I know it took a lot of effort, but I wanted to welcome you back to respectable non-distorted blogging.  Now if only we can get Fox News and Rush Limbaugh to treat Obama fairly.

The Obama sun surely does herald the meme that it's a new day, and this is coming from a Hillary supporter. When one considers Obama's campaign in toto, including his speeches, his web site design, his campaign posters and his supporter-designed artwork, one comes away with one thing: Obama's public image is very heavily guarded, tended and shepherded. When I compare Obama's brand to Hillary's, I can't help but come away with the idea of slick v. conventional, interactive v. conventional, new v. conventional. This is not to say that conventional does not work, but in Obama's case, slick, interactive and new have helped him considerably in carving out a very sizable niche in the electorate.

But does Obama's brand work on large states? We have yet to see that. When I think of the workers in the Rust Belt corridor, Florida, New Jersey, New York and Texas, the exuberance of Obama's branding fails to effect any real feeling of potential change but instead is derided as representative of inexperience and smoke-and-mirrors. Smaller states with diverse classes of people have been more accepting of Obama's branding because of the disproportionate influence of the upper middle-class who appreciate Obama's change message. Connecticut in the east and Colorado in the west come to mind here.

Working-class and middle-class people appreciate conventionalism because they show up for work at the same time everyday, week in and week out. Hillary's campaign banked on conventionalism but did not plan for, especially in Iowa, the influence of the change message flowering among the upper classes and flowing down to the working class and middle class (her base). When Hillary wins Ohio and Texas, which she will (no matter how narrowly), the question will then be how can she prevent her base from being overtaken by Obama's change message. Will she change her brand (probably too late) or will she hope that her message continues to hold among the people she needs to reach?

Slightly off topic but just about linked- it's about Obama's appeal. Today, the Head of the UK Equalities public body has accused Obama of exploiting the racial divide and delaying the onset of a post-racial America. Whites are only voting for him because of 'slavery guilt' according to Mr Phillips. He likens Obama to Winfrey or Cosby as blacks who are 'tolerated but don't change anything.'

I find his comments ill-informed and ignorant but I thought they may be of interest:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/wo rld/us_and_americas/us_elections/article 3451323.ece

I was largely dismissive of marketing (through ignorance) until I went to Northwestern and learned about the importance of branding and marketing.  Great ideas/products/candidates have to be marketed effectively to get anywhere at a mass level.  

Another Axelrod pimp comment.  It was AKP&D that hired Sender.  Here's an interesting comparison from a 2007 NYT profile of Axelrod:

There are a variety of problems of political communication that the industry's operatives spend their time obsessing over.  One, which obsessed James Carville, is persuasion: How do you persuade people who believe one thing to believe another?  A second, the big one for Joe Trippi, is commitment: What motivates your party's loyalists to go to the polls in larger numbers?  But Axelrod has become animated by a more basic challenge of political communication, the problem of breaking through, of sounding different and new.  Axelrod says that the way to cut through all the noise is to see campaigns as an author might, to understand that you need not just ideas but also a credible and authentic character, a distinct politics rooted in personality. ("David breaks them down," Peter Giangreco, a Chicago direct-mail consultant who often works with Axelrod, told me. "Who is your mother? Who is your father? Why are you doing this?")  This, Axelrod says, is what Karl Rove understood about George W. Bush. "One of the reasons Bush has succeeded in two elections," Axelrod says, "is that in his own rough-hewn way he has conveyed a sense of this is who I am, warts and all."  For Obama, because of Senator Hillary Clinton's far-greater experience and establishment backing, this is a particularly essential project. "If we run a conventional campaign and look like a conventional candidacy, we lose," Axelrod says.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/magazi ne/01axelrod.t.html
 

Good article. This is something that a lot of candidates and campaigns should read, and then take to heart.

There are a lot of really creative young people and lots of creative class supporters in the centre left. They need to be consulted early and respected.

Branding, consistency and professionalism are vital to any campaign. Find what you can afford, and ask for help from creative types. If   you are a creative type, help like this can be a boon to your career,  and doesn't cost a damn thing, you could donate thousands of dollars, tens, hundreds of thousands of dollars to a campaign that won't cost you a cent.

The presentation is as important as the content in a campaign. Consistency matters. Once you have picked the look --Stay With It!!

And as I am further left than most here, I'm not talking about loosing or hiding the content of your message. In fact I think leading in a progressive manner now will be your best bet.

Thanks Jerome.

also had a sun logo. Here's a link to a picture of the button. http://www.encyclopedia.chicagohistory.o rg/pages/6360.html

I await the attacks from the same people praising you up stream when you say something criticizing him on some point.

particularly in getting hordes of young people to relate to Obama as the youth candidate.

I obviously know nothing about marketing, because I find the sunrise irritating and corporate-looking. Those "HOPE" yard signs everywhere with the sunrise O logo always made me wish someone would print up parodies that said HYPE.

I'm embarassed to admit it, but I always saw the sunrise as a cool sunrise logo.  I completely missed that the it is actually a Big O as well with the sun as the center hole in the O.  Impressive.

I'd just echo what Jerome says in terms of brand marketing. Oliver Willis about 4 years ago started promoting "Brand Democrat," the concept that the Democratic Party ought to have a really smart, hip, and strongly typed brand image. And he (and several contributors) came up with some wonderful advertising messages and a common logo. Great stuff. I'm not sure why it's so hard to find the "Brand Democrat" collateral now. Anyone know where it went?

Fast forward 4 years later, and the Obama campaign is doing much the same thing. It's a great idea. Presidents must be effective communicators in order to advance their issue agendas. Ronald Reagan certainly understood that.

If Obama becomes the nominee, I'll be very interested to see how the "brand" -- and that's not quite the right word actually -- evolves and shifts. It's fascinating to watch.

The Republicans aren't going to care about any of this.  Their goal will be to brand Obama as unfit and unprepared to be Commander in Chief.  They'll be doing it 24/7. Sunshine and lollipops won't help Obama at all.  

He was born in the Panama Canal Zone I believe, which would make him born on American controlled soil. Eitherway, children of military parents are natural born citizens regardless of whether their born in Japan, Germany, or South Korea so I don't think it'll be a big deal.

Really?

That's interesting as that has never been challenged in court.  A 527 should sue over this once he is the official nominee.  

There's no Tootsie Roll at the center of that lollipop: McCain was born on a military installation to two natural-born US citizen parents. There's very little chance a court would rule against him, and if one did, it would set an earth-shaking precedent that would have effects felt in many other policy areas by many other US citizens.

campaign, the best run campaign in modern primary history?

The only campaign I can think of that is close is Carter's in '76.  

Having seen the Obama operation in Iowa, New Hampshire, as CT, I would have to say that it is.  I have never seen anything like it in the last 30 years.

I'm just not sure what he can respond with.  So far his national security credentials boil down to the "superior judgement" he showed in one speech he made in 2002.  But the public expects the president to do things, not just talk. What has he done?  This isn't an attack.  I just see a huge problem for his campaign.

McCain's legitimacy to run for President? Give me a break.

A child born overseas is automatically a United States citizen if both parents are U.S. citizens.

In most cases the child is a citizen if one parent is a U.S. citizen.

(The parent who is a citizen must have been a U.S. citizen living in the United States for at least 10 years, five of which were after the age of 14.)

Years of military service count as years living in the United States regardless of where served. In each case, the State Department determines citizenship.

To establish a child's citizenship, the birth is reported to the nearest American consular office on the "Consular Report of Birth."

(Form FS-240, only one copy may be requested at the cost of $40.00) as soon after the birth as possible.

This report is prepared and filed by the parents; however, the physician or midwife attending the birth (or any other person having knowledge of the facts) can prepare the report.

The original document is filed with the Department of State, and the parents are given a copy of the report along with a short form showing the name and sex of the child and the date and place of birth. (This is called "Certificate of Birth," Form FS-545.)

http://www4.army.mil/outreach/gQuestions /

He admits to making a "boneheaded" mistake by doing his real-estate deal on his mansion in Chicao with an indicted developer, Tony Rezko, whom everyone knew was indicted at the time.

Was that "superior judgment?"

He can't deny that he voted to support funding the Iraq War on every single funding vote that came after his 2002 speech, which, of course, was made when he knew he didn't have to cast a vote on it.

Dennis Kucinish was actually in the House and voted against the AUMF. And, he then voted AGAINST FUNDING BILLS on the Iraq War every time.

So, where is Barack Obama's "superior judgment" on those funding bills?!

The man is a con. Pure and simple.

He is campaigning right now against NAFTA. He voted to expand NAFTA under the Peru Free Trade Agreement.

And, now, it's come to light on Canadian News, that he actually contacted a Canadian Minister to tell them not to worry about his anti-NAFTA rhetoric; it's really not true; it's just a campaign pitch...

The guy is a CON MAN. You don't know what you're getting til you open the package on Christmas morning in November. And, you may find it's nothing but a lump o' coal.

What a joke. I can't believe people are so gullible. You have been propagandized by a manipulative marketing master. Congratulations: Welcome to Obamacult.

I thought the blue arch was supposed to represent the "Obama wave" or something like that--not sure where I got that idea.

There is a reason the black and the Hispanic community have admired Hillary Clinton and they should be reminded of that.  I consider Sen. Obama to be nothing but a product pushing a script.  This back and forth between McCain and Obama about Iraq really showed Obama's contempt of common sense.  Obama said that he would put our troops back into Iraq if Al Qaeda resurfaces.  McCain pointed out the fact that they are already there and once again Obama reiterates his 5 year old position.  I wish he would answer the question-since Al Qaeda is already there will we need to remain in Iraq?
All this talk about character of a man no one knows anything about is disingenuous in it's self.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/35382 9,CST-NWS-rez23.article
Obama and his Rezko ties
April 23, 2007
BY TIM NOVAK Staff Reporter/tnovak@suntimes.com
For more than five weeks during the brutal winter of 1997, tenants shivered without heat in a government-subsidized apartment building on Chicago's South Side.
It was just four years after the landlords -- Antoin "Tony'' Rezko and his partner Daniel Mahru -- had rehabbed the 31-unit building in Englewood with a loan from Chicago taxpayers.
It was just four years after the landlords -- Antoin "Tony'' Rezko and his partner Daniel Mahru -- had rehabbed the 31-unit building in Englewood with a loan from Chicago taxpayers.
Rezko and Mahru couldn't find money to get the heat back on.
"Senator Obama does not remember having conversations with Tony Rezko (inset) about properties that he owned" -- Obama's campaign staff on Sunday.
(Sun-Times/AP)

But their company, Rezmar Corp., did come up with $1,000 to give to the political campaign fund of Barack Obama, the newly elected state senator whose district included the unheated building.
Obama has been friends with Rezko for 17 years. Rezko has been a political patron to Obama and many others, helping to raise millions of dollars for them through his own contributions and by hosting fund-raisers in his home.
Obama, who has worked as a lawyer and a legislator to improve living conditions for the poor, took campaign donations from Rezko even as Rezko's low-income housing empire was collapsing, leaving many African-American families in buildings riddled with problems -- including squalid living conditions, vacant apartments, lack of heat, squatters and drug dealers.
The building in Englewood was one of 30 Rezmar rehabbed in a series of troubled deals largely financed by taxpayers. Every project ran into financial difficulty. More than half went into foreclosure, a Chicago Sun-Times investigation has found.
Eleven of Rezko's buildings were in Obama's state Senate district.

A while ago on Sullivan's blog, he linked to some advertisers critiquing the logos of various candidates. To my knowledge these were just regular add people and not political add people.

The consensus on Obama's was that it was new and different, but that it looked like he was trying too hard. I can't remember who had the best, I think it might been Clinton.

I'm surprised that Jerome would have anything positive to say about Obama. Totally shocked.

The discipline of the Obama campaign has been amazing. As Jerome points out, their professionalism has been paramount throughout.

It's clear that in some ways Obama is running a new-ish campaign -- web focused, small donors, the 50 state strategy. So much did Dean and many other progressive hopes that fell like a stone. I think in hindsight, though, it will become clear that the greatest strength of the campaign was that it combined these new tools with an old-fashioned, pre-modern campaign strategy: rallies, ground game, direct mail, phone banks.

Clinton's campaign worked within a paradigm we've all become familiar with: win the big states, shape the media narrative, lock up the big donors, present yourself as inevitable. Most of all, focus on demographics, demographics, demographics; who you are tells me who you will vote for. So many people have been elected to office with this strategy. Many more probably will be. But I think the Obama brand -- which emerges from a commitment to persuade people, to woo them as thinking, feeling people, and not simply to target them as sub-populations -- shows that there is a lot of life in the pre-CNN politics.

How about just a straight up head shot of the candidate with no logo or graphic?  The man is gorgeous...

Interesting article. It points out that Hillary's "logo" or brand just shores up the notion that she doesn't know who she is.

The Canal Zone was US territory at the time.  Try something else.

there's -nothing- original about Obama.  Thanks for pointing that out (and this comes from a professional logo designer).

BTW, logo design costs money.  I see that that guy and his contest = no $.  No thanks.

Wow, I never would have guess that's a sun.  I just thought it was an "O" for Obama with a flag draped along the bottom.  Pretty cool.

Jerome:

You better double check ol Sol's quote here.

"He turned to a pro, Chicago-based branding firm Sender, and they turned it on."

Who is "he".  If Sol says it's Barack Obama's campaign, Sol might have some explaining to do.