Interesting analysis at Good Magazine about what design says about the presidential candidates.
Author Ryan Bowman says:
“For politicians, design is the language they use to corroborate themselves, to confirm their public persona with the perfect color combination or the right font. It’s like an instant stump speech.”
The rundown:
Hillary is “ruthlessly efficient”
Edwards is “strong, considered, and competent but patently unexciting.”
Obama is “beautiful but empty”
The Republicans don’t fare any better. Read the whole article here.
We now know too much about the candidates to look at the designs with an empty mind - or at least I do. But Obama’s looks peaceful to me, like a country road. Hillary’s reminds me of strength and movement. Edwards? Blah.
But does it affect how I think about the candidates? I don’t think so. How about you?
Digg This
-
Design is beautifully, ruthlessly efficient. It is not necessary for the conscious mind to interact with appearance - though it often does - for you to form a very definite opinion about a person or place. The automobile you drive, the clothes you wear, the neighborhood in which you choose to live all have the power to reveal a portion of your personality. Even the style - the 'design' - of your writing and speech instantly confirm or deny an impression of your status, abilities and power. Think you don't like, want or have design in your life? That's a design statement, too!
