The DNC logo is a train wreck
Ok, I can’t contain myself. The logo for the Democratic National Convention is a train wreck. The Democrats should be eager to cast off the negative stereotypes that they’ve accumulated since since Gore lost to Bush in 2000 — weak on defense issues, wishy-washy, too touchy-feely, disorganized, and unfocused. But this logo does exactly the ...
Ok, I can't contain myself. The logo for the Democratic National Convention is a train wreck. The Democrats should be eager to cast off the negative stereotypes that they've accumulated since since Gore lost to Bush in 2000 -- weak on defense issues, wishy-washy, too touchy-feely, disorganized, and unfocused. But this logo does exactly the opposite. The soft gradients and jumbled type only serve to reinforce those negatives. The colors are washed out. Red, white, and blue in a political context should never fade to pink and baby powder. It looks weak. Red is always a dangerous color to run to a gradient in a logo for that very reason. And while I'm talking about color, why is the sky a burning red? Has a nuclear bomb just gone off somewhere over the horizon? Has global warming gotten that bad already? The stars overweight the logo on the left side, making the whole thing feel too asymmetrical. They also remind me of the stars a cartoonist might draw over a character's head to indicate that he's had too much to drink. The tightly kerned sans-serif type is completely out of phase with all of Obama's materials, which provide for much more air between each character. The right side of the logo reminds me of Enron's Logo. I don't understand why those large chunks have been taken out of the mountains. Is it supposed to look like a plug or a puzzle piece? Why is the "0" so much bigger than the "8"? Yes, I'm sure that's the nature of the type they chose, but it looks terrible. This election is about the "8," not the "0" Why are there mountains anyway? I know they're there to tip the hat to Denver, the convention's host city -- but why? Is this convention being held for Denver or for the country as a whole? What would a successful logo contain? Strong, solid colors. Similar to the deep blue on Obama's materials. Clean, simple type. Go serif to make it different, but not too different. A horizon that looks like a sunrise, or some other imagery that points us to the future, not a nuclear holocaust. Hell, even some clichéd "21st century digital" bric-a-brack in the background would be better.
Ok, I can’t contain myself. The logo for the Democratic National Convention is a train wreck.
- The colors are washed out. Red, white, and blue in a political context should never fade to pink and baby powder. It looks weak. Red is always a dangerous color to run to a gradient in a logo for that very reason.
- And while I’m talking about color, why is the sky a burning red? Has a nuclear bomb just gone off somewhere over the horizon? Has global warming gotten that bad already?
- The stars overweight the logo on the left side, making the whole thing feel too asymmetrical. They also remind me of the stars a cartoonist might draw over a character’s head to indicate that he’s had too much to drink.
- The tightly kerned sans-serif type is completely out of phase with all of Obama’s materials, which provide for much more air between each character.
-
![]()
The right side of the logo reminds me of Enron’s Logo. I don’t understand why those large chunks have been taken out of the mountains. Is it supposed to look like a plug or a puzzle piece? - Why is the “0” so much bigger than the “8”? Yes, I’m sure that’s the nature of the type they chose, but it looks terrible. This election is about the “8,” not the “0”
- Why are there mountains anyway? I know they’re there to tip the hat to Denver, the convention’s host city — but why? Is this convention being held for Denver or for the country as a whole?
What would a successful logo contain?
- Strong, solid colors. Similar to the deep blue on Obama’s materials.
- Clean, simple type. Go serif to make it different, but not too different.
- A horizon that looks like a sunrise, or some other imagery that points us to the future, not a nuclear holocaust. Hell, even some clichéd “21st century digital” bric-a-brack in the background would be better.
More from Foreign Policy
Can Russia Get Used to Being China’s Little Brother?
The power dynamic between Beijing and Moscow has switched dramatically.
Xi and Putin Have the Most Consequential Undeclared Alliance in the World
It’s become more important than Washington’s official alliances today.
It’s a New Great Game. Again.
Across Central Asia, Russia’s brand is tainted by Ukraine, China’s got challenges, and Washington senses another opening.
Iraqi Kurdistan’s House of Cards Is Collapsing
The region once seemed a bright spot in the disorder unleashed by U.S. regime change. Today, things look bleak.
Sign up for Morning Brief
Foreign Policy’s flagship daily newsletter with what’s coming up around the world today. Delivered weekdays.
By submitting your email, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use and to receive email correspondence from us. You may opt out at any time.
