this is sort of off topic so Ill err on the side of safety
does anyone have a problem with Obama’s use of graphic design to develop a much stronger “brand” for himself during his campaign, because appealing to the younger voters requires slicker advertising due to our accustomness to appropriate graphic design and also our expectation that images thrown at us are of the highest caliber?
Also does this set a precedent of best ads equal voter turnout? And if so do we want to lend this advantage to any or all candidates? Do we want our nation run by an electorate that is making its decisions the same way they buy shoes and electronic devices?
Plus the Executive branchis symbolic in comparison to the Legislative or Judicial branch in my opinion. So I tend to vote more on character–someone who will inspire the people and congress. That sounds like brand to me! Washington, Lincoln, Kennedy etc. were all brands.
Consider how limited their “actual” power is:
May veto laws
May refuse to spend money allocated for certain purposes
Wages war (but cannot start them)
Makes decrees or declarations
Appoints judges
Has power to grant pardons to convicted criminals
Would you propose a “double blind” voting system where we only choose the issues that matter to us and the candidate who is most closely associated with those issues wins? I did a survey like that on the web and although I liked the candidate it picked for me based on the issues, there’s no way I’d vote for them based on their behaviors.
Far more disturbing to me than branding is the amount of personal money that candidates are allowed to use, giving the rich a clearly unfair advantage over the poor.
True, money can buy good designers. But in politics, as in business, it often doesn’t. Were it otherwise, presidential campaigns would be shining examples of top-notch graphic design, and a boon to the graphics profession. Judging by the stuff we saw in '04…it ain’t.
The main thing you can read, then, is not that Obama has more money, but that he considers hiring good designers a worthwhile use of that money. Does this make him a better candidate? Probably not. But at least we’d get a better looking whitehouse.gov out of the deal…
does anyone have a problem with Obama’s use of graphic design to develop a much stronger “brand” for himself during his campaign, because appealing to the younger voters requires slicker advertising due to our accustomness to appropriate graphic design
With all due respect to Mr. Obama, and with absolutely no insinuation, or association, it would not be the first time avante garde graphic design was used in “politics”.
a personal opinion here but I often think that the money that has gone into the campaigning is not a good way to show that they genuinely care for the people. The millions could have put into a much better and wholesome use for others who really need it.
The best way to win the race is to show who you are, what you do, and what you will do to solve the problems.
um im not sure that would work. Kind of one of those situations like there are no wrong answers, but thats definitely not it.
Obama for instance just says he is change we can believe in, but what is he changing? no one knows. I am from Illinois, and I can tell you we invented corruption in chicago, and then we came up with a really good ad campaign and sold it to the rest of the country.
the guy, or gal who spends his campaign money on good deeds will lose, like wes clark a few years ago. Everyone here can think of some candidate they know would have been perfect that didn’t even make it out of the gate. I think my question is geared towards is it right to get the youth fired up using slick campaign materials when we have no idea whats going on?
of course it is if you want to get elected, but is it a good idea for us a nation, i doubt it.
posted this to another thread but meant to put it here-
I haven’t been watching it much, but caught a bit last night. I have to say, overall I was most impressed with the graphic design of the DNC logos and banners. Very retro with a futura like font and new deal / WPA type banner graphics!
every banner/placard in the audience also echoed this great typography.
amazing what a cohesive brand the campaign is running, from the original Obama logo using Optima to the new Obama/Biden logo…
Oh… I remember discussing that “guy” in college. They created a complete visual identity, even changed the meaning of a very old symbol. Too bad that it was used for that purpose, but it was still very well thought out.
Good design doesn’t mean good politics, but it will be remembered.
Obama was using Gotham for his slogans & Perpetua for his logo and McCain is using Optima. I just looked it up and this new Obama/Biden logo is apparently sarif-ed Requiem.
The constistency of the brand graphics has been remarkable. Whoever was in charge deserves a lot of credit, maybe a reality show.
The ‘pastures of plenty’ style is really appropriate considering how it looks like the we’re going to get a big revival of the bureaucratic welfare state.
LOL damnit! your post was so informed and well written until that last line! Thats the whole point, the guy is going to win on PR and well thought out graphic design, not on his stance on issues.
The power of packaging. I saw your other crack about the toilet of the midwest - funny - I’m originally from nearby. Illinois turned into a single party central planning collective years ago so if you want to see a preview of the new regime look no further.
I try to keep a sense of humor. the entire Midwest is not a toilet, most of my family is from the Quad Cities, and my folks always refer to the QC as the “toilet”
But seriously, I am no Obama fan, but I am repulsed my the belief system of most republicans so who should I vote for? Thats really not the point though. I started this topic because I thought he was going to get by on good graphic design.
and as for dem’s screwing up Illinois, it is as George Ryan left it…
