An Intro to the “New Wave of Political Branding & Design”

Politically charged design in the modern era can be traced back generations. One of the most famous movements, however, came in post World War I Germany. As Germany was trying to move on from the first World War, their country became extremely divided, the Nazi party began to form. With this formation came their obsession with Fraktur, “the true German font” which was picked largely because of its roots in “gothic script that had been synonymous with German nationlist identity…” (Quartz News). On the opposite end of the spectrum stood the Avant Garde artists that were beginning to change the landscape and develop what we see now as eurocentric modern design, the Bauhaus. Bauhaus design stemmed from an anti-Nazi belief and moved purposfully agaisnt the grain of the heavy, black ancient-feeling facist design. From there grew a battle of aesthetics, but the goal was more than just an appearance, it was to sway a country in two drastically different directions. This battle is a great example of design being used to not only carry a message, but to give the speaker a remarkably recognizable identity.

Over the years political design has evolved. In America during the mid 1960s and into the early 2000s, presidential lockups and logos worked their way into being more of a primary focus of many campaigns. But for nearly half a century, a majority of campaigns looked similar. It felt like political branding was solely focused on ensuring it looked good on a standard lawn sign and on bumper stickers, the design constantly in that typical rectangular shape. You can look at the Regan & Bush campaign logo from 1984 and put it right next to Gore & Leiberman from 2000 and easily point out the similarities. Between 1960 and 2004 the typefaces differed as design shifted. Design went from large serif display fonts to relatively boring and bold sans serifs–some of which sadly resemble Impact. Of course the shades of America’s standard red, white, and blue differed slightly from campaign to campaign but the difference is not entirely huge. It could be of course due to the limit of print design, and the possible color choices of print. Or even perhaps that print design demands larger type. Another possibility could be because the goal was to be as american as possible, after all it was a race to be the President of the United States.

I started looking at campaigns and noticed that the same blue and the same reds have been used since 1964 for presidential candidates. 

– JOSH HIGGINS

Regardless of what drove political design to be stagnant in that era, that all changed as we saw nearly 20 Democratic candidates emerge for the 2020 election. The push for more refreshing design can be traced back to Obama's 2008 branding. The colors, while still red white and blue, were shades we had never seen before. His design director, name, said he “...wanted the message to be ‘This guy is completely different than anybody that has come before him, or will probably come after him.’”  2020 canidate Kamala Harris has taken that idea and pushed it even further, with her bright orange-red, combined with a blue with dramatic purple undertones, all sitting on a bold yellow.

With this new wave of political design, we see less and less traditional American colors, along with a huge variety of typefaces. It’s truly refreshing, and quite obvious that it’s no longer about who’s the most american, but rather who each candidate is at their core. It is inspiring to see candidates choosing design that truly represents who they are as people.

In previous campaigns, I think [campaign design] was mostly about trying to falsely attach what you stand for to "Be American." While thats important, whats even more important is representing who you really are. Weather thats color or design or other communications. 

– JOSH HIGGINS

Why is it changing now though? Well, design exists differently now. The print era is behind us and the internet age is very much here. We are so deep into the world of designing for technology that we no longer let print influence digital, but rather we are looking to digital to influence print. Social media and the internet very much drive political campaigns now. The design needs to live there first, and be successful there if it wants to do the same in print. 

Political design has a place in pop culture now, but it goes beyond branding. It has to be recognizable across all channels and platforms. The design truly needed to move past the rut it was in. It wasn't a choice of change or be left behind, it was a swift push in the back, a forced change by the evolving landscape of media, and the package it comes in. The branding is the first step but it goes beyond that.

sources: 

Blanda, Sean. “Obama's Former Design Director on What It Will Take to Win 2020.” Josh Higgins: 

Obama's Former Design Director on the New Wave of Political Branding , InVision, 14 May 2019.

Quartz News. Bauhaus Design Is Everywhere, but Its Roots Are Political. YouTube, uploaded by Quartz, 13 Sept. 2019, www.youtube.com/watch?v=X59FCW3vOlE.