        Yeah, they ‘won’ and yet it’s not enough. Everyone must bend to their will. Scary, very scary stuff.

        This is more than churlishness. They are agitating for complete surrender.

  4. RussianBlueCat says:

    Melania should just call up her stepdaughter Ivanka and ask her for a dress to wear. It is only fair, since most likely Melania will only be FLOTUS in name only. Ivanka will be the one people will see the most

    • hmmm says:

      Oh, good point! Ivanka, as first lady proxy, will be flogging her brand from the White House. Wouldn’t it be funny if Melania had to exclusively wear Ivanka’s brand? LOL And Ivanka can design all the alt-Reich uniforms- she’d make a killing.

  5. Donna says:

    Honestly, at the end of the day, who cares? These designers are all so busy patting themselves on the back and puffed up with their own sense of self-importance at having “taken a stand.”

    • Clare says:

      It matters because people publicly refusing to dress her add to the public outcry/criticism of these people. At the end of the day it doesnt matter what dress she has on, really, what does matter is people with louder voices than yours and mine speaking out agaisnt Trump and his insanity – it makes the criticism mainstream. Yes its just fashion, but public rejection from ‘famous’ people (which includes designers) will keep the criticism current, I think. That’s why it’s important, and that’s why it matters.

      • Kitten says:

        This exactly. As far as I’m concerned, it’s always a check in the right box if someone speaks out publicly against this guy.

    • Timbuktu says:

      well, actually, 2 of them said something about helping those who will be negatively affected by Trump’s presidency, that sounds like they’re doing more than just taking a stand.

  6. Locke Lamora says:

    If I was a foreign first lady, I would try to wear designers from my own country, God knows they need exposure. Along with American ones. But she probably won’t considering she’s ( or Trump is) warning people back in Slovenia not to profit from her name ( they sell a cake named Melanija in her home town, etc).

    • Adele Dazeem says:

      Wow. I hadn’t heard of this, Locke. With all of the things they have ahead of them….they’re fretting about Slovenians profiting from her name? Really? If I were a Trump (shudder!) I think Slovenia would truly be the last thing in my mind right now. Seriously.

      • Leo says:

        They are so petty it’s unreal. Like Locke said, local pasty shop are just naming cakes after Melania and the like. It’s not only small scale stuff, it’s actually quite endearing since countries like Slovenia really take much pride in having a citizen representing them internationally. And those shits are threatening to sue them.

        Can you even image this depth of being rotten to the core?

      • Lorelai says:

        @Leo I realize that’s just a typo but considering Melania’s past career, it is hilarious 🙂

  7. robyn says:

    Wow … Melania looks like she chews bricks for breakfast with that expression. She is her husband’s enabler when it comes to “locker room” talk, etc. so I admire the folks who put ethics ahead of profit and refuse to help her in her quest to normalize.

  8. Megan says:

    Fingers crossed that Marchesa agrees to dress her.

  9. Greenieweenie says:

    I feel like I can come up with a lot of European designers who would absolutely dress her. Dolce and Gabbana…Galliano (is he working again?)….

    NO SURPRISE Tommy Hilfiger would. Who else wouldn’t be a surprise? This is a fun game.

    Cynthia Rowley is right that anyone can buy anything but of course, everyone recognizes when it is purchased off the rack and when it is not. She’s trying to separate commercial from political interests but that’s not going to happen. That’s not how politics works! You participate, you endorse.

  10. Josefina says:

    I don’t see it so much as a form of protest as much as a personal choice. The fashion industry is dominated by gay men and women, 2 groups of people Donald Trump doesn’t want to work for as president, in fact, he seems to want to work against them. If he won’t work for them, why should they work for him?

    • Hulrs says:

      I’m still waiting to see what he actually does. You can’t take him at his word for anything.

      • Josefina says:

        From all he promoted in his campain, I imagine the discussion is how much those groups will lose instead of wether he’ll be good or not for them. Or do you see Donald Trump suddenly becoming a fierce advocate for equal pay?

      • Hulrs says:

        I expect the unexpected.

      • hmmm says:

        He foments hatred. That is his platform. He’s stacking top positions with evil wackos who hate humanity and WILL act on their beliefs. He is already unashamedly profiting off his future position. What more proof does one need? No wonder he got elected.

  11. Bunbun says:

    Cynthia Rowley’s was the wisest one I think. And it’s true, she can just buy a designer dress. That being said, the taxpayers will be paying for it, whereas a custom dress would be “free” so to speak. The designer is paid with exposure.

    • Josefina says:

      Did the designers say they forbid Melania from ever wearing their clothes, though? The questions seemed to be “would you dress her?”, which I imagine means meeting up with her, measuring her, making a custom dress for her, or at least personally pick something. Giving her a special service most people don’t get.

      Going to Chanel and buying a coat is entirely different from Karl Lagerfeld himself making a coat for me. And even low tier actresses don’t go shop for dresses themselves when they need to go to a red carpet. So I imagine within the world of famous people and fashion, it IS quite a big deal that a designer would refuse to dress you and instead make you go and buy one of his regular mass-produced pieces.

      • littlemissnaughty says:

        Yeah. I hated her reply the most because does she think we’re morons? She was asked if she would dress her, not if she would call every store personally to forbid them to sell to Melania Trump. Does she think we don’t know the difference? Because SHE knows. Dressing someone and that someone just buying a brand’s sweater is not the same thing.

    • Lightpurple says:

      They have to pay for their own clothes.

    • Emily says:

      I thought her answer was the cagiest one. She’s basically saying “well it’s not my fault if Melania wears my clothes! So if she shows up in something Cynthia Rowley, don’t blame me!” She avoids out and out saying “if it were up to me, she wouldn’t wear my clothes.”

    • Bonbon says:

      They buy their own clothes.

      For special events a designer may design and donate a dress for the exposure, but the dress then goes into national archives, It is NOT hanging in the closet of the FLOTUS for her disposal.

    • M.A.F. says:

      Tax payers don’t pay for the First Family.

  12. Becky says:

    Is Melania squinting in that top pic or has she had some work done?

    • boredblond says:

      She always squints, and she always puts her hands over her vagina, and until last year I don’t think there was one photo of her smiling. With his talk of raising tariffs on consumer goods, I hope he doesn’t forget to jack up the price on already over-priced gowns, handbags, shoes, jewelry..the stuff his friends care about.

      • robyn says:

        I hope when Trump punishes companies through taxes and tariffs sending jobs outside of America he puts his own businesses on that list since he is a huge offender with his shirts, ties and more. Maybe FINALLY he will pay some taxes of his own so America can be great.

      • Snork says:

        Maybe she covers her lady bits because of her husbands propensity for pussy grabbing?

  13. grabbyhands says:

    It’s not like the Squinty One is going to be waiting for someone to dress her-any number of people will step up because the exposure of doing it will outweigh any personal gripe they might have (IF they do) against the Cheeto Messiah.

    I’m sure they’ll choose an American designer anyway to satisfy all the rabid flag wavers who support him.

    • Lady D says:

      This is a woman who wore a pussy bow blouse deliberately to antagonize. They are not that in touch with the populace. I wonder if it will even cross their minds to use American made.

  14. SusanneToo says:

    They look so happy in that top picture. It’s definitely worth a thousand words.

  15. lisa says:

    you cant keep anyone from buying off the rack

    but these grifters arent really interested in that, they want free junk. and i would never make anything specially for her. if you are successful enough to be asked, you are successful enough to turn her down.

  16. HappyMom says:

    Sort of off topic, but I’m looking at the pics from last night’s White House tree lighting-and I cannot fathom Trump and his family standing there next year. Ugh.

    • MellyMel says:

      I can’t imagine them doing any of the fun & silly Holiday events. Like passing out candy on Halloween or reading to kids on the lawn, or having an Easter event with all the kids. The Obama’s do these events so effortlessly.

      • Deering24 says:

        Gah–I certainly can’t see them doing the Kennedy Center Honors or Trump giving out Medals of Freedom.

      • Anna says:

        omg at Halloween the children will run screaming thinking he’s part of the Haunted (White) House–and that’s actually true, he will be

      • SusanneToo says:

        @Deering. I see a lot of “Sorry, I have a previous engagement” for the next four(?) years. That, or a lot of d-listers getting honors.

  17. Guesto says:


    Anyone who publicly disassociates themselves from the House of Trump is doing their civic duty.

  18. LinaLamont says:

    For those who say it doesn’t matter…yes, it does. Every bit of integrity matters, especially, when you have a President-elect who has none. Any public pushback is good.

    Can’t deal with the fur, though.

    • Who ARE these people? says:

      Thanks and I agree.

      Von Furstenberg is married to business tycoon Barry Diller BTW so no surprises there.

      Marc Jacobs got to the point.

      • The Original G says:

        Barry Diller and DVF held a $100,000 per couple fundraiser in support of Hillary and the DNC.

        “The Hillary Victory Fund contributions are split between the Clinton campaign, the Democratic National Committee and state parties.”

        Diane is a business tycoon in her own right as well.

      • Who ARE These People? says:

        Well true, true, true and thanks for the correction. I read DVF’s statement more carefully. The only part I could take issue with is about Melania deserving the respect accorded the other first ladies. But even that is splitting hairs. Melania doesn’t deserve respect. But the role maybe does…however we’re all pretty sure Melanie won’t live up to that. Whatever. Every week is a long week with the Trumps riding into town.

      • Ky says:

        Also, DVF was president of the CFDA for 10 years and is still on the board . A large part of that job is to promote the American fashion industry. It employs a lot of people. It would unwise to go after the First Lady directly in spite of her political leanings.

      • LinaLamont says:

        There are priorities and choices in life.
        The Trumps are an extreme and dangerous anomaly. This is about more than political leanings.
        It’s about right vs wrong.

        You can promote the American fashion industry without pandering and prostituting yourself. You can stand up for something bigger than pretty clothes. No-one’s going to lose their jobs over DVF refusing to dress Trump.

        What does the The Diller–von Furstenberg Family Foundation stand for?

      • The Original G says:

        They support Big Brothers and Big Sisters, CityMeals on Wheels for the elderly, several nature conservancies. I think DVF has stood up for plenty.

        Where does vilifying people who you haven’t even taken the time to identify square up with your sense of right vs. wrong?

      • LinaLamont says:

        @The Original G says:
        “They support Big Brothers and Big Sisters, CityMeals on Wheels for the elderly, several nature conservancies. I think DVF has stood up for plenty.

        Where does vilifying people who you haven’t even taken the time to identify square up with your sense of right vs. wrong? ”

        It squares up perfectly. That’s my point. You support all these causes, but, don’t oppose the fascism and corrupt government that seek to destroy them…and the good they do. Putting money toward causes does not let you off the hook.

        The Kochs give plenty, too.

      • hmmm says:

        @Lina Lamont

        I like everything you wrote here. So on point.

        + gazillion

  19. The Original G says:

    Right, because fashion designers are have been sooooooooo integral in promoting racial, ethnic and social equality, body acceptance and equal access to their good and services? Whatever.

    Taking comfort in the prospect that people who charge thousands of dollars for an exotic handbag or a year’s average mortgage payments for a single dress won’t dress her is pretty cold.

    I’m with Diane. Set an example with your own behavior.

  20. BonBon says:

    Please. As stated, MT can go out and buy any designer she chooses and they can’t stop it. So all this is just an exercise in smug public judgement that ultimately changes nothing. And to those who think those approach it as business are sell outs ……well by golly , it is business.

    This whole thing is a non story except for more of the current trend to let political differences infiltrate every single aspect of life. And sometimes it shouldn’t. It’s fashion, not policy. But oh the smug self righteousness from some designers. But also — thank you for the pragmatic and IMO appropriately crafted response from others respecting the institution of our WH traditions. (DVF, Rowley etc)

    • Who ARE these people? says:

      Speaking of respecting White House traditions…the Trumps do not.

      • Bonbons says:

        “when they go low, we go high”…….except not.

      • hmmm says:

        You don’t go “high” when standing up to evil. That’s ridiculous. And judgment is not a dirty word though Trumpistas’ talking points lately are centred around dominating and mastering through the twisting of words. Like, next they’ll be telling us there are only opinions and facts don’t exist.

        People would be crazy to go high when fighting evil. Time to get down and dirty. And who cares what Trumpistas think of the rest of us especially with their base standards. America is not that dumb not to see through Orwellian speak.

      • Bonbon says:

        Michelle Obama disagrees. 😎

      • hmmm says:

        Twist away.LOL I rest my case.

      • Bonbon says:

        We just disagree. It isn’t twisting away ….it’s acknowledging that differences of opinion exist. There is yours. There is mine, There is Michelle Obamas, I’m not attempting to dominate a discussion, to shut others down, to win or to persuade. I don’t need to do that.

      • hmmm says:

        As I asserted, I rest my case.

    • Greenieweenie says:

      Uhh….your comment is an exercise in “failing to understand how fashion works” and “failure to read the many comments here and on the last post that explained it to you”

      • Bonbons says:

        Oh I understand. They design, promote and sell. We buy. It’s basic commerce with the usual hyperbole and a dash (or a whole ocean) of artistic smugness. 😎

      • Greenieweenie says:

        And yet, not…many times they design, and you do not buy. Turns out not everything is for sale.

      • hmmm says:

        And failure to persuade through debased Trumpist talking points. Big fail. Very big fail.

      • Bonbon says:

        @hhhhmmm………your assumption that I was trying to persuade is a failure to understand. As you say — Big fail. VEry big fail.

        I was Merely expressing an opinion on a celebrity website. Which is all any of us are doing here.

      • hmmm says:


        “Not the puppet. You’re the puppet. You’re the puppet!” LOL

    • Crumpet says:

      Ah – the voice of reason.

    • Lambda says:

      Yet refusing to directly work with Melania could be pragmatic and market driven. Not that I know much about designers, but if they market towards the young, who abhor her husband, or a sophisticated clientele, and Melania is a bit vulgar in that Desperate Housewife way, maybe they don’t want to spoil their brand. Besides, she’s not gonna be around for long.

  21. detritus says:

    Any Shade Court followers here?
    Ruling on Vera Wang’s comment?
    Considering Melania has barely worn (if worn at all) any American designers?

  22. Lalu says:

    I think that designers should be free to work with whoever they choose. If they don’t want to dress her, fine. I am sure there will be plenty that will.
    I do find it odd though… I thought there were people that had actually been sued for discriminating against people based on a difference in beliefs. I am always all for everyone making up their own minds. I just think it shouldn’t be a double standard.

    • lightpurple says:

      They were sued for discriminating against people in legally protected classes. Being of a particular race or gender or orientation is not a belief, it is who one is. Being married to Donald Trump is not a legally protected class.

      • Lambda says:

        You are patient and poised in your responses. I tend to lose it when people are that dense or pretend to be.

      • hmmm says:


        They’re trying to change the discourse by positing *beliefs* as equally valid. To believe that a lot of humanity should be baselessly hated, discriminated against, discarded, is the height of evil and should be rejected at every turn. In their eyes, evil is anyone who refuses to yield to their illegitimate views.

        Great answer, @lightpurple.

      • Kitten says:

        I second what hmmmm and Lambda said. *high-fives* to LP

      • SusanneToo says:

        @Lambda. There are more trumpees than usual here today. At least three with their oh so cool defenses of their disgusting hero.

      • LinaLamont says:

        “Being married to Donald Trump is not a legally protected class. ”
        Ugh. I think, now, it is.
        They’re so corrupt and litigious….and powerful, now.

        “I tend to lose it when people are that dense or pretend to be. ”
        I’m like you.

  23. Melody says:

    Melania looks so much like her husband in the first picture! The tan,squint, lips, and even chin! I’ve always thought she was a beautiful woman but she is morphing into Donald.

    • elle says:

      I came here to say the exact same thing. Maybe The Donald provides instructions to her plastic surgeon to shape her in his image? Agggghhh… I just completely gave myself the creeps.

  24. Apples says:

    There’s a video on Melania’s FB page of her wearing a ball gown and talking about it. I think the designer was the contestant on one of the reality show about fashion?

  25. Sophieb9 says:

    You gotta wonder what the Donald’s instructions to his tailors are that he always looks boxy and mussed, pants baggy at the hips. Any designers agreeing to dress him?

  26. Radley says:

    What does it mean to dress Melania Trump anyway? She’s not special. She’s not accomplished. Her anti-bullying platform seems to have been an afterthought she really isn’t interested in.

    She’s a lazy trophy wife who actively supports many despicable ideologies via her support for her hateful husband. I guess if that’s your demographic, then go for it.

    I don’t believe the respect for the role of First Lady should automatically transfer to whomever is in that position. He might as well dump her for a Kardashian then. What difference does it make?

    • Oriane says:

      >He might as well dump her for a Kardashian then

      This I kinda want to see – harbinger of Armageddon though it may be!
      But honestly I don’t think the Kardashians would tie themselves to Trump… for all their vulgarity the Ks are modern Americans with multiracial families.

      • teacakes says:

        I doubt the Kardashians would buy into the Trump ideology – as you noted, they’re a multiracial/multi-ethnic family and Kim K has declared support for HRC on Twitter, so at least they’re not this particular brand of monster.

  27. Thnuggaboo says:

    The only fashion “house” that should be considered for anything Trump-related is Hugo Boss considering those fashionable Nazi uniforms they created back in the 30s.

  28. eggyweggs says:

    You know who I want to hear from on this issue? Tim Gunn. Someone get him on the line. I know he will be insightful.

  29. sherry says:

    Question as I am seeing this repeated over and over from my right-leaning friends Facebook timelines: How is refusing to dress Melania based on not agreeing with Trump’s policies on moral grounds any different than bakers refusing to bake a wedding cake for a homosexual couple based on their religious beliefs? Should a Muslim-owned catering company be forced to provide ham and pork barbecue for an office party?

    They are both providing services. If one is compelled to go against their personal beliefs because they are service-based, shouldn’t everyone regardless of what service they provide?

    Should the person who is being denied service just go to someone who agrees with their lifestyle for the service, or should everyone be forced to provide regardless?

    * I’ve stated before I’m a Libertarian – I don’t like government control on everything. The less government involvement in people’s lives the better. I don’t want someone like Rick Santorum telling me how I’m supposed to live my life any more than I want Jill Stein dictating how I’m supposed to think and feel. However, if you’re going to set up rules you favor when your side is in control of everything, you’re going to have to realize that knife cuts both ways when the other side is in control.

    • hmmm says:

      They like to convince you that *beliefs* and opinions are equally valid. They’re not. It’s actually about values and they’re not equally valid either in a civilised society. Arguing equivalencies is a way to place discussion in a bind, and dominate you. It’s not real but they want you to accept this brave new world where everything can be something else. That’s called brainwashing. Scientology does it too, making you doubt reality, your own experience, twisting words, dumbing you down. Everyone should read Orwell.

    • The Original G says:

      Well said Sherry. Trust me, I am in no way shape or form a Tump supporter.

    • Lambda says:

      This thing again. Let’s try one more time: homosexuality is not a lifestyle. Practicing nudism or veganism is a lifestyle. Lifestyles are modifiable, revisable, discardable (probably not a word). Gender, race, sexuality are not. If you refuse to serve somebody on account of something they were born as, hence they have no control over, you’re breaking our civic covenant as spelled out in our founding documents. And because we’re a secular society, religious beliefs cannot justify discrimination.

      I don’t understand the example of the Muslim business. Can you force a business to provide services they don’t usually provide? It’s like expecting a divorce lawyer to litigate your insurance claim.

      • sherry says:

        It’s not my position. It’s just the arguments I’ve seen on Facebook. I think if you’re in a service based business, you should serve whoever comes into your business. If you don’t agree with same-sex marriage – don’t attend the wedding. You bake the cake, they give you money and you go on to your next customer. Chick Fil A is a Christian-based company. They’re not asking people in the drive-thru if they’re gay or straight. They just give people their chicken sandwiches and move on.

        I haven’t really had a good argument for this when I see it on Facebook though. I think if you’re selling fashion, sell it. If you’re selling baked goods, sell it. If you’re in the business of making party food, make the party food.

        If you’re going to have a rule for business (selling things), then it should apply to everyone.

      • Goldie says:

        I see your point Sherry, but I would argue that making custom-designed dresses is not a service that these fashion designers typically provide. It is a favor that they do for a very limited number of people. If you visit the websites of these designers, they don’t mention custom gowns as one of their services. If I were to call Marc Jacobs’ office and ask him to design a dress for me, I certainly wouldn’t consider it discrimination if they refused. They have no obligation to dress me. Why is Melania Trump automatically entitled to have a gown made especially for her? It’s not as if anyone is trying to prevent her from purchasing clothing from a store.

        On the other hand if you have a bakery that advertises themselves as a business that provides custom baked goods for their clients, I don’t think they should be able to refuse services because they don’t agree with a customer’s ideology, race, religion etc. They can refuse write certain words on the cake that they find to be profane, but I don’t think they can flat out refuse services.
        For instance Chic-Fil-A can’t refuse to sell Obama a sandwich, even if they disagree with his political policies. However, I don’t expect them to create a brand new sandwich specifically for Obama.

      • Lambda says:

        I didn’t assume it was your position. I don’t understand what’s so complicated. If you come into my store and start spouting obnoxious things, I reserve the right to kick you out. In a roundabout way, that’s the case with Melania. If I ask you to leave because you’re gay, I’m a discriminating bigot.

      • hmmm says:


        “I think if you’re in a service based business, you should serve whoever comes into your business.”

        Just because *you* think people should does not make it so when you’re arguing false equivalency.

        Bottom line- there is evil in the world and you don’t want to be associated with it if you are a decent human being. Evil constitutes the denigration, oppression, suppression of the *innocent* other. It is just to reject, not serve denigrators, oppressor, suppressors. In effect, you don’t have to cater to @ssholes- no shirt, no shoes, no empathy.

      • Jay (the Canadian one) says:

        Lambda, you wrote: “Lifestyles are modifiable, revisable, discardable (probably not a word). Gender, race, sexuality are not.” If you are going to draw this particular distinction, one could use this premise to justify excluding adherents of a religion that offends you (or exclude atheists if you prefer) since religion is a choice, not something you’re born with. (You may inherit from your family or community but that’s how any belief, be it spiritual or racist, can be inherited.) You could argue that only harmful beliefs should be rejected, but people obviously cannot agree on what’s societally harmful.

      • Lambda says:

        Jay, that’s different layer of discussion.
        With the exception of cults, I don’t see how anyone can claim to be offended by the totality of a religion or a random individual practitioner. Like, I’d like to see somebody try to argue the point that the entirety of religion is offensive. That’s cuckoo. Practices, texts, leaders, specific events or arrangements – yeah, I can dislike those. Plus, I’m a person of faith and I myself navigate around the pitfalls of my own religion, which I attribute to people from other faiths. So, no, it’s a false analogy. While religion is not a fixed identity trait, it’s more than a “lifestyle”. There’s a difference between “no shirt, no service” and “Jainists not allowed”.

    • Bonbon says:

      I’m a libertarian leaning pragmatist myself Sherry, And I tend to agree with you. My own beliefs are to keep government to a needed minimum, out of our lives, our bedrooms, less in our pocketbooks, etc. live and let live with our own choices. Leave me alone to live mine and I’ll leave you alone to live yours.

      But there is what is legal (which is pretty well defined) and there is moral / values which is no where near cut and dried. From a LEGAL perspective, using EEOC as an example, what is protected is age, sex, race , religion, national origin and now sexual orientation.

      Do I like all this “I don’t like you, I disagree with you, I judge you, and I’m going to try and punish you” that is dominating dialogue all across the political spectrum now? Ahh hell no.

      But there is no law against being an @$$hole unfortunately. And they come in all shapes, sizes, colors, and political beliefs.

      • sherry says:

        Thank you! You said it much better than I have.

        I get accused by my friends on the left of being for the right and my friends on the right for being for the left (my husband even accuses me of being an anarchist sometimes). I just don’t see the world in black and white, but a rainbow of colors and hues.

        We all have lived different lives and have different perspectives and I respect those differences without wanting to make a law that others have to see things my way or be punished for it.

      • Amelie says:

        Hi Sherry:

        I raised this issue on the initial thread re: Ms. Thelleat’s refusal to dress Mrs. Trump. It resulted in my being dogpiled.
        Here’s my personal example of something being politicized:
        A couple of years ago, my long distance provider sent me an email (my email was listed with their company only for billing purposes) stating the company’s position on particular legislation. The email, in its wording, suggested that the position they supported was the ‘correct’ one and they apparently thought that I would agree with this. My response was to send an email to the customer service dept, stating that my relationship with their company was limited to their long distance service and that I did not appreciate my email being used by the company president to communicate what was apparently his opinion. I stated that I in fact did not agree with his position and canceled my services. It occurred to me that this privately held company might also have made my contact information available to whatever groups supported their position as well. IMO, what this company did was stupid from a business point of view and I am mystified how they could assume that their customers would appreciate receiving an email endorsing a policy position that had absolutely nothing to do with long-distance service.

        I agree with the designers listed in this thread’s intro piece that ‘fashion is fashion’. No, it should not be politicized, nor should cars, concrete or long-distance.

      • sherry says:

        @Amelie – I agree. If you’re offering a service or products to the public, then give it to them. I don’t go to my mechanic here in town because I agree with his religion/stance on gay marriage/who he voted for. I go to him because he’s been in our town forever and he takes good care of me and my car.

        I don’t ask him where he goes to church, who he voted for or if he agrees or disagrees with certain policies. I don’t ask, because I don’t care.

        Giselle had it right when she told Tom to keep his mouth shut regarding politics. No matter what your thoughts are, you are sure to piss off half of your prospective buyers.

      • hmmm says:


        Y’all make it sound like false equivalence is A Okay. No, it’s not. Nor is it the standard for thinking. In fact, it is intellectually lazy and dumb. When you’re talking about hatred and evil it’s about more than just politics and some logical fallacy. False equivalence is akin to having your brains fall out, IMO.

      • hmmm says:

        “Do I like all this “I don’t like you, I disagree with you, I judge you, and I’m going to try and punish you” that is dominating dialogue all across the political spectrum now? Ahh hell no. ”

        Woops , false equivalency.

      • Amelie says:

        Thanks for your response.
        Do you know what I suspect is the root of all this? The identity politics that appears to have dominated the Dem party* for so long; everything is judged thru the lens of each special interest group and their getting what they want. What Trump did so successfully is speak to “common denominator” issues (ie jobs) and that’s why he won. He even got votes from people who the experts said wouldn’t vote for him.

        I live in one of the most diverse communities in the country and choose to see common denominators in whomever I encounter.

        *Identity politics is what many Dems are saying needs to change in their party.

      • Greenieweenie says:

        You all are talking past each other. I said this upthread: you’re failing to understand how designers works. Anyone can buy a designer’s clothes. But designers don’t have to dress anyone–and they don’t. They choose who they work with. As Tom Ford noted, FLOTUS should not be wearing ridiculously expensive clothes. And she doesn’t buy those clothes at market prices either. She gets large discounts–half price, say–on the clothing because by wearing it, she raises a designer’s profile. This is also why Tom said it was appropriate for Michelle to wear his clothes to Buckingham Palace–that’s a very formal occasion that would justify the expense (even at half price, his clothes cost) and as an American in London, he’s a logical choice.

        This is a matter of BRANDING, not market principles. Branding is always selective. Branding is always image conscious. OF COURSE not every designer will want to be associated with the Trumps just because Melania assumes a title. They own their own brand and can develop it however they see fit. This is not the same as refusing to sell someone something–AT ALL.

      • Amelie says:

        Branding is a marketing concept for a product that will help connect the company’s product with the market. In fashion, one is selling beauty, attractiveness, fantasy etc. For the sake of discussion, Melania fits the bill: she is a former model, looks glamorous, has what many consider is an enviable figure. IMO-for the sake of discussion-she fits the bill as a model for clothing. What Ms. Theallet is stating is something else. Ms. Theallet says in her statement that her brand is an expression of both artistic and philosophical ideas. Huh? Her formal statement says that she won’t dress the new first lady because of issues connected with her husband’s presidential campaign. Melania, it appears is guilty by association. I would love to have someone comment on what the “philosophy” of Ms Theallet’s brand is. BTW, when I look thru Vogue when I am in some waiting room, I am looking at the fashion, not reading political essays or philosophical treatises.

    • hogtowngooner says:

      “Should a Muslim-owned catering company be forced to provide ham and pork barbecue for an office party?”

      This is a false equivalency. The government cannot force you to sell products you don’t want to sell. If you are a catering company that doesn’t want to sell a specific type of meat, that’s your choice and you have to accept that people may not buy from you on that basis. The issue is that you cannot refuse to sell your products/services to anyone (with the exception of alcohol and tobacco to minors).

      Kinda goes into that whole freedom thing. Sell whatever the heck you want (provided it’s legal). What you cannot do is not sell it to anyone you disagree with. That’s the illegal part.

      • sherry says:

        Again, these are the arguments I’m seeing from my right-leaning friends. I don’t particularly like political arguments, so I keep scrolling. I think people view things based on their life experiences, family, friends, religion, etc. and my stating something to someone isn’t really going to change their opinion.

        I honestly try and view life from other perspectives.

        I’m a Christian and when I looked at the bakery situation I asked myself, “What would I do if the situation was reversed? What if Christians were a minority and a baker refused to make a wedding cake for me based on that? What if I went to two or three or four bakers and they all refused to make a wedding cake based on my religion? How would that make me feel as a human being?”

      • hogtowngooner says:

        If a bakery refused to bake/sell a cake to a couple because of their Christian religion, that absolutely is discrimination as well. But the bakers in that specific situation pretended like THEY were the ones being “oppressed” because THEY couldn’t practice discrimination. If they didn’t bake wedding cakes at all, that’s fine because they’re not discriminating against any specific group based on race/religion/gender/sexual orientation/etc (though it would be a poor business decision!).

        The mental gymnastics most of their defenders did just because they don’t want to acknowledge that gay people are people too were so tiresome. There’s such a ridiculous amount of hate for people who aren’t doing anything but trying to live their lives like everyone else. And so much selfishness at seeing the rights of minorities confirmed still, in some way, has to be about them and their ridiculous persecution complex.

        ^^ FYI that wasn’t directed at you Sherry. Your empathy for those you disagree with makes you a wonderful example of what true Christianity is. 🙂

      • Carmen says:

        There was a Muslim flight attendant who refused to serve alcoholic beverages to passengers in first class. She felt that she was being discriminated against for being required to serve drinks to passengers as alcohol is against her religion. I thought this flight attendant was completely in the wrong because serving drinks to passengers is part of her job. It was not as if she was being asked to drink alcohol herself which is definitely against her religious beliefs. The problem here is that by refusing to serve alcohol to her passengers because of her religion, she was in effect forcing her religious beliefs on her passengers. I believe she was terminated for not doing her job and is suing the airline.

      • Otaku fairy says:

        Misogynists, rapists, Neo Nazi endorsed racist politicians, and their enablers are not protected classes, no matter how badly Trump supporters and their defensive loved ones want to try to turn them into one. At the end of the day I dont think not dressing Milania is going to effect policies either way or reduce hate crimes, so I wont judge designers who do dress them, but I definitely respect and support the right of other women, gay, bisexual, and transgender people, and people of color in the fashion industry who just want to make it clear in this way that they want no parts of an administration that wants to roll back our rights, safety, and equality to the 1950s or earlier.

    • vauvert says:

      A day late and a dollar short but there is a ver big difference. The designers will not refuse to sell her a dress in their stores. They will not instruct heir staff to turn her away a the door. That would be the equivalent treatment to bakers refusing to make a wedding cake for a gay couple. What they are saying is: I won’t be making a custom dress for her, with fittings and private consultations and creating a unique item that only she can wear. Which they are totally entitled to do. Look at it this way:
      My SIL is a painter. When she has an exhibition, she does not control who the gallery sells to. Her paintings may end up in the homes and offices of people she dislikes etc. But, if someone wants to commission a portrait or any other custom work from her, she is free to say yes or no. She doesn’t have to accept every request.

  30. royalfern says:

    Cynthia Rowley makes the most important point… not the part about not being able to control who buys her clothing…. BUT about the exclusionary dynamic. Ultimately a designer can agree or disagree to dress her for whatever reason they see fit, but this whole thing invites the same mentality that so many were against Trump for. On a personal level one can say they aren’t interested in dressing her for political and moral reasons, but to make it a campaign? Yikes. That’s scary. You know its bad when the bad makes the good look ugly.

    • hmmm says:

      It’s not the same thing at all. All things are not equal.

      • Kitten says:

        Exactly. I never understand this need to equalize everything. The status quo (ie white people) does not equal minorities, thus the double-standard argument holds no water.
        I mean, it is literally in the definition of the word *minority*: “a part of a population differing from others in some characteristics and often subjected to differential treatment”. That is NOT applicable to white people as a whole.

        Additionally, the scenarios presented here should never be compared. Melania’s quality of life won’t change because some designer refuses to dress her but you better believe that minorities (black, Muslim, Hispanic, LGBTQ etc) and women’s lives could be directly impacted by Trump’s “exclusionary” political ideology.

        It’s just apples and oranges and after all the false equivalencies from the 2016 election, I’m so DONE entertaining that drivel.

    • Bonbon says:

      When I read the phrase “false equivalence,” it is almost always coming from a deeply entrenched partisan in full on deflect mode.

      • Kitten says:

        LOLOLOL that is RICH, coming from you of all people.

        Where is the deflection in my comment? Care to point it out?

        Or better yet you could attempt to poke holes in my assertion that minorities and white people are not equal in this country, as that was the crux of my argument.

        Take a stab at forming a cogent counterargument, Bonbon, instead of the standard trolling and you might actually learn something.

      • Bonbon says:

        Actually kitten…..your response had nothing to do with royal ferns post at all. you just jumped on it and offf it into a racism rant.

        Take a stab st staying on point in your responses……or at least start a new thread when you want to tangent off into your chosen talking points.

      • Kitten says:

        Ah trolls…how fun you guys are.

        My point was pretty clear and was based on this portion of her comment: “Ultimately a designer can agree or disagree to dress her for whatever reason they see fit, but this whole thing invites the same mentality that so many were against Trump for.”

        Not the same mentality and not even comparable.

        We have a fascist dictator who is assembling a cabinet of people including Bannon who has made countless racist, misogynistic and anti-Semitic comments, Mike Pence who is threatening to roll back the rights of the LGBTQ community, to defund Planned Parenthood and Jeff Sessions who devoted a good chunk of his Alabama political career to defending an educational system that pushes poor black students into drastically under-funded public schools.

        These aforementioned people have actual impact–they are real and viable threats to the lives of others.

        Saying that at the heart of their political stance resides the same “mentality” that drives a designer to decline to design for a rich white woman who’s political beliefs directly threaten their rights is quite clearly a false equivalency. A designer is marketing a BRAND, if they don’t believe that the person wearing their clothes accurately represents their brand, they have every right to decline designing for them. It’s no different from an athlete losing an endorsement deal because they got a DUI. Image matters in fashion.

        But again, the lack of nuanced thinking seems to be a common thread amongst you Trumpsters–oh I’m sorry, I mean LIBERTARIANS.

        (same church, different pew so forgive me I don’t see the need to make the distinction)

      • Bonbon says:

        ahhhhhh…but equating republican and libertarian platforms is indeed a false equivalency. Differences exist in many areas…….Religious, gay rights, pro choice etc. might. I’m sure you can find resources to educate yourself on this if you look.

        It’s going to be a long 4 years kitten. Pace yourself.

      • hmmm says:


        The sad fact is that you delight in administering cruelties in service to your own genius. Like Drumpf it really doesn’t matter about the substance and you sure as hell don’t care about anything. It’s about dominating and getting off on people’s suffering. This is who Drumpf attracts, people like him. People without conviction because that would stifle their ‘freedom’.

        You are a troll thrilled at spreading disinformation and playing with heads. We have your number now. Troll null. Bye bye. Inwardly really, really soft and mushy and driven by negative emotion, lacking intellect.

        It must really twist your knickers to face people who are educated and accomplished. I am finding a fundamental rage against and resentment of intellectual success amongst Drumpf acolytes. Thanks for stepping up to the plate and showing us that resentment.

        Meanwhile a lot of us are not driven by resentment but by love/respect for our fellow human beings. Read this and weep.

      • hmmm says:


        Bonbons is just like Drumpf. They believe in nothing but like playing with your head. That is what they do.

        To me your thoughts are always substantial and careful. I’ve witnessed your struggle. Don’t ever stop, except when it comes to the character disordered and malicious.

      • Bonbon says:

        My knickers are intact. For every 1 post I share here with my thoughts, others are 5 x more typewriter warrioring away raging against facts.

        Your opinion of me is as irrelevant as mine is of you. I’ll sleep tonight just fine.

        That whole accomplished comment was meant to belittle or diminish. Isn’t that what you presume to hate about Trump?

        But FYI. I retired from the csuite at age 56. Yes the old fashioned way….I earned it.

        Or as Kathy Bates said in Fried Green Tomatoes….”I’m old and I have more insurance”.

        We simply disagree philosophically.

      • Timbuktu says:

        well, good for you. Let me guess – you’re white, at least middle class, heterosexual, no disability? Yes, you made it, good for you, and screw everyone else. If THEY never make it to their retirement because they can’t afford insurance due to a pre-existing condition they were born with, you’ll sleep just fine. After all, it’s not your fault, their parents should have thought hard before having disabled children or something. Because lazy people deliberately have disabled children all the time, just so they can mooch of the system, right?

      • Bonbon says:


        I didn’t say any of those things. Have never posted anything close to that, Didn’t vote for Trump either,

        You have no right and no invitation to judge me or anyone else you’ve never met on the basis of so darn little information. So much vitriol simply because someone doesn’t buy into the herd thinking on a celebrity gossip website by people who are angry and shocked that their candidate lost.

        After participating in 10 presidential elections — and being about 50/50 in terms of supporting the winning candidate – I can assure you that most of your fears will not be realized.

        Candidates” success rates for their campaign promises (threats?) are pretty low on both sides of the aisle. And DT is already back pedaling.

        Like I said…..pace yourselves. Save something for the midterms, Picking anonymous fights and insulting anonymous posters on a celebrity website may be emotionally letting of your anger but it is a total waste of energy if you are interested in change. There are good suggestions downthread by Sheri. She’s right too in my opinion. But that’s all any of us have to offer on this topic…our opinions.

  31. LawBabe says:

    do we know who dressed HRC when she was first lady?

    • Bonbon says:

      Well there was the whole handband debacle. TArget ?😜

      Seriously……I believe Oscar de la Renta frequently dressed several First Ladies including HRC

  32. Jezza says:

    I demand the cheeto-in-chief rage tweet at 3am on this subject!

    • lightpurple says:

      He probably will very soon. He is getting lots of flack right now for talking to the leader of Taiwan on the phone (he’s currently tweeting about that) and well, he owns lots of stock in Carrier, so that big deal he just made means that the people of Indiana will be seeing their tax dollars go to him for a deal he possibly could have controlled anyway.

  33. SusanneToo says:

    The GOP AG of Michigan is suing to stop the recount. Call his office at
    517-373-1110 and demand it proceed.

  34. joannie says:

    She looks like a siamese cat.

  35. Hfsni says:

    Why does it matter that it be an american designer… who cares shell wear dolce n gabana or something else instead and theyll make money

  36. Sheri says:

    Unfortunately the elite liberal left still do not get it. The people Trump has put in place many of them are billionaires. They see Hollywood and designers much the same as England saw stage actors years ago as less then – lower class. Many of them see themselves as way above some this class and the age of Washington catering to “famous” actors, sports figures etc. Is done for the next four years. It is fine for these designers to take a stand but to the ultra wealthy who could buy and sell them a hundred times over and who are running the military , education, and creating laws these designers mean nothing. Trump isn’t tweeting about it because it means next to nothing to him. As well the designers were already upset because she choose off the rack for the campaign. There will be many who want to dress her. If the left really wants to change the course of the country they need to lobby, write their representatives , volunteer in schools so they know more about education, donate to planned parenthood, etc. Trying to say rude things about the President’s wife and what she wears is exactly the kind of tactics that got the Democrats – liberals in this mess in the first place . Deal in real stuff not this kind of stuff to change the country. People without jobs don’t care who is dressing the President’s wife.

    • Lightpurple says:

      You wrongly presume that people are not contacting their representatives. And during the 8 months I was unemployed back in 2010, well, free diversions like gossip and what someone was wearing did help.

    • hmmm says:

      “Unfortunately the elite liberal left still do not get it.” ….”Deal in real stuff not this kind of stuff to change the country. People without jobs don’t care who is dressing the President’s wife.

      Really?. Who are these liberals and what makes them elite? If they stand up against evil, does this make them elite? Having a brain or an education, does that make them elite? Slapping the inherently derogatory ‘elite’ label on them doesn’t make their resistance to evil less valid. There were lots of successful educated people who voted for Drumpf but I guess they are not elite by some personal standard I guess?

      People without jobs come from EVERY walk of life, and many of them are not gullible enough to believe a self- described billionaire (show us your taxes) is going to fight for them. He’s more likely to make them slaves. Hatred is very real stuff and there are those of us from every walk of life, with or without jobs, who are not jonesing for a slave driver.

      Meanwhile Trump and his cronies, the uber ‘financial elite’ (show us your taxes, Drumpf), eager and ready to loot America, get a pass.

      Why? Because it’s really all about hatred, all about the con, and greed.

  37. sodapop says:

    Good for them. Faced with cheeto mussolini’s tyranny, you have to stand up for your ethics in any way you can – even small. Can you imagine if everyone just accepted and “respected” the Trumps position (which, btw, is also the argument of authoritarian governments everywhere: you have to love your country! you have to respect the president!) *shudder*

    Anyway I didn’t think I would be more disgusted with Trump but nope turns out it gets worse. This is how vindictive he is:

    “Even when it comes to a sick baby in his family, Donald Trump is all business. The megabuilder and his siblings Robert and Maryanne terminated their nephew’s family medical coverage a week after he challenged the will of their father, Fred Trump. “This was so shocking, so disappointing and so vindictive,” said niece Lisa Trump, whose son, William, was born 18 months ago at Mount Sinai Medical Center with a rare neurological disorder that produces violent seizures, brain damage and medical bills topping $300,000.” Source:

    • hmmm says:

      The TrumpenFuhrer’s choice of top guns is also a vindictive FU to …well I don’t know who, except the overwhelming part of America who rejected him. He has chosen every stereotype of the dregs of society, the caricatures, on purpose, and delights in his choices because he is sadistic and gets to torture on a grand scale now.

    • Kori says:

      I read about this way back. I would’ve thrown it and a whole lot else at him the whole campaign. I think that was a real misstep.

  38. Shayla says:

    I think if Trump really wants to have his wife seen as being supportive of his ideals and those same minded republicans who voted for him, Walmart should ha e ZERO issues with dressing the future First Lady. But, just in case they do, I hear Duck Dynasty is coming out with a clothing line that should fit right in with those celebrating Mr. President Elects win. Dressing for dummies might come in handy too…

    • kate says:

      And you are who? Some immature person who thinks everyone who doesn’t believe as you do is ignorant and only worthy of purchasing at Wal-Mart? Wal-mart is too good for the likes of you. There are hard working individuals in this country who provide services for YOU who can only afford Wal-Mart and yet you look down your self important nose at them because you feel so smug and superior in your LuLu Lemon yoga pants ranting about social injustice. Lol. The hypocrisy of people like you. You are no better than anyone else because of how you vote.

    • robyn says:

      Walmart imports many goods from China and that is why US citizens can buy their clothes and food relatively cheaply there. The genital grabbing conman and America’s head mob boss and official loose cannon, Donald Trump, could likely change all that if he holds true to his threats. I think Melania will still be able to afford a dress there, however, so no worries.

  39. MFM008 says:

    I’m sure the first escort can find something to wear from her hooker closet.
    I applaud these people for refusing to get on board the fascist train.

    • Carmen says:

      Moronia could put on haute couture and make it look like it came off the remainder rack at Walmart, so she might just as well shop from the remainder rack at Walmart and say Donald a lot of money.

  40. Martha says:

    so Givenchy and Balmain, both respectable brands will dress someone like Kim kardashian but no one wants to dress Melania?

    • Otaku fairy says:

      Does Kim Kardashian is just a vapid attention seeking lady with no talent and even though her husband defended Donald Trump verbally, the guy didnt even vote. Donald Trump and the people he appoints… well as the people who voted for them… are an active threat to whole groups of people in this country. Milania defends all of that. Its pretty easy to see why people are more worried about Trump, Pence, and Bannon than Kardashian and West.

      • teacakes says:

        Kim Kardashian publicly supported HRC too, so if any votes came out of the Kardashian-West family they certainly weren’t for Trump.

  41. SM says:

    A bit off topic but my God. The posture in the first pic. It’s like the Donald is taking a picture next to a jaguar, trying not to tip off a wild animal. They look like a complete strangers

  42. Chetta B. says:

    It looks as if she’s constantly giving someone the stink-eye. That being said, I wonder how the “First Couple” will interpret these refusals. That’s got to hurt in a way.

  43. India Andrews says:

    Designers’ bread and butter are trophy wives and their offspring so I’m not going to throw stones.

    Melania is beautiful and won’t go naked to a White House ball. Someone will dress her. She has enough clothing in her closet now she probably can go four years without buying anything.

    • robyn says:

      Whether Melania is beautiful or not-so-much is debatable but to me true beauty comes from within. Melania’s choice to marry a wealthy man who had been known as a bully for years, a person who stiffed his workers, a bigot and a sexist who enjoyed humiliating everyone and thinks genital grabbing is merely “lock room talk”, makes her a pretty ugly woman to me.

  44. Original T.C. says:

    For those claiming this issue is not a concern to the “poor White” Trump voter, this topic was the number one trending topic on Fox News for the last 24hours. And AGAIN, most poor Whites making under 50,000 voted for HRC not Trump. Please stop repeating myths.

    HRC did appeal to the working poor including the White working poor. The part of the White population she did NOT appeal to were the culture warriors who think they are superior to other Americans of other colors, religions and sexual orientations. Like her campaign spokesman said this week, “we didn’t want to win that way”. And again, only 25% of the population voted. I would rather have HRC lose than appeal to KKK sympatheziers. Most Trump voters have jobs and make over $70,000.

  45. GenevieveNatalia says:

    Melania Trump is not just a First Lady.

    She became Trump’s mistress while he was married to his second wife.

    She worked in the US illegally, a policy Trump has railed against, as a center-piece of his campaign.

    She attacked a Jewish journalist, using Jewish slurs against her…when an unflattering article was written about her.

    She lied about her education and she stole the words of others, during public speaking.

    She criticizes online bullying while giving a pass to her own husband.

    *And she has done absolutely NOTHING positive in this world for others with all of her years on this earth*

    This woman and what she stands for; is vile.

  46. Lauren says:

    I truly do not think Melania Trump cares whether designers dress her or not. She has the means to buy almost anything she would ever want to wear. I do remember Trump once saying in an interview that Melania was actually not crazy with her spending. Implying that Ivana and Marla had far more expensive taste. I am sure now she just won’t wear the designers who have talked about her.

    I also don’t think she cares to ever live in the White House. She has a 30,000 square ft. apt in the heart of Manhattan and Mar-a-lago to escape to, both filled with staff. Why live in what she surely views as “government housing” where her every move will be scrutinized. And she has a full service spa in her apt. in Trump Tower. Who would want to leave that?

    Whenever I see her I think wow, when she met “The Donald” she thought she was just marrying a Billionaire. Not the future President of the United States and the most powerful man in the world. She must certainly think she won the gold digger jackpot!

  47. Thnuggaboo says:

    Maybe she could get together with Mrs. Pence to see if they can get a buy one-get one kind of deal from whoever is doing Pence’s dress. Or maybe give Scott Baio a ring for any leads or to ask if he sews. Or she could just get in the elevator and go downstairs of Trump Tower into the retail and boutique stores there, such as Gucci, and shop shop shop!!!

  48. Jenny says:

    No worries, Melania, there’s always John Galliano.

  49. Nibbi says:

    I m surprised & disappointed by how many of them sort of just dance around the question.
    Cynthia Rowley, especially.
    I respect Marc Jacobs for taking a stance & saying it loud and clear.

  50. Nibbi says:

    Also, anyone else a little freaked out by how The Donald and Melania start to look alike?
    Don’t get me wrong, I do think she’s beautiful, and I think he’s nasty…
    But there’s something and it’s weird. The squinty eyes, the pissy look, the pouty mouth…
    Similar injections/ plastic surgery? …
    She’s even getting slight jowls in the same areas he is.
    Maybe just time together being paranoid and spoiled? I mean, that look they both always have ! that angry pout !!
    argh. 4 years of looking at that mess…