New Campaign Logo

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
There are campaign logos that had better art. Wu's logo either falls under dead last as the kind that has little effort or it looks like it was meant for some upscale store that has no relation to politics.

Curt Sibling said:
Wu's logo reeks of the typical "don't offend anyone" artistic rationale, which is devoid of taste and imagination...

Our own version is the height of sophistication, however.
Click to expand...
Our logo has more creativity than Wu's. Her logo lacks that sort of creativity. It's just her name in some weird font.
 
c-no said:
Our logo has more creativity than Wu's. Her logo lacks that sort of creativity. It's just her name in some weird font.
Click to expand...

It's a terrible logo because nothing about it lets the viewer know what it's even about. Even the shitty Hillary logo (that I think is visually uglier) lets you know you're looking at a candidate's logo for a P/VP ticket for the year 2016.
 
AnOminous said:
It's a terrible logo because nothing about it lets the viewer know what it's even about. Even the shitty Hillary logo (that I think is visually uglier) lets you know you're looking at a candidate's logo for a P/VP ticket for the year 2016.
Click to expand...

It's reminiscent of a mall shop that sells overpriced perfume to middle aged housewives.
 
This graphic doesn't identify 1) who/what is represents, 2) what it's promoting. Logos on things like campaign signs and bumper stickers are supposed to raise awareness that a person is running for a seat and to visually show that there are real people who support a candidate. There is nothing - nothing - in this graphic that even begins to accomplish any of these tasks.

If anything, it's counterproductive. This person is a candidate for federal office. Not only that, it's the House of Representatives - arguably the most important federal position that people vote on. A U.S. rep. lives in their community and only represents about 600,000 people. A rep is an advocate for this relatively small community, and constituents want to feel like they have something in common and share their values. A logo like this doesn't just fail as basic campaign messaging - it's actively hostile to voters. It's unapproachable. It's incoherent. It's fucking strange. It's absolutely perfect for Wu, but it shows how out of touch she is with voters. Over half of voters in Mass. Dem. primaries are over the age of 45 - this will repel them.

If Wu has any real intent to run an actual, competent campaign she'll drop this stupid idea. This is literally the worst campaign logo I have ever seen, and I've seen more than a few.
 
stets said:
This graphic doesn't identify 1) who/what is represents, 2) what it's promoting. Logos on things like campaign signs and bumper stickers are supposed to raise awareness that a person is running for a seat and to visually show that there are real people who support a candidate. There is nothing - nothing - in this graphic that even begins to accomplish any of these tasks.
Click to expand...

Logos are meant to go on things like signs in people's yards, simply so even if you're just casually driving around, you get to see people supporting some candidate. This means people are willing enough to put something in their front yard even though there's always some bunch of douches who go around stealing people's signs and similar shit.

Yet more evidence John is just cosplaying as a candidate because absolutely fucking nobody is going to put one of those dumbass things in their front yard.
 
AnOminous said:
Yet more evidence John is just cosplaying as a candidate because absolutely fucking nobody is going to put one of those dumbass things in their front yard.
Click to expand...

I doubt that anyone with a yard would be voting for him in the first place.
 
Is the W supposed to be a subliminal vulva (see the curved inside edges), perhaps implying "this candidate supports women and their issues first"?

That's the best theory I can muster as to the curious design choices. Is the rather phallic U supposed to balance out the... um... vulvaic (is that a word) W?
 
One "minor" thing about that logo that bothers me nevertheless is how the W is abruptly cut off on the left where I think it should either overlap with the lower-case I somehow or be serif-ed under the a.
 
AnOminous said:
Logos are meant to go on things like signs in people's yards, simply so even if you're just casually driving around, you get to see people supporting some candidate. This means people are willing enough to put something in their front yard even though there's always some bunch of douches who go around stealing people's signs and similar shit.

Yet more evidence John is just cosplaying as a candidate because absolutely fucking nobody is going to put one of those dumbass things in their front yard.
Click to expand...
Nobody's gonna steal this from a yard. Thieves will dump signs with this on yards of people they hate.
 
AnOminous said:
It's a terrible logo because nothing about it lets the viewer know what it's even about. Even the shitty Hillary logo (that I think is visually uglier) lets you know you're looking at a candidate's logo for a P/VP ticket for the year 2016.
Click to expand...
It looks like something an idiot gothy middle schooler would scrawl on the cover of her English notebook.

Considering that's John's feminine persona though I guess it makes sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom