Ron Paul Designs creator has new design for 2012 brand with eagle symbolism!

[sailingaway]

Yeah. And the campaign may not want to 'brand'.. I kind of hope they don't. But the grass roots do a bunch of stuff on our own. The R3VOLution logo didn't have anything to do with the campaign....

 

[eduardo89]

I want to buy that shirt

me too!

 

[FreedomProsperityPeace]

Cool design.

I want one NOW!

 

[PermanentSleep]

Cool design.

I want one NOW!

+1

Seriously, I want one of every color of every item. :collins:

 

[The Dark Knight]

Its sad but some people might vote for Ron because of this cool design, gotta get votes anyway we can

 

[brandon]

This is a very nice design. It may not be "conventional" enough for older voters. Not sure, I like it though.

 

[justinpagewood]

Ignore anything about Obama politics,

Scott Thomas explains why Obama's 2008 Design Concept was extremely important, and how they made it work:

http://vimeo.com/5943199

 

[sailingaway]

Ignore anything about Obama politics,

Scott Thomas explains why Obama's 2008 Design Concept was extremely important, and how they made it work:

http://vimeo.com/5943199

I've read that theory and even then thought it made Obama look like a Madison Avenue produced product.

Which doesn't mean I don't like this design, I do. I'd get two of the shirts (red and black). But I think 'branding' a candidate is dehumanizing and removes them even further from being identified with by the electorate. That is just my opinion.

 

[RPIdeaMan08]

Please make these as soon as possible... i want to strap one on my back when i ride my ride, i can get a light for it at night

 

[justinpagewood]

I've read that theory and even then thought it made Obama look like a Madison Avenue produced product.

Which doesn't mean I don't like this design, I do. I'd get two of the shirts (red and black). But I think 'branding' a candidate is dehumanizing and removes them even further from being identified with by the electorate. That is just my opinion.

Ya, I do understand that point, and that's why I am torn.

On the one had, we want the campaign to be taken seriously by everyone in the country. We want new people, Democrats and Independents and Republicans, to be impressed with the campaign, and have one more reason why people would want to look into the movement.

On the other hand, the idea of being completely unorganized and 100% grassroots makes sense philosophically. But if that's the case, then Ron's campaign should almost be anti-design. They should do as little as possible to brand themselves. Their website should be insanely minimal. The whole campaign should just be Ron and a few people managing him flying from debate to debate, give speeches, etc. But then, who will make GOOD videos of his speeches? Who will take decent Photographs? Who will write good Press Releases. The fact is, whatever he does will have an "appearance." And there's simply no way to make that not the case.

I guess I need to really think about this. If Ron does run, and with no central branding strategy, then their campaign needs to make that point. Because in 2008, they did not stress that at all. They simply did poor branding, but it was branding nonetheless.

 

[Dave Aiello]

Original poster: I may be wrong, but it looks like you may have used a bitmap in your design. The campaign shouldn't adopt a design that isn't a vector, as they will need a highly scalable logo. You should vectorize it if it isn't already 100% vector.

 

[Dissident]

Great work. I really like the concept, colors, and simplicity.

My only small suggestion is to use a different serif font. Several letters look clumsy.

 

[sailingaway]

Ya, I do understand that point, and that's why I am torn.

On the one had, we want the campaign to be taken seriously by everyone in the country. We want new people, Democrats and Independents and Republicans, to be impressed with the campaign, and have one more reason why people would want to look into the movement.

On the other hand, the idea of being completely unorganized and 100% grassroots makes sense philosophically. But if that's the case, then Ron's campaign should almost be anti-design. They should do as little as possible to brand themselves. Their website should be insanely minimal. The whole campaign should just be Ron and a few people managing him flying from debate to debate, give speeches, etc. But then, who will make GOOD videos of his speeches? Who will take decent Photographs? Who will write good Press Releases. The fact is, whatever he does will have an "appearance." And there's simply no way to make that not the case.

I guess I need to really think about this. If Ron does run, and with no central branding strategy, then their campaign needs to make that point. Because in 2008, they did not stress that at all. They simply did poor branding, but it was branding nonetheless.

But WE can brand, we branded the revolution, and now that has kind of been stolen (not the word, but the indicia of the American Revolution). Even if the campaign doesn't brand doesn't mean there aren't popular sales and use on his behalf. I think he should be anti-brand, but with good videos. I don't see a reason for bad videos. HE doesn't have to look like he works off cardboard boxes, the idea is that the spontaneous order of the movement he inspires is creatively driven. I want those shirts; don't take them away!

 

[Ray]

Ehh ehh?

 

[Romulus]

Ya, I do understand that point, and that's why I am torn.

On the one had, we want the campaign to be taken seriously by everyone in the country. We want new people, Democrats and Independents and Republicans, to be impressed with the campaign, and have one more reason why people would want to look into the movement.

On the other hand, the idea of being completely unorganized and 100% grassroots makes sense philosophically. But if that's the case, then Ron's campaign should almost be anti-design. They should do as little as possible to brand themselves. Their website should be insanely minimal. The whole campaign should just be Ron and a few people managing him flying from debate to debate, give speeches, etc. But then, who will make GOOD videos of his speeches? Who will take decent Photographs? Who will write good Press Releases. The fact is, whatever he does will have an "appearance." And there's simply no way to make that not the case.

I guess I need to really think about this. If Ron does run, and with no central branding strategy, then their campaign needs to make that point. Because in 2008, they did not stress that at all. They simply did poor branding, but it was branding nonetheless.

I get that, but 90% of the voting population won't. Choosing not to brand, is still a brand - just on a disconnected level. We really have to look at the target audience, and its everyone, so how do you make that work? That is the the challenge, but it can be done.

Obama 08 proved that branding important. Do I think we need a "logo"? No. But the campaign needs consistency. After all, is RP himself Mr. Consistent? Then why shouldn't the design that represents him?

If what we are about to do is going to be something special, then we need to push the limits and embrace a strong unified brand that is consistent, along with grassroots creativity. I think the 2 can coexist in harmony.

But WE can brand, we branded the revolution, and now that has kind of been stolen (not the word, but the indicia of the American Revolution). Even if the campaign doesn't brand doesn't mean there aren't popular sales and use on his behalf. I think he should be anti-brand, but with good videos. I don't see a reason for bad videos. HE doesn't have to look like he works off cardboard boxes, the idea is that the spontaneous order of the movement he inspires is creatively driven. I want those shirts; don't take them away!

Do you see what you did there? People crave and are drawn to good design, whether they support "branding" or not. The fact remains that branding does work, and when selling ideas, branding them consistently and effectively represent them, is crucial.

 

[sailingaway]

I get that, but 90% of the voting population won't. Choosing not to brand, is still a brand - just on a disconnected level. We really have to look at the target audience, and its everyone, so how do you make that work? That is the the challenge, but it can be done.

Obama 08 proved that branding important. Do I think we need a "logo"? No. But the campaign needs consistency. After all, is RP himself Mr. Consistent? Then why shouldn't the design that represents him?

If what we are about to do is going to be something special, then we need to push the limits and embrace a strong unified brand that is consistent, along with grassroots creativity. I think the 2 can coexist in harmony.



Do you see what you did there? People crave and are drawn to good design, whether they support "branding" or not. The fact remains that branding does work, and when selling ideas, branding them consistently and effectively represent them, is crucial.

You are misrepresenting it. I am drawn to the branding on a shirt, I am repulsed by branding on a candidate. Really, really repulsed.

 

[sailingaway]

I heard Ron address this point in an interview after the campaign, and you could tell how thrilled he was that it was so homespun and disorganized and decentralized. He said he had always been told that what you have to do is get a logo, a symbol, a theme and put it on everything you put out, on signs on bumperstickers on campaign literature. He said that hadn't happened in his campaign, it was spontaneous and he thought it worked out pretty well.

Ron is anti-central planning anti stagy and 'real'. I think it would do him a disservice to 'package him'. I think great shirts are a great idea though. And I think well made media, whether a web site or video is not branding, it is just expected.

 

[justinpagewood]

Exactly. If Ron Paul's campaign does any branding at all, which it inherently must it if publishes anything, then it should be a strong branding concept. Otherwise, it should be intentionally very simple and minimalist. Not necessarily ugly. I drew up a concept image for a Website design to explain my point.

 

[justinpagewood]

Oh ya, and it needs a Donate button.

 

[Legend1104]

I still like the design anyway.