Bradley Who? Here Comes the Obama Effect
Everyone knows about the dreaded Bradley Effect: the phenomenon that leaves white voters loath to tell pollsters they won't vote for a black candidate. There's been a lot of fretting about this recently -- fretting, I find, that correlates with age: the older you are, the more likely you are to believe the Bradley Effect will turn up in this election. Here are some reasons Democrats needn't be overly worried, in ascending order of importance:
1. The event that gave the BE its name -- the 1982 California gubernatorial election, when Tom Bradley, the black mayor of Los Angeles, polled well and then lost resoundingly -- took place 26 years ago. Don't you think the world has changed a little bit since then, especially regarding tolerance? Consider a prejudice once thought to be even more intense than racial prejudice: If we've made even a quarter of the progress in racial matters that we have in issues regarding sexuality, that alone turns the Bradley Effect on its ear.
2. There are 60 million Americans of voting age who hadn't yet reached the age of eight in 1982. Don't you think their racial attitudes are different from the people who have disappeared from the voting roles in that time -- namely, their dead grandparents?
3. Tennessee, 2006: The Democratic candidate for the Senate was a black man, Harold Ford. Tennessee hadn't elected a Democrat to the Senate since 1990. George Bush carried the state in 2004 by a 14 point margin. Republicans ran an ad, right before Election Day, suggesting that Ford had a taste for white women. In this very red state, with a black population of only 17%, Ford lost by just 3 percentage points. More to the point, he did better in the election than in the pre-election polling.
4. One recent, ill-conceived analysis suggests that 6% of people polled will not admit that they will not vote for a black man. Ask yourself: even if this were accurate, how many of them would be likely to vote for a liberal Democrat anyway? How many of them live in states that McCain is going to carry no matter what, like Texas or Mississippi? How many live in states that Obama is going to carry no matter what, like New York or California?
5. Finally, and most importantly, isn't there another shoe to drop on this issue -- namely, the number of people who will vote for Obama because he's black? I'm not talking about white voters who think it's time for a black president, or who want to feel good about their own racial attitudes -- those are Democratic voters in any case. I'm talking about the increased turnout among black voters. In recent elections, 51% of registered blacks voters showed up at the polls. Do you think that number will be up 10%? 20%? More? So do I. And that's just registered black voters. Registration of new black voters in states like Virginia and North Carolina has been one of the Obama organization's most notable accomplishments.
As a result, I'm looking for the debut of the Obama Effect -- a level of increased participation among black voters that may change the electoral map for years to come.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I know MANY people living in a Republican household, that when asked, many have this sick look on their faces and less than enthusiastic support for McCain. But they go along with the Patriarch of the family or the majority of the company they are in. Usually, the reason is 'I would never vote for a black man'. I'll bet the farm that many of these people are going to vote for Obama, unbeknownst to all.
I would like to pose to the Media a different look on this.
I am a volunteer co-ordinator for Obama in a very ultra-conservative area. Many times I have been approached by Republicans who whisper to me that they will vote for Obama but do not want their neighbors to know. I call them the "Whisper People". They are the ones who will say to pollsters that they are Repubs and for McCain yet they are the ones who will vote for Obama
wow, that is a lot of reasons for hope...and just now I needed some after the CNN analysis piece last night that really tried to cast uncertainties about the validity of polls.
I find each of the points have some merit but like 4 and 5 as the strongest.
November 4th, the American people will make a choice that will either move this country forward and back and into continued decline. Voting for Barack Obama is voting for real change in a nation that must change or die. Voting for John McCain is voting for yesterday, the Bush administration again and moving toward oblivion.
We shouldn't even be discussing this. You either vote for Obama or not. And it looks like by all indications that Obama will win. McCain and Palin are not a valid option for leadership of this country. People are ready for a change. It is disgusting to have lived through eight years of horsesh-- under a failed Bush administration. The only people voting for McCain/Palin are the diehard Republicans who can't see the light because their head is stuck so tightly up their as--es; they are neocon thugs, right wingnut extremists, fundamentalist Christians or members of the Free Republic who have run into the woods with their cans and guns waiting for the rapture. I'm sorry, but you will never convince me that these are the majority in this country.
One more member of the roll call: the lazy-minded. I met a woman at church who "just doesn't trust Obama" because she believes she's very discerning and can tell by his television appearances that "he's not for real." Debbie is certain that she can "tell" a liar just by looking at them.
She hasn't spoken to me since Palin started giving interviews, though.
I frigging hope so because we cannot take another year of Republican politics let alone four. The more I hear out of the McCain campaign and its low life people, the more I disdain and hold Republicans in contempt.
The Bradly effect only matters in 8 swing states. In all other states it is meaningless because your electoral college vote has already been assigned to either of the two parties.
The only way for your voice to be heard is to vote 3rd party.
This is what really happened in the 1967 L.A. mayoral race between Tom Bradley (an L.A.P.D. Captian) and incumbent Sam Yorte, who, in prior decade, had run an anti-corruption campaign against the Poulson machine, but, since had lost his luster due to his right wing positions, insensitivity to police brutality incidents, appointments, and the usual scandals. Bradley led by 15 points. People heard him on radio; you couldn't tell he was black. Like James Flournoy voters, some didn't know till late. Trailing worse than McC in the final days, Yorte had to do something drastic. He did. Bradley's lead evaporated because what Yorte did was: to plaster the Latino community with ads and rallies, claiming their issue will be ignored because black issues will eclipse the attention they deserve. Commentators noted the Latino turnout and exit polling confirmed the "divide and conquer" strategy effects. It takes TWO to activate the Bradley effect. Like Yorte, McC is on the right track by sending Palin to stir up the crowds so McC can convince Americans that race will be a thought-distraction for O's entire presidency, eclipsing the economy. After all: America has so few brain cells, they must be carefully rationed. I know. I am 104 years old and was was born and raised in San Quentin with a G.E.D. That's how Obama will lose.
I'm not convinced the Bradley affect is what cost Bradley the loss.
Maybe it was the alligator affect, you know...where the beasts are set loose to roam about, chewing up the ballots cast for someone that those in control do not want to see win, as scandalous as that sounds, it seems that it has indeed happened, in all kinds of disenfranchising kinds of ways, of course.
It's like that curious "osama" print out on the absentee ballots coming from upstate NY that were proclaimed as being just a mistake. It would seem that more of an explanation is necessary, particularly since today, the McCain campaign is instructing their voters to make depraved comparisons between Sen. Obama and the man seen as the arch enemy of the United States - Osama. Yes, Osama, the guy whose name was placed on NY States absentee ballots in one upstate county.
It would seem inconceivable that the editing process involved in printing something as serious as absentee ballots for the office of the presidency yet, no one noticed that incendiary reference.
Usually, there are at least 2 people involved in editing and review, with final approval given before printing is executed.
Perhaps the County Executive can explain what went so terribly wrong in the process, because it surely seems very curious that this occurred without anyone noticing it.
Perhaps we are calling these "affects" by the wrong name, because perhaps they involve more than what meets the eye?
WHY WHY WHYYYYYY do wh ite people always claim that racism doesn't exist anymore? I will never understand this urge to speak authoritatively about that which you do not know.
This is the 3rd election that I have been able to vote in. I have voted everytime.
I was born and raised in California.
I have several professional degrees and an excellent career.
Guess what? I HAVE EXPERIENCED RAC ISM. It has NOT been wiped clean in 26 years! My goodness, it sickens me how the cau cas ian liberal demographic has become the biggest apologists for rac ism. Instead of fighting to eliminate it, you just ignore that it exists.
Talk about privilege.
Of course racism still exists. But the dirty politics of the McCain campaign is bringing out the trash from under the carpet and the more it is out in the open, the better to deal with it. I wish both black and white would leave off of the racial card issue already. You are just causing more ill will than not. How many times do we have to say that those of us voting for Obama are voting for him because he is a Democrat, because of his idealogy, his leadership ability and trust that he will help our country. Racism hasn't totally gone away, but it disappears a little each year as young people are educated and have exposure to diversity. It is in the small towns where people are isolated and retain their fears and hatreds that racism lingers. There are a lot of injustices in this country, and throughout the world, including the massive holocaust of and cruelty to animals, and by fundamentalist Islamaic hatred of Americans. We will not change people by screaming and yelling and chest pounding, but by educating and example. I can understand your frustration, but please, let's not stir up the pot when it is trying to reach stability.
Racism is not limited to small towns where people are limited. It's just more apparent in small towns because (a) people are more vocal about it and (b) victims have less recourse.
"Stirring the pot," is exactly how we reach equality. The fact that Obama is running has itself stirred the pot, and forced racial apologists to acknowledge a reality that the rest of us have known for the last 200 years. Now, when confronted with the evidence of these racialized ideas, people just want to ignore it. How is that education, in any way shape or form? How does that stop people from secretly changing their votes when they are in privacy?
And please, don't use the term "holocaust" when referring to animals... or compare animals to the experience of people of color ... or claim that those practicing Islam are the only ones who hate America these days. Unfortunately, we've lost our moral authority to most of the world.
WHY WHY WHYYYYYY do wh ite people always claim that racism doesn't exist anymore? I will never understand this urge to speak authoritatively about that which you do not know.
I'm a young Black woman who was a mere 1 years old during the Bradley election. I was born and raised in California. I have several professional degrees and an excellent career. Guess what?I HAVE EXPERIENCED RACISM. It has not been wiped clean in a mere 26 years and the Bradley effect is quite the reality.
My goodness, it sickens me how the "liberal" population has become the biggest racism-apologists ever. No one wants to admit the extent to which race and racist attitudes drive American society.
Talk about privilege.
Forget the Bradley effect, worry about the Le Pen effect. In the Bradley case, people didn't want to admit to pollsters that they'd cast a vote on a racial basis. With Obama, there is no need for that: people can say they won't vote for him because of Ayers, or any other "non-racial" excuse served on a platter by the McCain campaign. So while they might lie to pollsters about their motivation, they won't be lying about their vote.
The Le Pen effect is different. In France, in each election, pollsters don't know how to estimate the support of the extreme right. Many voters are embarrassed to admit they're going to vote for Le Pen, and the polls are always misleading (the difficulty resides in estimating by how much). This is because people instinctively want to please the pollsters, who are known to be urban, well-educated and likely to disapprove of candidates like Le Pen (or Palin).
So people's please-the-pollster tendency still may lead to an inflation of Obama's numbers, even in the absence of a Bradley effect.
I disagree. Obama has been tested already in the primaries and beat the most popular democrat president and his wife. This is HUGE. People are enthusiastic about Obama, now more than ever and will vote for him in huge numbers.The polls were not wrong in the primaries.
Ce n'est pas Le Pen.
I hope.
I am a white man who lives in California. I remember 1982. I voted for Tom Bradley. For years the Bradley Effect has dogged the political conscience with little proof. In 1982 there were a flood of absentee ballots that favor Republicans. There was also a handgun proposition on the ballot that energized the Republican base and boosted turnout. Democrats tend to be less energized on a normal basis then Republicans and vote at far lower percentages. Something not reflected in the polls.
That was then. This is now. It is the Democrats that have the momentum and are energized. Obama is a generational candidate. His campaign is like nothing any of us have ever seen. There are no comparisons. Bradley was no Obama. Sorry Tom. I believe racial attitudes have changed enormously. The current group of younger voters do not see race the same way. The tend to be more color blind. Also polling has gotten so much more refined and accurate. If there was a Bradley Effect it would have shown its ugly head by now and Obama would be watching from the sidelines.
After this election we will finally be able to put the Bradley Effect behind us. Racism will always be with us. The trick is too make it less and less relevant. Barack Obama will be a great stride toward putting racism farther in the rear view mirror.
I sincerely hope you're right. I live in a very small, very red town. I'm at the office today, which is unusual. The closed sign is in the window, but one of the Board members saw my car here and stopped in. She's a dedicated Fox Noise watcher and I have made a point of NOT talking politics with her. She's things Dubya is the BEST president ever. Sigh. Anyway, she started railing on Pastor Wright. I said that the subject had played itself out in the primaries, and we're going to have to agree to disagree because I'm an Obama supporter. She kept on railing and I finally told her it was inappropriate for her to be lecturing me on who to vote for since she's my employer. She stalked out.
Keep the faith Deni. There were factors in 1982 that have only been addressed with minimum attention. It was not all deception of pollsters. The Wilder election was more of an example of pollster deception and that was primarily exit polls. Before the Bradley Effect became the stuff of legend the other factors in 1982 were given more credence then they are now. They are generally dismissed.
This is a different time. The polls are more anonymous and sophisticated. Racism is still alive and not well but it is diminished especially among younger voters. My daughter is 18 and her and friends are on fire to vote. Far more motivated then my generation. I really believe the Bradley Effect is a relic of another time.
I do not believe Barack would have made it this far if it were a factor. As for dealing with rabid conservatives......you might want to try pepper spray.
Keep the faith Deni. This is our time.....this is Barack's time.
I bet your boss wouldn't have a problem telling a pollster she was voting for McCain...
I don't know about the "Bradley Effect", but I do know about voter suppression and rigged voting machines - check out bradblog.com. I am glad Obama is a leap ahead of McShrub and Winky, but the race is far from over and the dirty work hasn't even begun yet...I have no doubt that Obama will win the election, but it's very likely he will never see the inside of the White House due to the rigged machines in key swing states...
You are forgetting that there has been a huge increase in Asian, Hispanic and non-white voters who are only too aware and have experienced the effects of White Supremacy. In the year 2030, whites will be a minority. I hope that we, non whites, will treat the whites better than what the whites have done to us. Of course, I am not including those whites who are better evolved.
Catholics who are true to church social teaching could not vote for McCain because of the words in Mattthew about the poor. Jews who are true to the Tanakh, also. The issues are such that a vote for McCain is a vote against every value one has as a religious person. Watching men's behinds anxiously and screaming at women at abortion clinics doesn't cut it any longer. You have to take a stand about family-oriented action like day care and a living wage.
The BE is simply an acknowledgement that polls are merely educated guesses and can not always predict outcomes. All of the campaigns in this election have done a great job of making the polls much more reliable in this election at least so far as the BE is concerned. The hugh rallies of very vocal people around the nation have proven that voters don't have a problem expressing their feelings about candidates regardless of whether those feelings are positive or negative. Then there's always the possibility that maybe, just maybe, more of the negative feelings are being expressed and more of the positive feelings toward Obama are being hidden just as UniquelyMe stated below. After all, just how many times has the BE been documented. I've only heard it mentioned in that one election all those many years ago.
And btw, don't count Mississippi out so fast! Mississippi, like many other states, is going to be closer than you think!
You know, there is a possibility that you might be on to something here.
I, my spouse, and my kids are all white, but we live in quite a racially diverse suburb of Chicago. We have whites, as well as many blacks, hispanics, and Asians around us. We like bringing our kids up here to show them that many good people come in all colors and from all backgrounds. We are also strong supporters of Obama, and Illinois is considered "safe" for capturing the electoral votes for him.
I have thought about getting an Obama campaign sign for the front of my house too. If it were just me and my spouse only, I'd definitely get it. However, since I have my children to think of first I won't be displaying that in front of our house. Again, we live in quite a diverse area with probably strong Obama support. However, especially since reading about these fruitcake hate-mongers of McCain's, I will not even risk the possibility of harm coming to my children because of them.
You could be right that there are more supporters of him than are willing to talk about it out loud. I'm hoping in the privacy of the voting booth though they will be willing to voice their opinion.
Hope, not fear. GObama '08!
I can understand your dilemma. Try living in the conservative south and being an Obama supporter. There are a lot of kooks out there, especially thanks to John McCain's campaign and the pitt bull from Alaska. But I had to tell you what I saw on one blog. A person simply stated, "fear smothers hope." I thought that was so profound on many levels and says a lot for this election.
Fear never trumps hope. Bill Clinton profoundly said something to the effect of "when offered fear or hope, choose hope". America will choose hope---have no fear.
"Fear smothers hope"? Perhaps. But love conquers fear.
If you have enough love for your children and grandchildren and their future; if there's enough love for the country once viewed by people around the globe as the greatest in the world; if there's enough love for the valiant young men and women who literally put their lives on the line every day to preserve the freedoms of this country, then hope has more than a fighting chance.
And hope, plus faith, plus action is an unbeatable combination.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
