In my last post, I shared my less-than-glowing review of Ted Cruz’s new logo. Since then, three more candidates have thrown their proverbial hats in the ring: Hillary Clinton, Rand Paul, and Marco Rubio are all now officially on the campaign trail.

Across the board, these are better identities than Ted Cruz’s. Each one is simpler, more modern, and easier to decipher than the burning teardrop. Still, all three have their own individual flaws and seem like they were rushed to completion.

While Hillary’s “Arrow H” is bold and definitive, it seems odd to me that the only Democratic candidate thus far would have a giant red arrow pointing to the right. Whether this is a subtle clue to her political stance or an unfortunate coincidence, I’m not sure. Also, though I applaud her daring omission of type accompaniment, without the name “Hillary” paired next to the logo, I would have thought this was a rebrand for Hilton Hotels (and a slew of other things).

I like Rand Paul’s the best of these three marks (though it is by no means an endorsement of the candidate, I am not a fan of his). The use of negative space between the “A” and “N” to create the base of the torch is a well executed visual trick.

The logo for Marco Rubio has a really nice font choice and layout. All lowercase makes it seem approachable, but I can’t stand the use of the U.S. map as a dot for the “i.” It makes me think that the candidate is a 6th grade school girl who dots her i’s with hearts and smiley faces. Plus, this leaves off Alaska and Hawaii – does  Marco Rubio only represent 48 states?!

In all, and this includes Ted Cruz, I would imagine that the hopefuls have been thinking about making their announcements to run for quite some time. These 2016 Presidential candidate logos are proof that some of that time should have been spent hiring a branding expert to craft an identity that did a better job of representing these individuals. We’ll see what the next candidate brings to the table.