Dems Don’t Need a Rebrand – They Need to Get Real
If Only the Issue Was Fixable with a Photo Shoot with a Supermodel.
Democrats need to stop using the term “rebranding” when they try to make sense of why they lost all three branches of government. Yes, perhaps not by a landslide but I’m not here to split hairs. Losing sucks and to what degree is a matter for another time. If I hear one more know-it-all like Marianne Williamson or countless bloviators pontificating, “What the Dems need is a rebrand”, I’m gonna scream. Sure, nothing works better than slapping on a fresh coat of paint, updating the logo, maybe tossing in a “BRAT” new slogan and hope for the best. Remember when Cindy Crawford helped rebrand Pepsi-Cola in 1992? That ain’t this. If only it were so simple.
Here’s the thing: branding is for products like energy drinks, sneakers, and fast-food chains. People? Movements? Entire political parties? They don’t need rebranding. They need leadership, strategy, personality, national recognition, and a backbone. And Q rating for good measure.
Reducing the largest voting block in American politics to a branding issue is not just oversimplifying—it’s belittling. Voters aren’t customers browsing for a candidate like they’re picking out laundry detergent. They’re human beings grappling with daily chaos. Democrats need to reconnect with real people in order to rebuild trust through action, not just optics. Remember, 19 million more people voted for Joe Biden in 2020 and chose to sit this one out. We need a massive Kumbaya My Lord.
Take this new political movement called No Labels—please. If you want a cautionary tale of unfortunate branding—here’s your baby. No Labels sounds like the discount rack at a failing department store. Labels for Less politics, at it were. The name feels like it was cooked up by a committee stuck in a brainstorming session for six hours —ON A ZOOM! In a world defined by critical issues, ambiguity isn’t inspiring—it’s confusing. Remember, they trounced around the two Old Joes—Manchin and Lieberman. Like they actually thought those old Joe’s were a better choice than our old Joe Biden? And they will be back again. Maybe they’ll have better luck with Susan Collins? Toodles.
As mentioned, Marianne Williamson has tossed her hat in the ring for DNC chair because she thinks the “Dems are a tarnished brand.” Don’t get me wrong—Marianne brings a unique flavor to the conversation, but this is politics, not a TED Talk. The idea that Democrats can course-correct by leaning into vague spirituality feels detached from the millions of already detached Dems who chose to sit out the election, not to mention that Marianne lost her bid miserably. Viable? I don’t think so.
Anyone calling for a Democratic rebrand needs go into another business. We’re not Gucci or Coca-Cola. We are human beings, not a product. We are governed and respond to people we like. It’s about emotional connection. How many times have you heard, “People want to vote for someone they want to have a beer with?” That’s why Jamie Harrison failed so miserably. You never saw him, not on social media, not on cable news, nada. He was almost like a persona non grata, a description that fits perfectly now.
Who should replace Jamie? I’ve always said Stacey Abrams was perfect for the job—I still do. Perhaps it’s a thankless job and she probably wouldn’t want that. Bottom line: whoever else runs for the top job at the DNC—in this perilous moment—that even mentions the word ‘Brand’—X them off the list. Politics is a popularity contest, which is why I did a post one day after the election titled, “Who Will Be America’s Next Top Democrat”. Hello!
Have you gotten my book/audiobook yet? Please do!
Rebranding is also a lack of imagination.