General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe freak out of some Democrats over
some comments about Our Next President's logo is interesting.
TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)freakouts happen over just about everything, so this descends into bored time wasting really fast.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)the liberal wing of the party, or she and her operatives are the stupidest people on the planet for their failure to see the symbolism of a red arrow pointing right.
Renew Deal
(81,844 posts)Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)she doesn't need their votes anyway.
Renew Deal
(81,844 posts)They've got more problems than Hillary can solve.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)I refuse to vote for her because she is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Wall Street and praises Henry Kissinger.
When you are a tool of the 0.01% and you adore a war criminal, you are not getting my vote.
I doubt I am alone in this view.
The logo is just an indicator of her arrogance or stupidity, take your pick.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Do you know of any person who if they had the chance to meet Kissinger personally, would turn away coldly or insult him, calling him a war criminal they won't associate with? Would Liz Warren do that?
NoJusticeNoPeace
(5,018 posts)is so silly, please tell me you are kidding
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)HRC paid a ton of money to some DC consultant group (this would be the same type of people that helped her lose to Obama in 2008) and no one in their focus group pointed out the obvious symbolism to people suspicious of her liberal cred that a rightward pointing RED arrow would indicate?
Either this was intentional, or it was colossally stupid.
Neither reason is very auspicious for her campaign kickoff.
I did an impromptu poll of the liberals in my office who had not seen the logo. I asked them their thoughts without any indication of my views ( I simply asked: What do you think of the Clinton campaign logo?) All six said that same thing: Why does she have a red arrow pointing to the right?
treestar
(82,383 posts)there are 7 of them, and they all loved it.
Pooka Fey
(3,496 posts)is the visual equivalent of another driver on the freeway suddenly swerving into your lane, then flipping YOU the bird for being upset over their nearly having caused an accident.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)I see it as a HUGE middle finger to liberals such as myself. And I will act accordingly.
one_voice
(20,043 posts)Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)who praised Henry Kissinger is considered a viable candidate for president by people here. It is like endorsing Dick Cheney.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)As to say it only in this manner.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Is the equivalent of looking at the ink blot and aging that it shows a demon rather than a teddy bear.
What one sees is largely determined by how one feels about the (now) candidate.
Pooka Fey
(3,496 posts)It's less weird to just ask someone what they think about the 1st Democratic candidate in the race, rather than posting a cryptic veiled message about demons and teddy bears and ink blots on an anonymous discussion board, wouldn't you agree?
[url=http://postimg.org/image/mjeplo7g3/][img][/img][/url]
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)The logo is red white and blue, THE HORROR!
Here's the obvious answer: she's capitalizing on the Obama O logo by using a letter: H. And also capitalizing on Obama's "forward" slogan.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)assuming all benign intent, some moron got paid a river of cash to come up with this logo, and everyone was utterly clueless as to the mixed message it would send.
But hey, HRC doesn't need my vote (and others like me), and doesn't want it since apparently she has all the votes she needs.
Cool.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)Mission accomplished. Thats how logo and advertising works.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)a reassurance that Wall Street is safe, and eternal war will continue.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,708 posts)Woo
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)for center-right Democrats and friend of America's top war criminal.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/04/12/1376828/-Left-flank-critique-of-Hillary-Clinton-On-Wall-Street-ties
The evidence is there for those who would see. The logo is just icing.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)to make a logo subconsciously pleasing to an audience that reads and writes right-to-left and sees going rightward on a timeline as progress.
But since a handful of people who had made up their minds well in advance wrote their own meaning into it, it's the designer's fault.
Yeah.
That make sense.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)and with Wall Street and Kissinger behind her, she is a dead cert to win. Votes from people like me a re not wanted nor needed.
NoJusticeNoPeace
(5,018 posts)that anyone is making a shitstorm out of that simply fucking amazes me
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)is what percentage of the electorate?
treestar
(82,383 posts)what interest does she have in catering to you only?
Politics is about people working together. Not about the demands of one individual.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)why worry about what I say? It's a done deal.
okaawhatever
(9,457 posts)probably red and blue on the internet because the background pages are white. The arrow
is a play on the recurring theme from the Democrats of moving forward. lt's been used for several years now. You know, like MoveOn.org. or "Forward" as one of Obama's campaign themes.
Sometimes an arrow is just an arrow. l'm not worried though, I think Clinton can win without your vote should she get the nomination.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)I think it's cool
rock
(13,218 posts)From the logo's perspective it points to the left. Tha is, if the "H" was a person, it would be pointing to the left.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)to garner, the arrow is red and point right.
rock
(13,218 posts)The arrow is pointing up whether these are voters or not. Now let me take a picture of you while you point to the left.
treestar
(82,383 posts)She doesn't expect Republicans to vote for her. I think she probably does not expect people so far left they don't like the Democratic party to vote for her. And I seriously, seriously doubt any thought went into that logo other than make it look cool.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)By the way, exactly who would be the "far left"?
Those of us opposed to the massive illegal war we waged and continue to wage in the Middle East?
Those of us who think the Wall Street financiers should have gone to jail for ruining the economy?
Those of us who think Guantanamo should be closed?
Those of us who think war criminals should be prosecuted?
Those of us who think it should be illegal to spy on America citizens without a warrant?
Those of us who think the police should be de-militarized and held accountable for murdering unarmed citizens?
Those of us who believe in a progressive income tax?
Those of us who oppose trade agreements that protect corporations while screwing workers?
Those of us who believe the government has no business involving itself in women's reproductive health?
Those of us who believe the time has come to cancel oil, gas and nuclear subsidies?
Those of us who believe that drilling of our coasts needs to stop?
Those of us believe that fracking needs to stop?
Please do tell me about these horrible people.
treestar
(82,383 posts)They are not people who'd want a Republican. Have to weigh all of those issues I guess.
merrily
(45,251 posts)And the logo has a perspective? And the perspective of the logo is what matters? Not the perspective of the masses of people who will be looking at the logo?
rock
(13,218 posts)If I ask you to raise your left hand, that's what it looks like to me.
merrily
(45,251 posts)rock
(13,218 posts)The logo has a right and left just as you and I do. Without further specification it can go either way.
11 Bravo
(23,925 posts)Just sayin'.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)and one more time: Either a deliberate slight, or a complete failure to recognize the logo would be problematic. My cat could have told her that it was a problem.
Malice or incompetence.
Not great choice either way.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Anyone who'd bother to take it that way is not serious about politics.
Renew Deal
(81,844 posts)KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)emulatorloo
(44,057 posts)KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)I find myself annoyed at DU'ers for making me have to defend Hillary, whom I really don't want as President.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)There was an obvious failure of understanding Image Control 101. Team Hillary really wasn't very careful on this one.
AngryAmish
(25,704 posts)Don't look up goatse.
The whole thing is srupid, an exercise in confirmation bias.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)The thing with image control and useful application of meaningful symbols is that it requires being in touch of the common uses of the symbol
I suggest anyone who has a driver's license is aware that arrow is exactly like the ones that point traffic to the right.
And there are much worse things that can be projected upon it...
Lack of appreciation for people's common knowledge and/or likely interpretations is a messaging issue. Failure to recognize that hints of potential weaknesses in that dept. Regardless of how important the logo is, if a real weakness is present there it needs attention.
emulatorloo
(44,057 posts)ex web and interactive graphic designer here.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)But, I'm sure that sort of people aren't important enough to worry about.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,262 posts)That covers pretty much everyone, by this decade. And it's not as if it's offensive to someone who has never seen used one of those. It just might not mean anything to them (but, then again, it might - for the same reasons that the original designers of playback equipment chose right-pointing arrows for 'forward').
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)We're you on IRC underground years ago too?
AngryAmish
(25,704 posts)bunnies
(15,859 posts)kill me now.
greatauntoftriplets
(175,728 posts)It was quite an educational experience.
dissentient
(861 posts)of everything that is good!
And you probably hate kittens too, on top of it all.
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)THat was the infamous library girl. LOL
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)zappaman
(20,606 posts)49 recs for a troll!
Telling...
AngryAmish
(25,704 posts)KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)And if you or a buddy did, wouldn't that make this thread both Meta and disingenuous?
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Happy hunting.
Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #12)
emulatorloo This message was self-deleted by its author.
B Calm
(28,762 posts)posting right-wing propaganda about Hillary.
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)MissDeeds
(7,499 posts)Wasn't there a lot of discussion about Obama's logo looking too much like the Pepsi logo?
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
DrDan
(20,411 posts)Autumn
(44,972 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)now locked thread were high comedy Manny....hat tip to you!!!
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Throd
(7,208 posts)HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)An arrow and geometric blocks can be made into almost anything but a circle,
which of course doesn't mean circles won't be added.
But, I can't say it's all bad. The one thing that's going to be very true about it is that it's going to be recognized as her's. For some ad people that's the entire objective for a logo.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)Worship of the logo is pathetic.
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)"Romper Room watching" is more like those who think people "worship" a logo, and then actually go on to post that thought.
Brilliant.
What does that even mean??
foo_bar
(4,193 posts)Yesterday was the soft launch of Hillary 2.0 (or whatever point oh), but these things aren't set in stone, she could change logos twelve times before the convention if the invisible hand wills it. I'm almost ready to give in and embrace this democracy-by-marketing concept, I bet some genius came up with this logo just to piss off the sorts of people who worry about these sorts of things. Aldous Huxley penned some prescient thoughts on these matters:
The task of the commercial propagandist in a democracy is in some ways easier and in some ways more difficult than that of a political propagandist employed by an established dictator or a dictator in the making. It is easier inasmuch as almost everyone starts out with a prejudice in favor of beer, cigarettes and iceboxes, whereas almost nobody starts out with a prejudice in favor of tyrants. It is more difficult inasmuch as the commercial propagandist is not permitted, by the rules of his particular game, to appeal to the more savage instincts of his public. The advertiser of dairy products would dearly love to tell his readers and listeners that all their troubles are caused by the machinations of a gang of godless international margarine manufacturers, and that it is their patriotic duty to march out and burn the oppressors' factories. This sort of thing, however, is ruled out, and he must be content with a milder approach. But the mild approach is less exciting than the approach through verbal or physical violence. In the long run, anger and hatred are self-defeating emotions. But in the short run they pay high dividends in the form of psychological and even (since they release large quantities of adrenalin and noradrenalin) physiological satisfaction. People may start out with an initial prejudice against tyrants; but when tyrants or would-be tyrants treat them to adrenalin-releasing propaganda about the wickedness of their enemies -- particularly of enemies weak enough to be persecuted -- they are ready to follow him with enthusiasm. <...>
Effective rational propaganda becomes possible only when there is a clear understanding, on the part of all concerned, of the nature of symbols and of their relations to the things and events symbolized. Irrational propaganda depends for its effectiveness on a general failure to understand the nature of symbols. Simple-minded people tend to equate the symbol with what it stands for, to attribute to things and events some of the qualities expressed by the words in terms of which the propagandist has chosen, for his own purposes, to talk about them. Consider a simple example. Most cosmetics are made of lanolin, which is a mixture of purified wool fat and water beaten up into an emulsion. This emulsion has many valuable properties: it penetrates the skin, it does not become rancid, it is mildly antiseptic and so forth. But the commercial propagandists do not speak about the genuine virtues of the emulsion. They give it some picturesquely voluptuous name, talk ecstatically and misleadingly about feminine beauty and show pictures of gorgeous blondes nourishing their tissues with skin food.
http://www.huxley.net/bnw-revisited/#propdem
99Forever
(14,524 posts)...to the issues that are important to me that I have come to expect from HRC and her supporters.
Bravo.
olddots
(10,237 posts)Backwards masking in those heathen records ........
NoJusticeNoPeace
(5,018 posts)it isnt that important either way and it sure as hell isnt intended to be an attack on the left
sheesh
BTW
anybody interested in seeing the logos that were considered and rejected?
I am
tularetom
(23,664 posts)Hillary Clinton is one of the most divisive candidates ever, regardless of party. Everything she does seems to be controversial and she inspires strong reactions in both supporters and detractors.
Even her choice of a campaign logo causes controversy. But it's just symptomatic of what we can expect from a Clinton presidency.
Of course the republicans are going to nitpick her to death. They do that to every Democratic candidate. They've been trying to do that to Obama without much success for the past seven years. Sadly for them, he doesn't let it bother him and just ignores it. Clinton won't react the same way, she'll take the bait every time, get on a high horse and deny whatever they accuse her of. Problem is she doesn't handle denial well. Even when innocent, she looks like she's hiding something. Just like Richard Nixon.
I doubt that the republicans are quaking with fear at the prospect of a Clinton candidacy. They're probably rubbing their hands together in gleeful anticipation. It's so easy to wind her up.
emulatorloo
(44,057 posts)I wouldn't underestimate her ability to make mincemeat of those motherfuckers.
tularetom
(23,664 posts)Why you never hear a peep out of them anymore.
If she's been "successfully" dealing with them for 20+ years, why haven't they STFU yet?
Nay
(12,051 posts)of this whole 2016 mess. I can't stand all this CRAAAAAP one more time. I'm sure I'll have to haul my tired old ass into the voting booth, but I'll be damned if I'm gonna waste my time with all the yowling and shit-throwing.
emulatorloo
(44,057 posts)H2O Man
(73,506 posts)some of our friends here are allergic to logic, rational thought, and/or truth. They break out in nonsense, when exposed to these pesky things.
Corey_Baker08
(2,157 posts)Moving forward with the progress and the policies of President Obama. Not turning back to failed policies of the Republican Party, especially here likely opponent in November, Jeb Bush.
Andy823
(11,495 posts)Hillary moving the country forward.
It really doesn't matter what kind of a logo is used, what matters is what each candidate is going to do to help this country move ahead, and not take it back to the days of George W. Bush, the worst president in history as far as I am concerned. What I want is to see the plan each candidate has to fix the problems in this country.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)I don't get how people can have such a reaction. It is an emotional reaction of negativity some have with respect to her. I am glad you notice how silly the Hillary Can Do Nothing Right crowd is. Seriously. A fucking logo has these people talking as if they have scored their next Gowdy moment.
Nitram
(22,755 posts)stop imagining things that aren't even there.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)1%.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Therein lies the additional value.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)It is the freak out over the freak out that concerns you. lol. So many freak outs down the line. Hard to keep track of what stage in the freak out we are suppose to be concerned about. Your concern is noted.
Rex
(65,616 posts)She did it on porpoise!
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)That thing really could be something HRC drew in the wayback.
Until the designer is named, I think we have to keep that possibility open.
Pooka Fey
(3,496 posts)Some guy's precocious preschooler entered it and won...
https://twitter.com/tomgreever/status/587454133805850624/photo/1
Now that I know that no adult had a hand in this, I'm OK with it.
KMOD
(7,906 posts)is funny and sad.
NanceGreggs
(27,813 posts)... is coming from the armchair psychoanalysts who are "seeing" all kinds of things that aren't there.
The response to that group has been a pretty consistent - as is appropriate in the circumstances.
I'm waiting for the first poster to play Hill's announcement video backwards, so they can start an OP about the subliminal messages contained therein.
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)Republican jihadists are trying to pass sharia laws in Indiana and Arkansas with more to follow no doubt.
Whole states are becoming fiefdoms of the Koch bros and their puppets. The whole damn world is burning up and nothing done to stop it, wages suck, republicans are determined to destroy social security, etc etc.
But fuck!!
Hillary's logo..horrors! Somebody get the smelling salts while I clutch my damn pearls eh?