California May Be Victory Lap for Democratic Nominee

The outcome of the Democratic presidential race could be settled before Californians vote next month, but the state’s primary offers the eventual nominee a chance to start locking down a crucial corner of the electoral map for November.

None of the top contenders for the Democratic nomination have the strong ties to California that former President Clinton built. As a result, the run-up to the March 2 primary will serve as the future nominee’s main introduction to many California voters -- whether the race remains competitive or not.

Without California in November, Democrats will be hard-pressed to win the White House.

“This is a time when you get maximum exposure,” said Democratic strategist Bill Carrick of Los Angeles.

It’s far from clear that California’s primary will matter in naming President Bush’s Democratic challenger. With upcoming contests this month in 10 other states and Washington, D.C., a candidate could in effect clinch the nomination before the California vote.

Sen. John F. Kerry of Massachusetts, the front-runner after triumphs in seven of the nine states that have voted so far, is trying to pile up enough victories to become the presumed nominee before California, New York and eight other states vote March 2.

By then, some candidates may have abandoned the race. Howard Dean, the former Vermont governor, said Thursday he would be forced out if he failed to win Wisconsin on Feb. 17. Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina and retired Army Gen. Wesley K. Clark have pinned their hopes on victories next week in Tennessee and Virginia.

Dean pollster Paul Maslin described California as “totally hostage to the states that come before it” -- and so securely anchored to Democrats that its role in the general election is apt to be minimal.

“California right now is on the fringe of national politics, and it’s not going to change any time soon,” he said.

Still, California’s primary will enable the eventual Democratic nominee to lay the groundwork to ensure that the state remains safe territory in November. Clinton and Al Gore, the Democratic nominee in 2000, both secured California in the early stages of their campaigns, then focused in the fall on more competitive states such as Florida, Michigan and Pennsylvania.

Though any candidate prefers to lock up the race early, the absence of a competitive race in California could harm the ultimate nominee -- by lessening the free attention he gets from the California media. The enormous cost of advertising in the state is likely to limit the number of commercials.

Over the last year, the Democratic candidateshave paid frequent visits to California, but mostly to collect money, not to draw the public eye.

Kerry has cultivated close ties to Silicon Valley donors. Edwards has tapped the state’s vast network of trial lawyers, along with a few Hollywood celebrities. On a two-day swing next week to the state, Edwards will collect donations at actor Dennis Hopper’s house in Los Angeles.

But Edwards’ staff is also scouting high-profile campaign stops. With the primary looming, he and the other candidates are turning their attention to building voter loyalty among Californians -- as Clinton did in 1992, when he became the first Democrat since Lyndon Johnson in 1964 to carry the state. The former Arkansas governor had an affinity not just for the Hollywood elite but for African Americans and Latinos, residents of the Inland Empire and the state’s agricultural heartland.

“Bill Clinton just seemed to intuitively understand the political rhythms of the state -- always did, from the first,” said Mickey Kantor, national chairman of Clinton’s 1992 campaign.

For the 2004 contenders, “there hasn’t been that sort of connection with the state,” said Kantor, who practices law in Los Angeles and Washington.

Tony Podesta, who ran Michael Dukakis’ California campaign in 1988, called the Democratic primary “an opportunity to come to understand the state by being there.”

In the last three presidential elections, Republican nominees suffered landslide defeats in California. Bush partisans say the election of Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger as governor in October suggests that California could once again be in play for the GOP. The combined vote for Schwarzenegger and fellow Republican Tom McClintock was 62%.

“That wall of resistance that Republicans have seen over the last decade, decade and a half, has been vastly crumbled down,” said Ed Goeas, a pollster for GOP Senate candidate Bill Jones. “California in reality is a different state than it was just months ago. The landscape has changed tremendously.”

Democrats dismiss such claims as bluster, noting that Bush -- unlike Schwarzenegger -- is more conservative than most Californians on abortion, guns, the environment and other issues.

“It won’t escape voters’ attention that on virtually every important issue, Arnold Schwarzenegger will have more in common with the views of the Democratic nominee than with George Bush,” said Roy Behr, a strategist for Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer.

But each Democrat in the presidential race starts as a relatively unknown figure to California voters. And even now -- 25 days from the primary -- the candidates are concentrating on Michigan, Wisconsin and other states. Kerry media advisor Jim Margolis said strategists for the Massachusetts senator recognize the importance of California, but “we’re not getting ahead of ourselves.”

“We’re focused on the states that are right in front of us today,” he said.

For the November election, some Democrats worry that Bush will have enough money -- perhaps $200 million -- to mount a major television ad campaign in California.

“Will Bush win California? Never,” said state Democratic Chairman Art Torres. “But will he make it competitive and make us spend money in California? Possibly.”