May 13, 2008
The Clinton Brand Name Keeps Getting Stronger
I always find this type of discussion interesting, if not amusing.
One strategic marketing site has created a very interesting brand architecture outline that essentially has users comparing presidential candidates across a variety of consumer categories, including “Cereal, Beer, Coffee, Apparel, Technology,” a subject very similar to something we blogged about last year.
Whether your liking for Rice Krispies will negatively affect the Clinton brand name, I cannot say. What I will risk saying is that win or loose the nomination, election, or even today's West Virginia primary, the Clinton brand name is not going to be tarnished for two reasons.
The first reason comes right out of Brand Naming 101: you cannot tarnish a brand name for doing what it is supposed to do.
What tarnishes a politician’s brand name is when they betray their basic brand values by doing something scandalous, dishonest or otherwise misinformed. Something that tarnishes the basic integrity of the brand name and all it stands for.
Love her or hate her, Hillary has yet to do that. She has fought hard and bitterly against Obama, but this is how she operates, and her supporters admire her for it.
The second reason is something we have blogged about in the past: Hillary has separated her personal brand from the Clinton Masterbrand and she has done so quite successfully. The Hillary brand name has never been more visible, strong, or vivid in my mind. I think that it is spurious to lump her simply as a Clinton.
After this is all over, count on the name Hillary to become just as big as the name Clinton.
TrackBack URL for this entry: