2008 election comes into focus

Milken panel dissects political picture

By TED JOHNSON

Wrapping up a Milken Institute Global Conference panel on the 2008 elections, moderator and Democratic political activist William Samuels declared of the coming race, "There is a chance now for civility and discourse. One reason I like Nancy Pelosi is she is putting civility, how we talk to each other, as a priority."

Not so fast.

The mention of Pelosi had panelist and Republican pollster Frank Luntz shaking his head. "Oh come on, come on," he blurted.

But Samuels did have a point in one respect.

The most surprising thing about the bipartisan Wednesday morning session -- which teamed Samuels and Luntz with former Republican National Committee chairman Ken Mehlman, former Democratic Gov. Gray Davis and progressive political consultant Deborah Rappaport -- is that there was so little disagreement.

The title was "Campaign 2008: Hold on to Your Hats, It's Going to Be a Bumpy Ride," but given the tenor of the session, that may be overstating it.

All were hopeful that the 60% turnout in the 2004 election was an indicator of a new sense of idealism in the process. All agreed that something had to be done on climate change -- whether the motive was to reduce global warming or to curb dependence on foreign oil. In an era of caustic one-liners, coarse language and attack ads, the panelists all see the Internet as changing the dynamics of a campaign, even bringing more people into the process and enhancing candidates' ability to speak beyond soundbites.

And even Luntz and Mehlman sang the praises of Democrat Barack Obama. Luntz praised his positive message of inclusion; Mehlman says he was "for Obama before it was cool": They were law school classmates. He said Obama "reminds me most" of Bobby Kennedy and Ronald Reagan, who "both talked like human beings."

One of the few issues over which the participants diverged: whether the insane amounts of money going into the presidential race really matters.

"We spend less money on electing the next president than we spend on Easter candy every year," Mehlman declared.

Others noted that technology stands to upend campaigns, reducing the influence of money. With a recent attack ad aimed at Hillary Clinton spread over the Internet to millions for virtually no money, for how much longer will campaigns spend such huge sums on traditional advertising? With an Internet-bred generation reaching voting age next year, "Buying a 30-second spot on 'Jeopardy' is not going to do it with this crowd," Rappaport said.

But even with the Internet's promise, campaigns still are investing big sums in traditional media. Democratic candidate Bill Richardson already has started airing ads in Iowa and New Hampshire. With large states like California moving their primaries to Feb. 5, campaigns may have no choice but to make big ad buys.

It's that Feb. 5 date, more than perhaps anything else, that is changing the dynamics of the race and making it more unpredictable. While the motive is to give more states an influence in the political process, it also can produce unintended consequences.

"This race, 2008, is on warp speed," Davis said.

Davis said he hopes California's relocation of its primary would mean that candidates would actually campaign here and not just siphon money from donors. But the truth is that one candidate could sweep all of the early contests in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina, with the nominee all but clear by Feb. 5. If that is the case, California's role would once again be minimal.

"It may be over by Feb. 4, but at least we have a chance to say something on Feb. 5," Davis said. "And under our laws, you can start absentee balloting 30 days before the primary" and before Iowa and New Hampshire."

In fact, so unpredictable is this election that no one wanted to venture a guess as to who the nominees will be.

Instead, they spoke in general terms. Davis said that issues like the environment and health care will take a backseat to national security and the war on terror. "The elephant in the room is that the next president has to keep us safe," he said.

Luntz predicted that Edwards will win Iowa but said that the next president will be whoever shows authenticity, a person "who says what he means and means what he says."

He does have a preference.

"I pray that it is Rudy Giuliani vs. Hillary Clinton for one reason: It will be the biggest brawl in modern political history. Every guy will be rooting for Rudy. Every woman will be rooting for Hillary. Divorce lawyers will make a mint off this election. And it will be fun to watch."

Fun, but maybe not so civil.