Nordstrom is dropping Ivanka Trumps Line in their stores

[katharath]

I'm pretty sure Ivanka was known for ripping off some high end designers. I know she had some beautiful very high heeled shoes and boots.

Yep. In 2011 she was sent a cease and desist letter when she copied a design from Derek Lam; and then last year, Aquazurra, an Italian (and much more expensive) designer sued her for copying designs. I've seen the pics of multiple shoes that she stole. They are shockingly close "replicas". She clearly stole the designs, then priced them at half as much as the real thing.

So admirable!!

Katharath, it was Aquarzurra that I was thinking of. The design was clearly copied and I had wondered why Ivanka wasn't being sued for her design. I had purchased a pair of her high heeled boots a few years ago and liked them but now there is no way I would purchase a Trump item.

Here are some side by side pics of Aquazzura and Ivanka's shoes.

 

[smitcompton]

Hi,

This -no shopping Trump- is a great way to peacefully protest. The Cleveland Clinic which holds a fundraiser at Mara Largo says it mat not re-new their booking for the spring. The Cleveland Clinic is among one of the best hospitals in the country, #2 or #3 after the Mayo.
It wants Obamacare.

Annette

 

[ruby59]

That would be so cool!

Right! I don't have any of her stuff, but I do like her style, AND she is an advocate for women and equality. Perhaps Nordstrom's competitors who DO carry her items would like a sudden infusion of cash from purchases of her line. I may have to go shopping as soon as I feel up to it.

If you like the style of someone who rips off other people's designs, then you better get out there fast, because Neiman Marcus is dropping her too, and I'm not sure how many other "competitors" exist at that level, lol.

https://www.google.com/amp/abcnews.go.com/amp/Politics/nordstrom-drops-ivanka-trumps-clothing-collection-citing-brands/story%3Fid%3D45241255

(Link includes Neiman info).

I find this a little amusing because over in Rocky Talk people are asking about how to copy ring designs all the time.

 

[the_mother_thing]

There are so many glaring differences in those shoes it's not funny ... and I am not even a fashionista in the least!

Are they similar? Yes. Identical, hardly.

 

[jaaron]

That would be so cool!

Right! I don't have any of her stuff, but I do like her style, AND she is an advocate for women and equality. Perhaps Nordstrom's competitors who DO carry her items would like a sudden infusion of cash from purchases of her line. I may have to go shopping as soon as I feel up to it.

If you like the style of someone who rips off other people's designs, then you better get out there fast, because Neiman Marcus is dropping her too, and I'm not sure how many other "competitors" exist at that level, lol.

https://www.google.com/amp/abcnews.go.com/amp/Politics/nordstrom-drops-ivanka-trumps-clothing-collection-citing-brands/story%3Fid%3D45241255

(Link includes Neiman info).

I find this a little amusing because over in Rocky Talk people are asking about how to copy ring designs all the time.

Posting as someone who works in an industry where intellectual property is an issue, I do think there are grey areas around copying someone else's designs, although in the instance of Pricescope, most of the original designs are already riffs on other designs . That said, a one-off copy for your own personal use is a completely different entity from mass production for profit.

 

[the_mother_thing]

I find this a little amusing because over in Rocky Talk people are asking about how to copy ring designs all the time.

Exactly. Of course, it's always masked as "inspiration".

 

[katharath]

There are so many glaring differences in those shoes it's not funny ... and I am not even a fashionista in the least!

Are they similar? Yes. Identical, hardly.

Did anyone here call them identical?

To my knowledge they don't have to be "identical" for Ivanka to be guilty of stealing their designs.

 

[the_mother_thing]

There are so many glaring differences in those shoes it's not funny ... and I am not even a fashionista in the least!

Are they similar? Yes. Identical, hardly.

Did anyone here call them identical?

To my knowledge they don't have to be "identical" for Ivanka to be guilty of stealing their designs.

If they aren't "identical" then how is it "stealing"? Maybe she was just "inspired" by them.

Is there any evidence she specifically knew of those shoes being in existence? Is it possible she just had the same concept?

Perhaps someone can just point to whatever lawsuit was filed so we can quit all the "what ifs" and just get the actual facts, because basing positions on anything else - while your prerogative - is irresponsible.

 

[Calliecake]

Think what you''d like Jenn. Ivanka is being sued by Aquazurra for repeated infringement. She stole their designs. It's a good thing you aren't in design since you fail to see the similarities.

 

[the_mother_thing]

Think what you''d like Jenn. Ivanka is being sued by Aquazurra for repeated infringement. She stole their designs. It's a good thing you aren't in design since you fail to see the similarities.

Your personal attack/tone isn't necessary nor productive.

Do you have a link to the complaint/suit filed by Aquazurra or not? That's all I asked.

 

[Dee*Jay]

Here is a link to an article and the lawsuit is referenced at the bottom.

http://www.thefashionlaw.com/home/aquazzura-adds-design-patent-infringement-claim-to-trump-lawsuit

I can't figure out how to link the suit itself on my phone (which is what I'm posting from).

 

[the_mother_thing]

Here is a link to an article and the lawsuit is referenced at the bottom.

http://www.thefashionlaw.com/home/aquazzura-adds-design-patent-infringement-claim-to-trump-lawsuit

I can't figure out how to link the suit itself on my phone (which is what I'm posting from).

Thank you for being helpful. I found this via your link: https://www.unitedstatescourts.org/federal/nysd/459241/1-0.html

I am not a lawyer nor well versed in these types of cases. The complaint does show another view of the shoes (neither of which had I ever hear of nor would I ever wear due to back issues, but they're both cute), and in that view they sure do appear different to me, especially around the ankle portion.

I wish there was a side by side that didn't identify which was which because I know I will undoubtedly be accused of defending chump yet again for this opinion, but I prefer the IT shoes in the styles posted in this thread because of one important factor to me - the heels. The IT heels appear a bit lower and more "substantial". I can't/won't do spikey heels, and the Aqua's look a bit less "stable". Again, all are cute, but to my eye, not identical. Will be interesting to see what a judge says, if it gets that far.

I did note in a couple articles that one of the people initially noted as a defendant may have worked for the Aqua company, and then collaborated with IT. He/it was later removed a s a defendent. I find that point worth noting, as he/it could have played a role in the design process.

 

[AGBF]

What a great idea! #grabyourwallet and protest THE most influential, socially liberal person to have Chump's ear on policy matters, such as her (and hubs) recent, widely-reported opposition to rollback of LGBT rights from the Obama admin, which has been largely attributed as the primary reason for that 'idea' being flushed.

You think we have to accept some fascism? You would have preferred us to follow Neville Chamberlain's course with Hitler? Look at how that worked out. Look at history. Tyrants only take more if you don't stand up to them.

AGBF

I said NO such thing, and reject your far-fetched inference and twisting of my words.

Of course you never said any such thing. I am not quoting you and I am not "twisting your words', since I am not trying to reword what you said, either. I am making an (accurate) extrapolation of what would ensue if one were to pursue the policy you advocate!

If one starts to buy off Ivanka Trump and her husband because they are the lesser of the evils surrounding Ivanka's despotical father, then one would be engaging in a policy of appeasement (like Neville Chamberlain with Hitler). (So sorry if you don't like to hear Hitler's name, but the comparison is apt.)

All the discussion that has gone on in this thread about Ivanka's shoes is, to me, irrelevant. I couldn't care a jot if she steals designs. It doesn't matter much in the scheme of things when the lives of hundreds of thousands of refugees are at stake (and so is our Constitution). Talking about the details of shoes designs is, in my opinion, like arranging the deck chairs on The Titanic. What we have to do is shut her and her father's and their cronies' businesses down.

AGBF

 

[the_mother_thing]

Of course you never said any such thing. I am not quoting you and I am not "twisting your words', since I am not trying to reword what you said, either. I am making an (accurate) extrapolation of what would ensue if one were to pursue the policy you advocate!

...

What we have to do is shut her and her father's and their cronies' businesses down.

AGBF

1) I wasn't advocating any "policy"; it was merely an observation. I would think liberals would appreciate having some diversity in those influencing Chump to help keep him from implementing policies you find wrong, especially a socially liberal woman whose opinion he gives serious consideration.

2) Yes, that's it, shut them down ... those mean, evil-doing job creators ... that way we can have more people unemployed without benefits they depend on, less tax revenue and even more government dependency. In the mean time, the Trumps will still be wealthy. Way to help the working class, Deb!

 

[House Cat]

Of course you never said any such thing. I am not quoting you and I am not "twisting your words', since I am not trying to reword what you said, either. I am making an (accurate) extrapolation of what would ensue if one were to pursue the policy you advocate!

...

What we have to do is shut her and her father's and their cronies' businesses down.

AGBF

1) I wasn't advocating any "policy"; it was merely an observation. I would think liberals would appreciate having some diversity in those influencing Chump to help keep him from implementing policies you find wrong, especially a socially liberal woman whose opinion he gives serious consideration.

2) Yes, that's it, shut them down ... those mean, evil-doing job creators ... that way we can have more people unemployed without benefits they depend on, less tax revenue and even more government dependency. In the mean time, the Trumps will still be wealthy. Way to help the working class, Deb!

Am I correct when I read that you are saying that you believe that Ivanka is so emotionally immature and volatile that she would abandon her core beliefs as a human being over a boycott and a business deal? And let's take this one step further, you are saying she will take those feelings of scorn and use them to influence the President of the United States...

Right.

 

[t-c]

1) I wasn't advocating any "policy"; it was merely an observation. I would think liberals would appreciate having some diversity in those influencing Chump to help keep him from implementing policies you find wrong, especially a socially liberal woman whose opinion he gives serious consideration.

2) Yes, that's it, shut them down ... those mean, evil-doing job creators ... that way we can have more people unemployed without benefits they depend on, less tax revenue and even more government dependency. In the mean time, the Trumps will still be wealthy. Way to help the working class, Deb!

How would not buying her shoes prevent her from moderating her father's views? Are you suggesting that she would only give advice if her businesses aren't hurt? That's kind of like extortion/black mail. It's certainly a conflict of interest.

 

[the_mother_thing]

Am I correct when I read that you are saying that you believe that Ivanka is so emotionally immature and volatile that she would abandon her core beliefs as a human being over a boycott and a business deal? And let's take this one step further, you are saying she will take those feelings of scorn and use them to influence the President of the United States...

Right.

No, you are not correct. That is not what I am saying nor advocating. See below.

How would not buying her shoes prevent her from moderating her father's views? Are you suggesting that she would only give advice if her businesses aren't hurt? That's kind of like extortion/black mail. It's certainly a conflict of interest.

I don't agree. Ivanka has no duty (official capacity or obligation) to provide input, opinion or influence to the President. That's why he has a cabinet ... comprised of members nobody here is singing the praises of.

As his daughter and a citizen of this country, she certainly CAN have a conversation with him about why she personally feels it's important to her that she support X, Y, or Z (as she seems to have done with regard to LGBT rights). It is also her right to NOT share those views with him. If she feels personally that she is being unfairly targeted by a group, she may come to decide that she no longer supports certain causes of that group because they violate HER beliefs by virtue of their actions - her right. And as such, she has no duty to continue advocating their importance when she has 'family night' with pops.

Why do I say she might feel unfairly targeted? Because:

1) she has not been found guilty of anything in court; and,

2) this "reaction" to her is largely because of her last name and who her father is. I bet the suit wouldn't have even been filed if he was not heading for the WH.

People change their positions on things all the time for a lot of reasons, especially about politics and social issues. BO & HRC were staunchly anti-gay marriage, until it came time to count votes. I was raised Catholic, and after seeing how some of my family was treated going through divorce and even at my grandmom's death, continuing to support the church was beyond my capability. If Ivanka begins to feel like she is targeted by the very people and groups she has advocated for, it is not out of the realm of possibility she may do the same, or at least, be less vocal about them. And it is absolutely her right to do so. Just like Chelsea probably had with her Secty of State mom while working for a hedge fund.

What I AM saying is - you have an advocate that is close to the President by virtue of being his spawn. Why whizz in her Wheaties BEFORE you have facts? That just seems downright dumb IMO. We (conservatives) had NOTHING close during BO's time in office.

 

[cmd2014]

Personally, as someone actively engaging in the #grabyourwallet campaign (as a participant, not an organizer), I'm simply choosing to spend my money with businesses whose policies, practices, and values align with mine. Just like I won't shop at Walmart because I don't agree with their business practices or their treatment of their employees, buy conflict diamonds, buy products that I think are harmful to the environment, or buy from companies that use child labor, advocate for discriminatory policies against access to birth control or against the LGBTQ community based on religious beliefs, or do not represent values in regard to other social issues that are important to me, I won't spend my money on Trump products or in stores supporting Trump products. I include Ivanka in this because rather than distancing herself from the expressed values that are abhorrent to her primary market base (i.e., primarily professional, urban, Gen X women who can afford her products and need a working woman's wardrobe such as what she sells - most of us who have had to deal with sexist, misogynistic jerks during the course of our careers), she actively represented the campaign and has been intregrally aligned with it in moving forward. So I am choosing to express my feelings on this in a way that I think has the most impact...businesses really only pay attention to their bottom line. Look at Uber. And I can't tell you how many women I know who feel the same. Trump is free to his expressed beliefs, the US is free to vote for whomever they feel will run their country well, Ivanka has the right to campaign for and support her dad, and I have a right to vote with my wallet in stores here and online about whose values I will financially support.

 

[t-c]

How would not buying her shoes prevent her from moderating her father's views? Are you suggesting that she would only give advice if her businesses aren't hurt? That's kind of like extortion/black mail. It's certainly a conflict of interest.

I don't agree. Ivanka has no duty (official capacity or obligation) to provide input, opinion or influence to the President. That's why he has a cabinet ... comprised of members nobody here is singing the praises of.

As his daughter and a citizen of this country, she certainly CAN have a conversation with him about why she personally feels it's important to her that she support X, Y, or Z (as she seems to have done with regard to LGBT rights). It is also her right to NOT share those views with him. If she feels personally that she is being unfairly targeted by a group, she may come to decide that she no longer supports certain causes of that group because they violate HER beliefs by virtue of their actions - her right. And as such, she has no duty to continue advocating their importance when she has 'family night' with pops.

Why do I say she might feel unfairly targeted? Because:

1) she has not been found guilty of anything in court; and,

2) this "reaction" to her is largely because of her last name and who her father is. I bet the suit wouldn't have even been filed if he was not heading for the WH.

People change their positions on things all the time for a lot of reasons, especially about politics and social issues. BO & HRC were staunchly anti-gay marriage, until it came time to count votes. I was raised Catholic, and after seeing how some of my family was treated going through divorce and even at my grandmom's death, continuing to support the church was beyond my capability. If Ivanka begins to feel like she is targeted by the very people and groups she has advocated for, it is not out of the realm of possibility she may do the same, or at least, be less vocal about them. And it is absolutely her right to do so. Just like Chelsea probably had with her Secty of State mom while working for a hedge fund.

What I AM saying is - you have an advocate that is close to the President by virtue of being his spawn. Why whizz in her Wheaties BEFORE you have facts? That just seems downright dumb IMO. We (conservatives) had NOTHING close during BO's time in office.

But there are still ethical (i.e. conflicts of interest) considerations with her advising the President. Why would she have needed to remove herself from management of Ivanka Trump fashion and Trump Organization? She, at least, is aware of the potential ethical quandary.

Am I correct when I read that you are saying that you believe that Ivanka is so emotionally immature and volatile that she would abandon her core beliefs as a human being over a boycott and a business deal? And let's take this one step further, you are saying she will take those feelings of scorn and use them to influence the President of the United States...

Right.

No, you are not correct. That is not what I am saying nor advocating. See below.

If Ivanka begins to feel like she is targeted by the very people and groups she has advocated for, it is not out of the realm of possibility she may do the same, or at least, be less vocal about them.

 

[ruby59]

That would be so cool!

Right! I don't have any of her stuff, but I do like her style, AND she is an advocate for women and equality. Perhaps Nordstrom's competitors who DO carry her items would like a sudden infusion of cash from purchases of her line. I may have to go shopping as soon as I feel up to it.

If you like the style of someone who rips off other people's designs, then you better get out there fast, because Neiman Marcus is dropping her too, and I'm not sure how many other "competitors" exist at that level, lol.

https://www.google.com/amp/abcnews.go.com/amp/Politics/nordstrom-drops-ivanka-trumps-clothing-collection-citing-brands/story%3Fid%3D45241255

(Link includes Neiman info).

I find this a little amusing because over in Rocky Talk people are asking about how to copy ring designs all the time.

Posting as someone who works in an industry where intellectual property is an issue, I do think there are grey areas around copying someone else's designs, although in the instance of Pricescope, most of the original designs are already riffs on other designs . That said, a one-off copy for your own personal use is a completely different entity from mass production for profit.

I go to a jeweler and ask for a knock off. Does he do it for free. He also makes copies for other customers, at a price.

He is selling multiples of knockoffs for profit.

One at a time or mass produced. What is the difference anyway? You are ripping off other people designs. And I have seen many pieces of jewelry here that would fit the description.

 

[AGBF]

2) Yes, that's it, shut them down ... those mean, evil-doing job creators ... that way we can have more people unemployed without benefits they depend on, less tax revenue and even more government dependency.

I didn't buy into the snake oil Trump was selling about how he was going to help the American workers. So far in his glorious career he has mainly "helped" workers overseas manufacture products (like his ties). And at wages that exploited those workers. Trump is a stingy b*stard who doesn't want to help any workers in any country. So please don't try to tell me that closing down his factories will hurt any Americans. It's risible.

 

[the_mother_thing]

But there are still ethical (i.e. conflicts of interest) considerations with her advising the President. Why would she have needed to remove herself from management of Ivanka Trump fashion and Trump Organization? She, at least, is aware of the potential ethical quandary.

I don't see one because she does not hold an advisory role. She is his daughter. Should he cut her off from communication for the duration of his presidency? Again, Chelsea worked for a hedge fund while HRC was SoS, and I suspect they had conversations (remember HRC shared info re:Benghazi with Chelsea via email before informing the public?). If that wasn't a conflict of interest, I'm really not sure how this is.

Now if she had a formal/official role - Policy Advisor on Social Issues or some such - whole different ball of wax. There may be restrictions on her as his daughter that prevent certain things (accept foreign gifts or make donations to certain entities), but she is his daughter, an adult, and free to have a career. And she is free to have father-daughter discussions just as anyone else, IMO.

 

[the_mother_thing]

I didn't buy into the snake oil Trump was selling about how he was going to help the American workers. So far in his glorious career he has mainly "helped" workers overseas manufacture products (like his ties). And at wages that exploited those workers. Trump is a stingy b*stard who doesn't want to help any workers in any country. So please don't try to tell me that closing down his factories will hurt any Americans. It's risible.

But it won't really "hurt" Trump; it will hurt a lot of innocent people around the world, people who work in his company, his hotels, golf courses, etc. because they need to. You could shut his doors tomorrow, and he and his family will live quite well for several generations (with secret service protection). The tens of thousands of employees, not so much. You're suggesting 'cutting off your nose to spite your face' in an attempt to stick it to one man and his family at the expense of innocent people - in this country & others, including immigrants.

You're entitled to feel how you do; I guess I am just genuinely troubled (and shocked really) that you would even think of such vindictiveness (while also advocating the illegality of the immigration ban no less). I sincerely thought you were above that, Deb.

 

[AGBF]

You're entitled to feel how you do; I guess I am just genuinely troubled (and shocked really) that you would even think of such vindictiveness (while also advocating the illegality of the immigration ban no less). I sincerely thought you were above that, Deb.

I am rather appalled that you can feel I am personally doing something wrong, or have some moral flaw. I feel that this is the way the world works and that it is naive not to realize it. One has to hit Trump in his pocketbook. That is what he would do. I am absolutely not doing it out of vindictiveness, but out of patriotism and a desire to defend the Constitution.

I am also defending the Constitution from an illegal attempt by the president to ban refugees of specific national origin by executive order.

 

[t-c]

But there are still ethical (i.e. conflicts of interest) considerations with her advising the President. Why would she have needed to remove herself from management of Ivanka Trump fashion and Trump Organization? She, at least, is aware of the potential ethical quandary.

I don't see one because she does not hold an advisory role. She is his daughter. Should he cut her off from communication for the duration of his presidency? Again, Chelsea worked for a hedge fund while HRC was SoS, and I suspect they had conversations (remember HRC shared info re:Benghazi with Chelsea via email before informing the public?). If that wasn't a conflict of interest, I'm really not sure how this is.

Now if she had a formal/official role - Policy Advisor on Social Issues or some such - whole different ball of wax. There may be restrictions on her as his daughter that prevent certain things (accept foreign gifts or make donations to certain entities), but she is his daughter, an adult, and free to have a career. And she is free to have father-daughter discussions just as anyone else, IMO.

What is Chelsea's interest in Benghazi? How did knowing about Benghazi benefit her?

I do not understand how you can so easily find a conflict of interest with Hillary talking to Chelsea, but are blind to Ivanka's conflict of interest with her talking to her father. Specially if Ivanka ties exercise of influence to her business (a direct interest), as you suggest she might do if she gets annoyed enough with people boycotting her products.

 

[the_mother_thing]

I am rather appalled that you can feel I am personally doing something wrong, or have some moral flaw. I feel that this is the way the world works and that it is naive not to realize it. One has to hit Trump in his pocketbook. That is what he would do. I am absolutely not doing it out of vindictiveness, but out of patriotism and a desire to defend the Constitution.

I am also defending the Constitution from an illegal attempt by the president to ban refugees of specific national origin by executive order.

It is BECAUSE I 'know' you (on here) to always looking out for people, that I am surprised your disgust for one man somehow justifies potentially harming the lives of tens of thousands of innocent people, just like how you object to this one 'law' that ALSO effects tens of thousands of innocent people.

In essence, what you suggested is doing the nearly the same thing as Chump (minus the EO) - crushing many to make your point. THAT is not the person I thought you to be.

 

[the_mother_thing]

What is Chelsea's interest in Benghazi? How did knowing about Benghazi benefit her?

I do not understand how you can so easily find a conflict of interest with Hillary talking to Chelsea, but are blind to Ivanka's conflict of interest with her talking to her father. Specially if Ivanka ties exercise of influence to her business (a direct interest), as you suggest she might do if she gets annoyed enough with people boycotting her products.

It's not so much boycotting her products; plenty of non-politically-affiliated businesses are on the receiving end of such wrath. Ivanka is not blind to how the very people she's largely associated, aligned & supported re: social issues with are speaking of and treating her father, and that treatment (shoes/lawsuit aside) has also been bleeding over to her, her brothers, Melania ... even their 10 yr old son.

Blood is (usually) thicker than water, and what happens to us & our loved ones does influence/shape our experiences, opinions & actions - in this case, I mean Ivanka's actions; not Chump's.

Let's first lay out both situations:

HRC was a very senior Gov't Offical as SoS. She has an adult daughter who worked for Wall Street (I haven't been able to find exactly what her role was working for the hedge fund/Avenue Capital Group, and it doesn't matter - she was an employee).

Chump is also a very senior Gov't Official as Prez. He has an adult daughter who owns her own company.

As adults (per gov't ethics & conduct rules), neither Chelsea nor Ivanka is under any requirement to quit their jobs, change careers, etc.

Both HRC & Chump are allowed to converse with their children about what's going on in their lives, how are the kids, etc. and must observe gov't ethics & conduct policies.

Now, the 'historical' precedent vs. the hypothetical:

HISTORICALLY: HRC talked/emailed with Chelsea as any mother would/does; however, as SoS - she also sent an email to Chelsea informing her (before the rest of the world knew the attack even happened) that the attack in Benghazi was terrorism. Chelsea - as a non-government official and private citizen - had no 'need to know' that information especially before a public statement was issued to the press/country, and HRC had a duty to not disclose it - regardless of whether it was at the time or later classified. No charges were filed, and no one was found guilty. Chelsea may not give a hoot about Benghazi, but her working for 'wall street' and later NBC introduces the potential ethical concerns that she may use that information to her, her company's, or investors' benefit with regard to trades, news leaks, etc. (companies that not surprisingly also were heavy donors to democratic campaigns). I won't go into the additional allegations re: her husband (also a money manager) and his possible ethical concerns re: investments & politics. My point is - a precedent for behavior & what is acceptable has been set.
Sources (for whom many here consider 'credible'):
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2006-11-05/news/0611050352_1_chelsea-clinton-hedge-sen-hillary-rodham-clinton
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/23/business/dealbook/for-clintons-a-hedge-fund-in-the-family.html?_r=0
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/05/us/politics/clinton-emails.html

But this isn't about 'the damn emails' as Bernie said; it's about relationships, the things that happen in them, and ethics (thus the email example). If you have no problem with the above having taken place, I'm hard pressed to understand what problem you might have with this one:

HYPOTHETICALLY: Chump talks/emails regularly with Ivanka. He's used to hearing about her kids, what fundraiser she's attending (many of which are socially liberal). In addition to the clear hatred by half the country for all things 'Chump', for which Ivanka is also on the receiving end (yea, I get it, that's politics, suck it up - I agree), Ivanka is now being sued. Note: she has not settled nor admitted any wrongoing, and gets her day in court per our justice system. In the mean time, because half of the country has bloodlust for all things Chump (the same half she just so happens to agree politically with) they start targeting Ivanka. Ivanka gets tired of the crap and being targeted unfairly for her father's actions (not her own), and decides that she can no longer support people who treat others in stark contrast with their purported platform. Chump calls her for their weekly chat, she mentions as part of their usual convo topics that she's shifting her personal politics to be less supportive of the left, and more middle or even right because of their behavior.

Liberals - by virtue of their own behavior - no longer have a socially liberal cheerleader's views (and whose opinions El Cheeto heavily respects) bending his ear on a Friday night. I'm not saying he WOULD or SHOULD base U.S. policy solely off what his daughter thinks/does; he absolutely should not. But she is a citizen, and he was elected by citizens to represent them, so if she went down that hypothetical rabbit hole & transformation of 'core beliefs' - she could be viewed as representative of how many in this country have done an about-face of sorts on their 'political leanings' and helped elect him, and just makes HIS perceived case stronger for his resulting actions.

 

[partgypsy]

Honestly I don't know what influence Ivanka has over Trump senior. She's his daughter, but she may possibly inherit from him so she is not going to do anything to distance herself or make or less likely to inherit, etc. That's why he surrounds himself with family and other people who will not tell him the truth, but what he wants to hear. I think he hears the things that reinforces his views, not so sure about views or beliefs that differ. If he isn't going to listen to 3 million women who marched in Washington the day after his inauguration, well...he's not listening.

Boycotting Ivanka's shoes will probably not make a whit of difference. On the other hand, we have become the laughingstock and also a focus of fear and uncertainty around the world due to Trump and Bannon's reckless actions. I would simply feel ashamed and weird to wear anything that has the name "Trump" on it, even if I thought the product was attractive and I liked the particular Trump who was selling the product. I'm sure many others feel the same.

 

[momhappy]

Ugh. This sort of thing is rampant these days. Delete your Uber account, boycott Starbucks, etc. People can choose to do what they want, but I'm not going to stop shopping at Nordstrom (in opposition to Trump), not boycotting Starbucks (in support of Trump), and not deleting my Uber account (in opposition to Trump). None of those things have anything to do with my political opinions. I don't know anything in particular about Ivanka's line. I tend to buy high-end shoes, so it's not a brand that I would typically shop for anyways. I enjoy Nordstrom and will continue to do so with or without Ikanka Trump.

 

[redwood66]

Politics is weaving its way into everything, more so than normal. Whatever the reason for her being dropped, it is their prerogative.

I first learned of #grabyourwallet when they added one of my favorite stores, LL Bean, because one of the Bean family members, not the company, donated to Trump. Now I use it as a list of where to SPEND my money.