Jeb Bush is extremely intelligent compared to his brother and it’s unfair that I psychologically was unable differentiate the two siblings even when his last name was left off the logo. Sorry. Not sorry.
Much like Hillary Clinton’s logo, the exclusion of last name demonstrates how Jeb Bush and his marketing firm are aware of the ongoing political climate of the American people’s uneasiness to taking several steps backwards towards monarchism. For some viewers the exclamation mark is overcompensation for excluding the last name. Other candidates who have family members previously elected to public office have omitted their last names from their logos. Jeb Bush and the people around him are bright and whatever their intentions were, their awful logo has us talking. Hillary Clinton received more press for having a terrible logo than if she would have had a “normal” logo. But this is gimmicky press and in the past gimmicks may work well in Hollywood and sales for companies but not in politics. Maybe things are changing in this direction.
I’d like to be a fly on the wall of a marketing firm’s meeting while they develop a logo for a presidential candidate; often times these fantasy meetings I conjured in my mind probably never take place. Instead some high profile campaigns most likely develop logos through the worst practice; an email thread from hell where a single designer gives their client some decent designs followed with the client sending 10 different emails with 10 different changes ruining a once decent design. This kind of presidential campaign has the same tenacity for designing a good brand as much as they would for a small local race in a town of 500 citizens.
Upon finalizing a logo, does anyone take a moment to brainstorm how their logo could be manipulated to become the butt of a joke or a parody? More often than not the answer is “no”. There is no way to make a logo completely safe from this problem but you shouldn’t make it too easy either. Taking a moment to brainstorm possible press aftermath after a logo’s debut is a moment well spent. I would hire a comedian or someone with some comedic creativity to brainstorm possibilities to improve my logo and overall branding.
A small amount of self-critiquing never hurt anyone. “Does this branding speak and relate to my audience?”, “Do these red stars look communist?”, “Does this logo resemble the shape of human private parts in any way?” If you’re going to adult in the adult world you have to politely ask yourself and your colleagues the hard questions. Nonetheless, some prefer to rot happily in an echo chamber with a penis shaped communist logo.
The tenure of Obama’s presidency has been one policy disaster after another. Regardless of your political affiliation or beliefs, if you are objective, you will accept Obama had the best presidential campaign logo in recent times. It was iconic and the design was impeccable. You better believe there were sketches, rough drafts, brainstorming, and then after some hours of brainstorming the designer came up with the idea for the right logo. Exceptional logos don’t happen instantly and they don’t happen through email threads from hell. No, I did not vote for Obama.
Good design is important and it’s important to know the difference between good design and bad design. Republican contenders are dragging their feet to catch up with democrats in regards to design and presentation (with the exception of the atrocious Hillary logo). For now the Republicans’ best hope of winning is that Hillary is a terrible candidate. Don’t forget how the media’s rose colored glasses work well on voters.