The Wisconsin Voter The Journal Sentinel's Craig Gilbert explores political trends in a purple state and beyond. SHARE Election 2012

Visit our election section for complete coverage of the 2012 spring, fall and recall elections.

By of the

If you’re one of those people who can’t stand watching political ads, you might want to unplug the television right now.

A convergence of forces is conspiring to make your viewing experience uniquely miserable over the next 11 months.

Wisconsin is about to witness the biggest eruption of political advertising this state – maybe any state – has ever seen.

If the recall petition drive against Scott Walker is successful, we will have fiercely contested campaigns for governor, senator and president in the same year. That has never happened here in the modern era of the television campaign, and has rarely happened in any presidential battleground state.

Add to the equation another round of legislative recalls, a hot GOP Senate primary, at least two top-tier congressional races, and the slender possibility of a meaningful April presidential primary.

Then factor in a recall law that allows a lengthy window of unlimited fundraising, the easing of rules on independent advertising and the national importance of Wisconsin’s 2012 races, which means gobs of outside money.

The result?

The perfect “perfect storm.”

“It’s sort of uncharted territory. We’ve never had a political year which has had that much advertising for so long,” says Ken Goldstein, an academic expert on campaign ads who currently runs Kantar Media CMAG, a DC-area firm that tracks political advertising. “I can’t think of a single thing that would depress ad spending in Wisconsin.”

The coming deluge in 2012 is a function of changes in our politics and a rare convergence of unusual election developments: the possibility of the nation’s third-ever gubernatorial recall election; the state’s first open-seat Senate race in 24 years; the first time in 20 years Wisconsin has had a competitive Senate race and presidential race on the same ballot; the first time in 44 years we could have an election for governor and president in the same year.

Goldstein crunched the numbers for this analysis in an effort to put this election cycle in context and quantify how all this might look and feel to television viewers and voters in Wisconsin.

The closest recent corollary to what Wisconsin is about to go through is the 2008 election in North Carolina, when the state was heavily targeted by the Obama presidential campaign and had hard-fought races for both Senator and Governor. (North Carolina is one of only 11 states where elections for governor and president occur in the same election cycle; in most states, like Wisconsin, they are staggered two years apart).

Broadcast TV spending in North Carolina that year was roughly $27 million for president, $25 million for Senate and $16 million for governor. Those are huge numbers in their own right. But put them together and the totals are staggering: nearly $70 million to air roughly 160,000 campaign spots across the state, according to CMAG.

It would be like combining last year’s record-setting races for governor and Senate in Wisconsin (a total of $48 million in broadcast spending) with the 2008 presidential campaign (which spent $24 million on broadcast ads here).

That’s $72 million right there. But ad spending will be almost certainly higher in this presidential race than the last one. So could spending on the governor’s race, because some of the money can be raised without contribution limits and a May or June gubernatorial recall election in a battleground state in a presidential year has the potential to be dramatically nationalized. When you further account for Wisconsin’s other races in 2012 and for spending on other media, we could easily be looking at more than $100 million of political advertising in one state over 11 months. That’s more than the Bush re-election campaign spent on broadcast TV in the whole country seven years ago. And because any recall elections would be held in the first half of 2012 instead of November, that spending will be heavy throughout the year, instead of light early and heavy late.

What will it be like for voters?

Goldstein’s analysis shows that the biggest hot spot in the country for campaign advertising in recent election cycles was Las Vegas in 2010, measured by total ads aired. Las Vegas saw more than 63,000 political spots last year. He expects major TV markets in Wisconsin to see advertising at those levels in 2012.

“A heavy TV viewer in Wisconsin will see literally thousands of ads,” says Goldstein. “A medium TV viewer in Wisconsin will see many hundreds of ads.”

The political implications of all this are hard to know. You might wonder whether some voters will be so turned off by the overkill that it could depress election turnout, but there’s just not much evidence that large amounts of negative advertising (or advertising of any kind) have that effect.

In fact, turnout could be boosted by the many millions also spent on mobilizing voters, the competitiveness of these elections, and their perceived state and national stakes.

How will candidates and their campaigns stand out in this din?

The effectiveness of political advertising is more dubious and marginal than people think. When both sides are spending equally and the information flow isn't one-sided, it’s especially hard to have an impact. And when the sheer volume is this massive, it’s hard for anyone to cut through the “clutter.”

Campaigns may find they have to mix up their strategies to break through: advertising earlier when there’s less clutter rather than later when the airwaves are clogged; getting away from cookie-cutter messages and formulaic attacks; finding ways to transcend the partisan schism and speak to undecided, independent voters.

Candidates face some obvious perils in this environment beyond the public’s deep frustration and mistrust of politicians. They have to contend with the surge in ad spending by outside groups, a force the campaigns can’t control or predict. They have to contend with the increasing nationalization of state and local races so evident in recent cycles, where candidates are swept up in broad partisan tides. All that spending at the top of the ticket could amplify that effect.

Think back to the fever-pitch of the 2004 presidential campaign, when George Bush and John Kerry held dueling rallies a few blocks apart in downtown Milwaukee on the day before Election Day. Recall the intensity of the 2010 mid-terms with a Senate seat and the governor’s office up for grabs. Remember the summer recall wars of six months ago that briefly dominated American politics.

Then imagine it all happening at once, in a carnival (or inferno) of political combat.

That’s what 2012 will be like.