Secondly, does John McCain have a graphic designer on the payroll? Look, I'm not saying that political campaigns are won and lost on aesthetics alone, but as anyone familiar with the infamous Kennedy-Nixon debate, or for that matter the first two Bush-Gore debates, can tell you appearance in politics matters. Hell, its one of the reasons why shorter cnadidates always negotiate for higher platforms during standing debates, so America perceives them as being the same height as their opponent.
Now we all know that Brand Obama has been phenomenal. I mean, you know it took some top-tier Madison Avenue graphic designer to design this:
This is admittadly a minor detail of a political campaign, but one that should not be dismissed, particularly by Democrats. Case in point, Walter Mondale's 1988 political logo:
As pointed out in some NPR story rom a while back that I am too lazy to dig up, Mondale's biggest mistake was making Ferraro's name as large as his own. In addition to just being a bland design, you an;t really tell by looking at it who is meant to be President and who is teh Veep (or is it just some dude named "Mondale Ferraro" running? Sounds like a good name for a mid-morning talk show).Now today, Sen. John McCain named Alaska governor Sarah Palin as his Veep candidate. It's a really weird choice, not least of which is that it undercuts his most successful line of attack against Obama: that he is unready to lead. Can Obama really be called inexperienced if a 72 year old man (happy birthday today) with a history of health problems chooses Palin to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency? But this is an aside. What concerns me, as you have probably guessed by now is the logo.
Now before we look at McCain-Palin gear, let's take a look at how the pros do it:
Notice the sexy. In addition to all the tradition Obama-logo elements, Biden's name is slightly smaller and is light blue, deemphasizing Biden. You look at this thing and you immediately know who is in charge. Conservative bloggers site this as evidence of Obama's alleged ego:
The font color was a deliberate choice by the designers. Why not both names in stark white, the better to be seen clearly? It’s almost as though the Obama campaign wants to de-emphasize BidenHoly Crap! A Presidential campaign placing more emphasis on the guy who will be President than the one who will be mostly going to state funerals? Cuh-razy.
Now let's take a look at McCain-Palin logo:
OK. So you got the McCain military-star logo (although MR never tires of pointing out the disturbing similarity to the McCain food company logo). But then you have the candidates names in the exact same size. Palin is already a gifted and energetic speaker -- two things McCain is not. Why in the world would you make a logo like this for a candidate who, if she doesn't trip up on the big stage -- already has the potential to overshadow you in public speaches?
Admittadly, the lighter background near Palin's name is a nice touch to the whole thing, drawing the eye upwards a bit towards the McCain name, but then the bottom third is a big blue mess with URL. It's sort of like they glued two different button together. Weird.
Anyways, I know its not the biggest thing in the world, and I'm no expert in graphic design: just my two cents. But hey, if you wanted reasoned, serious political analysis you would have gone to FoxNews.
