To expand upon an earlier examination of the logos for Obama and McCain (on this site), check out this article from Design Bay.
The article is called “Study of Symbolism and Tradition in US Presidential Logos.” It starts off with “a quantitative analysis of frequently used attributes and symbolism in US presidential campaign logos of both successful candidates and unsuccessful candidates during the years 1984 to 2004.” Then the researchers take what they learned from past presidential races (and the corresponding logos) and they apply it to the Obama, McCain, and Hillary Clinton logos.
To cut to the chase, their study finds that Obama is going to win by a landslide. OK, ok… I know that the researchers didn’t say that specifically; I took their findings one step further. What the researchers said was their study found “that Barack Obama’s logo has more ‘positive’ attributes” as compared to John McCain’s logo.”
Even though the article uses “quantitative analysis” in the first sentence, it’s a short, easy-to-understand story.
Filed under: Design, Politics | Tagged: advertising, Branding, Logo, McCain, Obama, presidential logos, Scott Sherman, symbolism, VCU |
The study is incorrect, for what it’s worth. George H.W. Bush in 1988, Bill Clinton in 1992, George W. Bush in 2000, and Barack Obama in 2008 all had “FOR PRESIDENT” on their official primary campaign posters. All won and went on to win the presidency.
…Once candidates win the nomination and choose a running mate, they naturally drop “for president” since there are now 2 names on the poster and since it’s patently obvious to everyone what they’re running for.