The Candidates: By Design

Is anyone else out there feeling completely overwhelmed by this year's presidential election? I simply can't keep up with the various platforms, especially given the candidates' seeming collective aversion to addressing actual issues. In these situations, I can do one of two things: either curl up in the fetal position and take a news fast, or seek out an environment over which I have some control. In this case, that environment is the visual. So, here is my take on just a few of the candidates, based on the design of their websites and identities:



Let's start with Huckabee. There are so many different typefaces and type styles on this page that it creates an overall sense of clutter and visual pollution. And are those letterforms in his logo bastardized? Especially offensive is the design of the Help Mike Today box, in terms of typography, use of color and copy editing. Are you serious with "Become a Ranger"?


Moving onto McCain. Hmm, liberal use of military iconography; I can dig on that, since I'm an Air Force brat and unrepentant fan of Top Gun (ah, the halcyon days before we discovered that Tom Cruise is a babbling lunatic). I don't hate the use of Optima in his logo, but I'm not sure that I would have gone with the bold version. The black and white flag behind the logo is a bit moody and subtle; I appreciate the somewhat toned down color palette. But, again, type styles: way too many. The italic on the right sidebar is the worst.



Honestly, I don't even know where to begin with Romney. For God's sake: his photo is horizontally stretched on the home page! The eagle/flag hybrid seems like an over-the-top addition to his logotype. You're patriotic: we get it. Really, would a non-patriot actually run for president? Isn't that a given. Although, compared to McCain's and Huckabee's sites, the designer was positively restrained when it came to typefaces and type styles.



Just to prove I'm not all about Republican-bashing: here's Edwards's all about bold typefaces site. And what is it about that red: it's not quite right. A bit too muddy. I might be able to handle it were it not for the use of the green accent colour. That green is just terrible, especially when juxtaposed against the red. Why, why the green swoosh on the blue star? Why a third color? Aren't red and blue enough?



If I were Hillary (have you noticed that everyone calls her Hillary instead of Clinton: I'm sure this is due to a desire to avoid confusion with Bubba and not related to sexism in any way), I'd want The Eurythmics's Sisters are Doin' it for Themselves to be my theme song. Damn: Aretha Franklin AND Annie Lennox. I'm playing it right now and I feel strong and empowered, like I could be comin' out of the kitchen to be leader of the free world. Let me tell you, Hillary, sisters don't select logos with skinny, lame, waving flags. Three stars? I know it's iconographic, but it just looks weird. However, like Romney's site, at least there aren't a bazillion different typefaces. But, Hillblazers has got to go.



Then there's Obama. I don't know what kind of president he'd make, but this man knows how to hire a designer (or, at least his people do). The typography is, dare I say it: sophisticated and actually pretty. I'm not gradation crazy, but the soft blue gradients are used quite well throughout the site. The sunrise over the stripes of the flag: okay, not earth-shattering, but the logo is not offensive in any way. Check out the Make a Difference sidebar. I love these different iterations of the logo. If you click on States, you'll see that each state has its own logotype that incorporates the rising sun logo within the name of the state. I cannot tell a lie: this website makes me happy and gives me hope for the future of our country (from a design standpoint).

Just to be clear, Juiciful does not endorse Barack Obama for president, but we do endorse the designer of his identity and website. Nice work.