Writing the Obituary for Bradley Effect is Premature and Foolhardy

Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama has never publicly made mention of the Bradley Effect. The Bradley Effect is the label that's been plopped onto the penchant of many white voters to shade, deceive or just plain lie to pollsters and interviewers when they tell them that color doesn't mean anything to them in an election. The only thing they claim they look at is the competence and experience of the candidates in an election. In a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll released on Martin Luther King', Jr.'s birthday, nearly three out of four whites say America's ready for a black president -- presumably that means they'd vote for Obama without batting an eye.

After Obama's breakthrough win in the Iowa caucus election and his narrow loss in New Hampshire, two of the whitest voting states, political experts trumpeted that the vote for Obama was close to that of his numbers in the final polls. They gleefully rushed to write the obituary for the Bradley Effect. They moved too fast. The Bradley Effect is alive and well, and it appeared to be very much in play in Nevada. Hillary Clinton trounced Obama among the state's white voters. Obama got the overwhelming backing of black voters and that markedly bumped up his vote totals. But they make up less than one in five of the state's black voters.

The white vote, or lack of it, that Obama got in Nevada is far more representative and ominous for Obama than the white votes he got in Iowa or New Hampshire. Many Iowa Democrats are independent, populist-leaning, and have broken ranks in the past with the Democratic Party's odds on favored candidates. Obama also got a huge boost from young voters. They were fired up enough by his change message, relative youth and the novelty of his campaign to flood the polls for him. In New Hampshire, legions of voters are independent, even contrarian, in who and how they pick their candidates. But Nevada was a far different story.

Bush won Nevada twice but Bill Clinton also won the state in 1996. At first glance, the state is a political oddity when stacked up against the rock solid GOP states to the North and to the East of Nevada. Its relative political flexibility also makes it a state that seems very much in play for the Democrats. Thousands of the state's voters are young, and could be considered moderate Democrats. But that's what makes it even more troubling for Obama. A big cornerstone of his pitch is to younger, moderate Democrats, and independents. He has done everything possible to tailor his message, style, persona, and even the appearances he makes in the most racially neutral way possible. There is absolutely no chance that there will be a Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton sighting in his campaign at least in the swing states.

That's wise. They would be the political kiss of death for him if there is even the vaguest hint that they are visible in his campaign or too enthusiastically cheer lead his campaign. In fact Sharpton hasn't endorsed Obama, and Jackson's endorsement has been perfunctory. He has even criticized him a couple of times. Their noticeable hands-off his campaign are tacit recognition of the Bradley Effect. Their active involvement in it or even favorable words by them about it could stir the Bradley Effect.

Though Obama has said nothing publicly about the Bradley Effect, he is very much aware that it derailed Bradley's drive to be the nation's first black governor in modern times, caused Doug Wilder to sweat nervously on election night in Virginia before he squeaked out a win there for governor in 1989, and helped do in Harvey Gantt and Harold Ford, Jr. in their Senate campaigns in North Carolina and Tennessee. It wreaked havoc in other campaigns where a black has squared off face-to-face with a white candidate.

Though there's no proof that the Bradley Effect played any role in Obama's defeat in New Hampshire, Obama campaign insiders admit that they are keeping a hawk-like eye out for any sign that it could crop up and hurt their man. They're smart to do that. The plain truth is that if Obama bagged every black vote in every state it wouldn't ensure him the Democratic nomination, let alone the White House. White males still make up nearly 40 percent of the American electorate, and older white women make up a big bloc of voters, and the majority of them are Democrats. He can't win without their votes.

The Bradley Effect is murky, amorphous, and virtually defies fingering. Yet, it will cause nervous moments for Obama's campaign when it rolls into the South and the other Western and heartland states. There's a lot of campaign left. To write the obituary for the Bradley Effect is premature, and worse, foolhardy.

Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. His forthcoming book is The Ethnic Presidency: How Race Decides the Race to the White House (Middle Passage Press, February 2008).

earlofarihutchinson.blogspot.com

Comments

[fjstratford]

Why is it when Latinos voted solidly for Clinton in NV the press and Obama implied that it was racist? Why is it that when white women voted for Clinton in NH the press and Obama shouted "Tom Bradley"? I ask because blacks voting along racial lines in SC does not seem to be so bad, according to the media and Obama...

TO ME THAT MEANS THAT OBAMA AND THE MEDIA ARE RACISTS.

[nihilon x]

Obama is actually ahead (or tied, depending on your perspective) in the primaries and you're already talking about "the Bradley effect".

Give people a little credit -- prejudice also includes judging others as racist before all the facts are in.

[Dalicious]

The Bradley Effect is in and of itself a racist concept. It took a racist to think of it, and only racists repeat it. Why do they repeat it? Because the Democratic Party has been obsessed with racism ever since its members founded the Klan back in the 1860s, and since it imposed segregation upon the country after Reconstruction.

[Ides]

Oh, God, the Bradley effect again? Why do we keep blaming the Bradley effect for something that hasn't happened? Obama got the same percentage of votes in New Hampshire the polls said he would get. He got 5-6 points more than they thought he would days before in Nevada. And yet, the "Bradley Effect" keeps hovering around his head. While saying it's dead is premature, saying it has had any influence YET is plain wrong.

You notice the same media coverage of woman voters. Obama has gotten the same percentage of woman voters he has always gotten, 34-35% in EVERY primary and caucus. This is an incredibly consistent turnout from women. Yet, the media says Obama is LOSING the woman vote just because Hillary is INCREASING in votes from women.

Meanwhile, the media flocks to say Obama is getting the black vote by default. This is convoluted. Obama has ACTUALLY taken the black vote away from Hillary Clinton over time, not by default. Why is it the media never paints the possible, and quite reasonably probable, alternative that WOMEN are going to Hillary by default.

Think about it. Blacks were heavily for Hillary Clinton against a black candidate a month ago. Blacks are now against Clinton. Women on the other hand were evenly distributed across the electoral field two months ago. As candidates have left the field women have gone STRAIGHT TO HILLARY. But the media never gives Hillary Clinton the state-by-state overwhelming voter advantage Hillary would have "by default" if the media treated WOMAN voters the same way they treat BLACK voters.

[trailrunner9]

You explained the Bradley effect. What is it called when black voters when given the chance to choose and African American or white candidate that they formerly liked choose the black candidate 5:1 (based on Nevada statistics). Are you saying that the explanation is that African American voters weighed all the issues and the black candidate just happened to be better 5:1. Come on. Have you read some of the comments on this postings? Some of the most vile, racist comments are from African Americans. Racism works both ways. People are people when given the power or opportunity. There are racists in all ethnic backgrounds. How about we give a little balance to the story. And it strikes me in this story that when the African American media/radio started burning up with Clinton hate and made this about race is when it began to turn off white voters who had previously not been looking at Obama as the "African American" candidate. Obama wanted it both ways. He cashed in on the race thing for a primary win and now in the larger picture it's going to cost him.

[taikan]

You state: "nearly three out of four whites say America's ready for a black president -- presumably that means they'd vote for Obama without batting an eye." Just because a voter says that America is ready for a black president doesn't mean that he/she believes Obama should be elected. Many people voted for Tom Bradley because they thought he was a better candidate than Deukmejian. That doesn't mean they will vote for Obama, with or without batting an eye.

[greejambri]

Mr. Hutchinson, -- as much as you and other Hillary Clinton supporters would like to, "to write the obituary for the (Barack Obama campaign) is premature, and worse, foolhardy." unquote.

[GWHayduke]

Why is this being framed as a white vs black issue? The electorate in Nevada - more specifically in the population center of Las Vegas - has a huge Hispanic component. There's a much deeper racial divide these days between Hispanics and blacks than between whites and blacks, at least here in the west. Look at the Hispanic split between Hillary and Obama and you'll find the key to the Nevada vote.

This is substantiated by the fact that Obama did better in rural Nevada, which is almost as white as Iowa and New Hampshire. White voters appear less concerned about Obama's flesh tone than Hispanics are.

[Nutcase]

Thank you. When I mentioned, and then had to explain, the Bradley Effect a few weeks ago, I was attacked as a racist. My intention was to make other posters aware of it, given that we have no idea how to quantify it or how much it has changed since Bradley's time. Too many voters decide based on MSM-manufactured image or number of chromosomes or pigmentation. There should be some consideration given to other factors (issues, character, etc.) but we should acknowledge the effect of factors that should have no place in the process.

cognito ergo populistae

[TonytheMisfit]

Let's not be stupid. Of course there is a Bradley Effect. Racism in America is alive and well. In addition, people are very prone to lie, in general, and fall into defense mode when asked about race. Only avowed, open supremacists will reveal their racism.

More specifically, lets look at my home state of New Jersey. I know several people personally (White and Hispanic) who will vote for anyone but Obama and they will only reveal this to their close friends. To many in the NJ Italian - American community - which is very large here - Obama is (in nicer words) unacceptable. Not all, mind you, but enough.

Imho, Obama loses v. McCain or Giuliani in NJ. Romney is probably 50-50. Huckabee also scares people here, so he's probably a loser. Race definitely enters into the NJ contest as a factor.

By the way, I am an Edwards supporter, but I will vote and work for Obama, should he get the nomination.

Carpe Diem!

[DeLuxe]

The Bradley effect may well provide some of the explaination. It will be interesting to see if Latinos are subject to the same phenomenon as white canidates. My intuition is that they will more accurately report how they will vote, but that polling my underrepresent Spanish speaking voters.

[mirandaK]

Interesting read, thank you Mr. Hutchinson.

I wondered if Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton would ever publicly endorse Obama. Thank you for putting some perspective on it rather than what I hear on the news programs. They are so in your face that I tend to ignore what they say even though they are pretty much saying some of the same things you are. No offense intended.

Friends have mentioned that they were turned off by Oprah's support of Obama and have stopped watching her show. Perhaps Oprah transcended race because of her predominately white audience, is she a benign black woman?

It's apparent that women with power scare some people but a black woman with power really scare them. A black man with power...with the support of a powerful black woman with lots o' money... whoa.

I am a Clinton supporter, if Obama gets the nom then I will by all means support him. I was thrilled when I first heard him speak at the Dem Convention but now that I have had an opportunity to listen to him, read about him and watch him in the debates, I do not think he is the best candidate, the thrill is gone so to speak. I don't like him as much now.

What this race for the nomination has done is pulled the covers off a real issue; race vs gender. It's real and it has caused me to question my own racist views, those I don't talk about or admit to much less share with others...and I am a person of color.

We've had men in the WH, it's time for a woman. While I was too young to vote I campaigned for Shirley Chisholm (an ideal), how blessed would this country be if this was her time now!

In regard to the obit you write about, yes, I agree, premature and foolhardy. I am hoping that we do NOT someday talk about the Hillary Effect.

Thank you for giving me food for thought, however sobering.

[cynara]

From what I've heard, Hillary had better organization in Nevada. An aquaintance of mine who worked on the Obama campaign in Nevada complained bitterly about its management. This could be a much bigger factor in her win than the "Bradley Effect".

[Nommo]

Hutch, here is another aspect of the effect that is easily missed. It is the "green" or "not ready" type of reasons that are put forward to justify not voting for Obama. I have even seen that old saw "childish" in a few responses. It has been a long time since I have seen so many code words.

Go back over all your years of following this stuff. I will state now that I have never seen such language ever applied to any white candidate for any office so frequently and so maliciously as they are applied to Barack Obama.

Ex coke fiends, (or should I say former?) serial rapists can all be presidents, but that green fellow...

[Meah]

The "Bradley Effect" is not necessarily anything that can be generalized in other elections in other states or nationally, since Tom Bradley ran in California. And I think it tends to be a self fulfilling prophecy type of assumption. It really bothered me that when Obama did not win in New Hampshire, that the Bradley Effect was mentioned right away by several African American radio and TV commentators. I do not really think this is fair, and it gave me a sinking feeling. That Hillary Clinton got ganged up on and was defended by women was more to the point, I think. The pollsters were all wrong in New Hampshire, and I really hope that people who are voting in the Democratic party know that times have changed. I think Iowa told us that.