Just scanning around the Web, checking to see if anything’s up in the Green Mountain State, when I’m assaulted by a truly terrible example of political advertising. Social media, NOT.
I present the offending image after the jump, to give you time to send the children from the room.
The horror, the horror!
Where do I begin? The riotous clash of colors? The visual non-sequitur of the Vermont flag appearing for no particular reason? (What, she’s a True Patriot while Beth Pearce is an interloping tenant?) The mishmosh of fonts? The overall composition that suggests a beginner’s design skills? The squinting, leering mug of Wendy Wilton, for which I suggest the caption “Your hide will make a fine poncho”?
Seriously, is that the closest they could come to a photo of Wendy Wilton smiling? Damn scary. Gives me another reason to vote for Beth Pearce: I don’t want to see that image plastered on the Vermont Treasurer’s website for the next two years.
So who does her campaign graphics anyway? And which campaign functionary took a look at this “art” and said, “Yeah, that’s the ticket! Slap that baby on the Interwebs!” And can they be fired immediately and/or sued for design malpractice?
Please note: I hate it when female politicians are judged entirely on their looks or wardrobe. This commentary has nothing to do with Wendy Wilton’s appearance; it has everything to do with campaign ineptitude.
Monty Burns is running for mayor.
Burns: Why are my teeth showing like that?
Political consultant: It’s because you are ‘smiling’.
Burns: Excellent. Just the sort of trickery I am paying you for.
*****
In my long years of computer use, I have noticed that people raised on M$-Windows have ZERO design sense, and Mac users are the better designers. So I would suspect that this was done by a conservative Windows user, someone incapable of independent thought and still thinks a 1990s OS looks good. But that’s just my own personal bias…
Now if that button said “Learn More About Why Our Graphics Are Horrible” I’d click in a second.