I think part of that is just illustrating a political ideology in their logoset. If you're more liberal, like farther left than average, you're gonna want to illustrate something new and unique, mainly something that goes against the standard red-white-blue identity. That's what's happening with these women and the Democrats so far. They want to be new and unique, feeding off the energy Bernie created in 2016, and part of that is creating a logo with bold and unique text, along with colors that aren't just red-white-blue.
I don't think there have been any bad identities thus far. Everything is unique and bold, yet remaining somewhat tied down to the status-quo. Elizabeth Warren has the most presidential look identity wise, but I like Tulsi's the best overall. She's a new player to the presidential scene, and her identity shows that with a youthful and unique font. Her home state of Hawaii is represented in the sunrise, as well as a "new, bright future" for America. Thus far, she has the most coherent and consistent identity.
Kamala's is the worst so far, if you ask me. It's bold and unique, which is good, but it's only text. And when you try to shrink that down, say for a polo-shirt or a watermark on an Instagram post, it's gonna become mostly unreadable. Plus, the "FOR THE PEOPLE" is so bland and generic, it doesn't relate specifically to her or to her visual identity. It's founded in pretty good ideas, but it doesn't execute it right.
It's gonna be a good election cycle for the Democrats, both in branding and otherwise.