Election 2012: Battle of the Brands

I was asked to elaborate on a brief point I made in my initial post about the the current US election being a competition between brands. Here goes.

Surely this imagery is familiar to you. These are our candidates' logos--the first giveaway that we are looking at two brands. They also both have a slogan. This time around our incumbent has chosen "Forward," and Romney uses, "Believe in America." Upon reading those, you probably felt something right? Both appeal to your emotions, specifically to your patriotism. More importantly these slogans are the essence of each candidate, and a segue into the core of what defines all brands: their promise.

Keeping consistent with his motivational 2008 slogan "Yes We Can," Obama promotes moving forward this election--moving the country forward, the economy forward, ... essentially he promises progress. Romney, being the newcomer in the race has a somewhat fresh take with "Believe in America." I will say this isn't quite as clever or relative to his trickle down economics or status on social issues, but this slogan does appeal to the Republican audience.

After the brand establishment, we of course have advertisements. And of course both of these branded people have ads. I argue that their internet and TV spots are accompanied by their national tour of speeches, endorsements, annoying emails and of course the party conventions in the advertisement category. All of these contribute to their ploys to win over their "fellow Americans."

And of course their selling of themselves is for our (the consumers') benefits. We obviously want the best, most apt candidate to govern our country. Ultimately, we are choosing between two products--two brands.