Rebranding the Republican Party – Everyone is doing it

Filed in National by on February 6, 2013

First Karl Rove says they need to tone down the crazy, now FastCompany has jumped into to try and save the Republican Party from itself with some comprehensive branding advice (that I hope nobody listens to).

…the nickname “Grand Old Party,” given to the party back in 1888, needs to be revisited. “Grand” is a word no one still alive uses today unless they are referring to a type of piano and “Old” is a negative perception the party needs to move away from. It’s time to either drop the nickname or replace it. Since the acronym “GOP” is used by the party as its site address and, by itself, has no inherent negative attributes, one option to explore is to change what the acronym stands for.

Energy giant BP did this when it changed what “BP” stood for from “British Petroleum” to “Beyond Petroleum” to signify their move into alternative energy sources. The party could do the same, perhaps changing the “GOP” acronym meaning from “Grand Old Party” to a more positive “Growth and Opportunity Party” that fits with the proposed brand promise.

About the Author ()

Jason330 is a deep cover double agent working for the GOP. Don't tell anybody.

Comments (15)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. puck says:

    Anybody remember the parody slogan from the 1970s, when Esso became Exxon and Nixon became The New Nixon?

    “Nixxon – But It’s Still The Same Old Gas”

  2. Jason330 says:

    Obviously the re-branded Republican Party would be just as extreme as the unre-branded Republican Party. The danger is in the GOP making their crackpot schemes to shove ever more money into the pockets of the wealthy more palatable to low information voters.

    Also, I just have to note how ironic it is that the current CW holds that the Republican brand is the one on its knees. My whole adult life has been lived without the Democrats providing voters with a coherent brand message.

  3. puck says:

    Republican master plan:

    1. Brand traditional Democrats as extremist liberals
    2. Move Republicans continuously to the right for 30 years
    3. Induce cowed Democrats to support what used to be Republican policies
    4. Throw the now far-right Republicans under the bus.

    Isn’t that pretty much where we are now?

  4. Tom Hawk says:

    GOP = Gang Of Predators.

  5. puck says:

    The GOP are like those ants that enslave some other species of ants (Democrats) to tend their hive for them.

  6. Jason330 says:

    Tom Hawk’s re-branding suggestion has a lot of merit. It is a move in the direction of honesty though, and I don’t think there is going to be much interest in that.

  7. Joanne Christian says:

    Puck–you have succint analytical skills that I concur have merit. But where to from here, without being one big Democrat, or a fringe Republican? This state is too loose in what they call Democrat, and too narrow in what they call Republican. Meanwhile, we can’t vote in primaries unless party aligned. Until a major shift in foundation rules of pyramid building via open primaries; or some other mechanism; Democrats have Egypt, and Republicans get Legoland.

  8. puck says:

    If Republicans can’t pull out of their dive, future political divisions will be between conservative Democrats and VERY conservative Democrats. This will create chaos until Democrats split into two parties, resulting in more chaos.

    And all the while, Republicans are doing very well in the statehouses and legislatures.

  9. Joanne Christian says:

    I totally agree about the implosion that is bound to happen within the D party. Besides the division of “what’s a Democrat” within the party–their massive reach will also springboard some candidates who may be tired of bench-sitting. I don’t know, but it sure makes for a long wait to really get out there in gameplay and get a job done. Frustratingly long.

  10. bamboozer says:

    The Republicans refuse to admit they lost because of what they want, hence they attempt a new paint job on the same old car and hope for the best. As for the Republicans doing very well in state houses it mistakes the results of the 2010 election as the way things will be in the future. Completely false, nothing in politics is forever and that goes double for Republican control of state legislatures . If the two parties have anything in common it’s that they are the authors of their own demise.

  11. kavips says:

    Bragging about the Republicans having a slim majority of state houses actually backfires when you look at the stats. The Senate is democratic because the entire state must vote for a Senator. The House is republican because the districts got gerrymandered to maximize the number of republicans. yet it still lost ground.

    There are more rural states than urban states. Recent trends would suggest that there would also follow more republican governors than democratic ones The fact that they are so close, that many rural states are pro democratic, really means Republicans are on the defensive… They should have a much higher percentage based on geography.

  12. cassandra m says:

    Democrats continue to struggle with what they’ve struggled with almost all of my life — and that is how to manage a Big Tent. Unlike the GOP, you do not have to particpate in some Stepford project to be a Democrat. As long as the range of interests for Democrats is broader and more inclusive than the GOP’s, there will always be some baseline tension within the Democratic Party.

    You can see in that effort to brand the GOP as the party of growth and opportunity that someone knows at some level that they have to get beyond the politics of resentment that motivate their (ever decreasing) base and figure out how to be relevant in the lives of people who won’t find their hostility to women, black people, brown people, gay people and to anyone who wants the government to treat them equally under the law and to stay out of the parts of their lives that the government should stay out of.

    The idea of open primaries is an interesting one, especially in light of the California experience. Their nonpartisan primaries (which send the top two vote getters, regardless of party to he general) delivered Democratic supermajorities in both houses. And they’ve been able to tackle their financial issues in a fairly robust manner, enough to squeak out a small surplus. Would the rest of the country pick the people who will roll up their sleeves and get to work? Who knows. But I think that if the GOP can rethink themselves enough to be competitive in the CA Statehouse again, they may have a longer term winning formula.

  13. puck says:

    True – California balanced their budget. All they had to do was get rid of most of their Republicans.

  14. kavips says:

    Why is it that only states with Democrats in the super-majority, are able to balance their budgets? Oh,… because the republicans have been pushed out of relevance.

  15. Aoine says:

    GOP=got zero plans

Switch to our mobile site