Supersize my vote: Illinois now part of the big picture

SPRINGFIELD -- In a few short weeks, in households across the suburbs, millions will gather for Super Bowl Sunday, pondering past halftime wardrobe malfunctions and great Bud Bowl matchups.

And this year may bring something entirely new to the mix: politics -- especially with the uncertainties created by Tuesday's New Hampshire primary results.

Loaded with campaign cash, it's doubtful, say some political observers, that the leading presidential hopefuls would pass up getting their faces in front of the nation's single largest TV audience just 48 hours before Illinois and most of the country possibly decides the nominees for president.

This is all foreign for Illinois voters, whose primary picks had long ago been deemed meaningless in presidential politics. Now, with Iowa and New Hampshire behind them, the full brunt of both the Republican and Democratic campaigns is about to be unleashed here, one of 22 states with primaries scheduled for Feb. 5, two days after the Super Bowl.

It means your TV will soon be lit up with campaign ads, your mailbox brimming with candidate fliers for everything from the White House to the statehouse, and your phone ringing only for you to hear one of those annoying pre-recorded campaign calls.

The trade-off? This year, your vote may actually mean something.

"In March 2004, we had a primary that didn't count for anything. We and other big states were totally left out of the equation," said John Jackson, a longtime political observer and author on primary politics at Southern Illinois University's Paul Simon Public Policy Institute.

Last year, Illinois approved moving the state's primary six weeks ahead to Feb. 5, the earliest date in state history.

The Democratic leaders who pushed the change did so in hopes of helping Chicago Democrat Barack Obama's White House bid.

But with Obama expected to handily carry Illinois, political observers say the true battle for Illinois votes will come from the Republican field, and candidates are expected to soon begin showing up here.

Illinois, New York and California are among the heavyweight states going to the polls on Feb. 5 in what could amount to an unofficial national primary.

It's possible we'll know the party nominees by the end of the day.

"Unless there's some kind of deadlock, generally you get a presumptive nominee," said Kent Redfield, a political studies professor at University of Illinois' Springfield campus.

Which is what may make the Super Bowl such an attractive, albeit expensive, political forum this year. A 30-second, nationwide Super Bowl ad is pegged at more than $2.6 million, but leading campaigns are raising and spending tens of millions of dollars.

"It gives the (Mitt) Romneys and the (Rudy) Giulianis, who we assume have money, an advantage over the (John) McCains and (Mike) Huckabees who don't," Redfield said. "It gives you a guaranteed audience that's a big hit."

Undoubtedly, presidential election ads aired during the Super Bowl could garner the attention of thousands of undecided voters.

Though the price tag's hefty, politicians are entitled under federal law to the lowest rate charged in the time slot, possibly saving them a few hundred thousand dollars.

Some candidates may even choose to save additional money by targeting Super Bowl ads in only a few local affiliates as opposed to airing nationally. Depending on location, this drops the cost well below the million-dollar range.

"What's the cost-benefit trade-off?" asked Bruce Newman, professor of marketing at DePaul University and former adviser to President Bill Clinton's senior staff. "It's just a function of where each campaign is and how much money they have in their war chests."

The presidential campaigns contacted by the Daily Herald wouldn't talk about the possibility of Super Bowl ads. But last year, an adviser to Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain said the football audience is "a very ripe and timely target."

Nearly 95 million people watched last year's Super Bowl game, according to Nielsen Media Research. The most watched moment, measured by TiVo rewinds and downloads, was a Bud Light ad.

In addition, Fox Sports, the National Football League and MySpace.com partnered earlier last year for a multimedia trifecta -- agreeing to post ads on the social networking site for the first time, as well as create links to the marketers' Web sites. Should presidential candidates air their own advertisements during the Super Bowl, the single event could spark more Web hits than any YouTube.com video of a notable speech or debate.

But what kind of ads could be in the making? David Morrison, deputy director of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform, said viewers shouldn't count on any mudslinging or attack ads to interrupt their Super Bowl parties.

"I think they would run a more positive ad because the focus would be on themselves," Morrison said. "They'd want to build themselves up and not just tear down someone else."

Newman said the only risk candidates are taking by airing a Super Bowl ad is that it may be confused with half-time entertainment. But to compete, creativity is key.

"It's likely that it won't be taken quite as seriously (if the political ads aren't more creative); it's likely that it won't stick in people's memories," he said. "If they're plain-old Jane ads, nobody's going to be paying any attention."