This year, designers and critics following Scher’s lead have generally swooned over the graphics of the Obama campaign (Obama’s web designer himself is now a rising star) while granting McCain and Clinton fewer laurels. If the presidential contest were an art school critique, Obama would win in a landslide. It’s not, and he won’t, but in a race that remains unresolved, graphic analyses might again chart the outcome of the election or the personalities of the candidates, or at least provide a distraction on this primary election day. Minnesota Monitor asked Twin Cities graphic designers Pat Thompson and Mark Simonson to review the campaigns’ signs, stickers and Web sites. Read below the jump for some of their remarks.

Continued: Click “Read more”PAT THOMPSON: The subconscious message [of Clinton's flag] is, “She may be a woman but she’s not going to break with tradition.” Whereas [Obama's] is more breaking with [tradition].
MARK SIMONSON: [Obama] chose to make it a sunrise, which suggests it’s a new era, a new day or things like that. It’s really pretty clever.
PT: It really captures his message very well. That’s the essence of what a logo mark is supposed to do: combine a whole lot of things into something that’s really simple. It makes me think of Reagan and “morning in America.”

PT: McCain doesn’t have a flag at all. And it’s not even red, white and blue. I give McCain points for not doing that. I guess that says something about his perceived strength that he doesn’t need to do it. His [Web site's] black and gold is very unusual for a presidential [candidate], almost unprecedented in recent history.

PT: Sure you can put eight typefaces on your Web site, but it ought to be for a reason. It makes me wonder if his policies are as incoherent as his typefaces. How someone runs their campaign indicates how they’re going to be president. It’s a little microcosm of that.

MS: [The Clinton Web site] feels kind of buttoned-down, not flamboyant or flashy. It’s kind of …
PT: … “workmanlike” is the term you’d use in these situations. So I guess it’d be workwomanlike.
MS: I think the idea is to present an image that projects honesty and forthrightness. I think it does that.

MS: The Obama campaign seems to be attracting the best designers, for whatever reason.
PT: If Apple were a candidate, this is what their Web site would look like. If I were a 23-year-old person, and I were going to these three different sites, they communicate to me that [Obama] is the one who cares about my generation, because he cares about this medium more. And [Clinton] cares more than McCain, but not as much as Obama.

MS: If I had a criticism for Obama’s site, it’d be that it almost looks to good to be true. It looks a little bit too savvy. You might get the impression that they’re spending too much time on it. There’s a certain element of people who, when they see something really well-designed, they think, “Oh, they’re not really concentrating on the things that matter. They’re just concerned about appearance.” 

MS: Here’s one that looks like [Bush's] “W” sticker. It was, like, “Yuppies for Bush.” It seemed like an attempt to add some high-end cache to the campaign. You’d always see them on expensive cars. I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone call her “H.”

MS: They’ve got the little Obama logo underneath the question mark.
PT: It’s not a good bumper sticker in the sense of someone can read it on a bumper while driving their car and get the whole point. But maybe if it’s on your folder instead, where you can see it up close …
MS: They don’t actually have the “Got Milk” font. They kind of redrew it sloppily. Which is fine. I’m sure you wouldn’t notice that. If you did notice that while you’re driving, you’re probably driving too close.
PT: And you know a little too much about type.