Carlsen is the best/only hope for chess to clean up its act (reinventing FIDE and the Candidates process), and market itself to the broader Western public, much as poker has been marketed. Keeping my fingers crossed.
As a chess player and fan, this will never happen. Poker can be very fun to watch, even for people who don't know how it's played. Chess is often boring to watch, even for people who do know how it's played. Can it's profile be increased? Absolutely. Will it ever compare to the television success of poker? I doubt it, but that's OK.
Blitz games, and bullet tie-breakers. Brightly-colored computer evaluations - a "win %" that swings wildly with every move. HD close ups of the players' frantic, sweaty faces. Pieces flying. Maurice Ashley. Anna Sharevich.
With the right backing, chess can definitely be as popular as poker. Big-money TV poker is very much a modern creation. Even big-money basketball is a "creation," not a founding plank of US culture.
I feel the other way: Poker is boring to watch, too much luck/randomness when watching. Fun to play, though.
I'm not really a chess player, but I've watched all the matches this Championship, and all my friends (not chessplayers as well) are watching. It helps that we are Norwegian, though. And that may be the point: A western player will bring back the popularity in the west.
If you're thinking of tournament poker, than I can see what you're saying. Try watching some deep-stacked cash games sometime though; this is the most high-level and interesting poker to watch (and also the most instructive).
Also, poker has the "everyman" factor going for it. When the amateur Chris Moneymaker won the World Series in 2003, the popularity of the game exploded. This could never happen in chess.
