How about the typography of candidates' posters, buttons, ads, and bumper stickers?

Mmm, that's a nice idea but it doesn't really fit a broad audience newspaper, it would be more interesting for a design magazine.
I'm not sure i could get something interesting with the time i have and the way it should be written.

Campaign posters around here typically use a white name on a darkish-blue background, with a lot of stars (white or red). The font tends to be a wide classical serif design, or sometimes a "dynamic" sans.

hhp

I've notices that on their websites (Kerry using serifs, Bush "dynamic" sans) but i don't think i can conclude anything from that. I suppose both campaign logos could have been cahnged one to another without signifiance.

Maybe because you could even swap the candidates themselves with little long-term impact. :-/

hhp

It is probably a case of going to the "Usual Suspects"

Chris you are so wrong, Ad agencies fight to get a piece of the hundreds of millions of dollars spent on campaigns. Its not a small time business getting someone elected any more. The reason for the looks is to appeal to the lowest common denominator (You know I'm a canadate of the people) so slick is out. There is a huge amount of marketing (and dirty tricks) that goes into politics.

> I'd be very interested if there were typo dirty tricks

One incumbant President made the Fed in charge of money, print alot of money to bolster the economy just before the elections to make it look like the economy was in better shape than it really was. It might have been the Nixon administration. Dirty tricks are more backroom stuff.

In the 2000 election, a negative TV ad partially obstructed the word "DEMOCRATS" with another graphic element before it vanished, so as to make it read "RATS" for the briefest of moments. That might qualify as a typographical dirty trick.

Maybe not exactly what you're looking for, but there is plenty of political opinion here:

www.fourinchesofego.com

Check the propaganda section for posters.

Months back, the New York Times magazine had designers create posters for the Democratic candidates... some interesting work (you may have to register):

http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2003/11/30/magazine/20031130POSTERS.SLIDESHOW_1.html

An unsuccessful Senatorial candidate here in Minnesota had a radical departure from the sans-on-stars n' stripes approach: Ken Pentel. I believe his approach could be summed up in one word: Borax; i.e., cleaning up Congress.

And our Senator Wellstone (RIP) stood out from the crowd by using white on green.

What I was trying to suggest above was not a study of how two stars n' stripes logos differentiate from one another, but how some candidates go out of their way to be different.

I didn't think President Bush was a many of letters, he's more into picture books...