The End of the Bradley Effect -- and the Dawn of The Palin Defect

There has been much discussion recently about whether the so-called "Bradley Effect" will contribute to the outcome of this presidential contest; whether voters in the private confines of the voting booth will actually pull the lever or punch the ballot for an African-American candidate. When Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley, an African-American, ran for governor of California in 1982, the polls had him widely ahead on Election Day. He lost, it is believed, because those polled were not truthful when asked if race would affect their choice.

Many pundits caution that such racial prejudice still lurks in the background today. They argue that despite Obama's comfortable lead, the Bradley Effect could rear its head at the last minute and become a significant factor in the outcome of this election. Others believe that race has already been factored into the polls and is the major reason why Obama is not leading by a much wider margin with all conditions seemingly pointing his way.

An Obama victory on November 4 would be the death knell of the Bradley Effect. With an African-American in the White House, our country would finally be post-racial. The next generation of minorities born in this country, whether African-American, Latino-American, Asian-American or Indian-American, would truly not comprehend that race was once a barrier to high public office, much in the way that young women today cannot really fathom that they did not always have the right to vote.

The Bradley Effect thus behind us, the legacy of the 2008 presidential election would be what I call the "Palin Defect." I believe that the majority of independent swing voters who are on the fence about whether to vote for John McCain or Barack Obama will ultimately choose Obama in the voting booth because of Sarah Palin. They will not be able to shake their nagging feeling that Palin is just completely unqualified to be the vice president; that her views and campaigning style are divisive, her knowledge base is laughable and she is downright dangerous for our country. While she may possess style and be able to deliver a performance, she has negligible substance -- something we just cannot afford to live without in these complex times.

So despite their affinity for McCain, they will ultimately be swayed by the thought that on day one Sarah Palin would be a heartbeat away from a president who would be 72 years old with a history of melanoma and with what clearly seems to be her own separate agenda. And they will be reassured in their vote for Barack Obama by his much more reasoned and thoughtful selection of Joe Biden as his VP.

In retrospect, McCain's choice of Palin would be seen as a major cause of his defeat and the primary reason many of those even in his own party turned against him. The Palin Defect would thus forevermore dictate that: (1) the choice of a vice presidential running mate actually does matter and selecting a mate perceived as unqualified has real consequences; and (2) failure of the first real public test of a candidate's decision-making process, priorities, and judgment in the act of selecting a running mate can prove fatal to a candidate's prospects.

The Palin Defect would force future presidential candidates to place paramount importance on a running mate's actual ability to step in on day one should something happen to the president with the necessary seasoning, judgment, gravitas, and intellect to handle the job. A selection would no longer be able to be motivated strictly by political pandering or "playing to the base" the way that John McCain's selection of Sarah Palin and George H.W. Bush's selection of Dan Quayle were. Going forward, presidential candidates would truly have to put "country first" in choosing a vice-presidential running mate; otherwise, they could potentially suffer the outrage and backlash of the public and the media as they begin to expose the charade.

Will the 2008 election be the birth of a new guiding principal -- the Palin Defect -- in presidential elections?

Thankfully, we'll all know soon enough.

Comments

[PiscesGirl24]

I think the point here, is that anyone who mis-interpreted this article is the person with negative thougths. As I was reading through the comments, I didn't even understand what was going on because the idea that somehow this article was related to Palin's family never even crossed my mind.

I guess their is more of a "defect" in someone assuming anything that horrible.

Fred, I appreciate your style and hope that it won't change. Great story!

[Leon72]

To the author of this column, Mr. Goldring: There was no need to clarify this article. Not for one moment did I think I think you mention the "Palin Defect" to bring up images of her "special needs baby"
This is coming from someone who always picks up on symbolisms. Please continue to write thoughful, insightful columns.

[FirstShirt]

Gingrich says there is no Bradley effect. So if you agree with Gingrich, and Buckley and now Powell then I guess you have nothing to worry about.

Republicans seem to be your main source of support.

[Roll451]

Excellent op-ed piece by in today's NYT by someone associated with 1982 Bradley campaign explaining why the polls being wrong that year was not necessarily due to the so called Bradley effect. Not all people disputing the potency of the Bradley effect are Republicans. I'm not even sure why you made this comment.

[armadillious2002]

I agree - swing voters and the undecided have evidently not drank the wing-nut cool aid so this gives them a degree of analytic ability that should allow them to see the danger if Sarah Palin would gain control of this country. Not a pretty picture.

[JRsNana]

I just spoke to my brother who lives in small town Tennessee. His wife's sister has already voted - for Obama. Her husband would divorce her if he found out so it's this big family secret. She tells everyone she "of course" voted for McCain. This is the Obama effect.

[truthforme]

wow, that's sad - not that she voted for Obama, but that her husband would divorce her if he knew. What kind of marriage is that?

[KHAAANNN]

It's a typical small-town Tennessee marrige.

[ProudNeoCon]

"the Birth of the Palin Defect"

Please tell me that this is not an attempt to play of the fact that Palin has a child with Down syndrome. Please... I still have hope that most of the people on both side of the isle are decent.

May I suggets that the author changes the name of the post...

[truthforme]

No one is doing any labeling of Sarah's baby here. The child has no bearing on this subject. The topic is Sarah Palin's limited ability to lead.

[Fred Goldring - Huffpost Blogger]

I did not in any way mean to imply that this article had anything to do with Sarah Palin's child. Frankly, it never even entered into my thinking when I wrote it and I didn't even realize it until someone commented on it on the Post. The "Palin Defect" refers only to the defectiveness of her choice as VP, nothing more. I used the term "birth" to represent the start of something brand new in contrast to what I hope is the end, or death, of the Bradley Effect. The reader who recognized that I used "defect" as a play on the term "effect' is exactly right - that was completely my intention. And of course as was also pointed out, when you read the article, you understand that.

To those who may have been offended by my choice of words and may be drawing some conclusion other than what intended, I apologize. Personal attacks are not my M.O. Humor is certainly an important part of how I communicate, but I certainly don't find humorous the unfortunate circumstances of Ms. Palin's downs syndrome child and her decision to have her child. There are plenty of other real issue-based deficiencies of Ms. Palin which can be examined rendering that kind of discussion unecessary and, in any event, distaseful.

Fred Goldring

[gdcb1128]

It is not. Read the article and you can see that is it a play on the "Bradley Effect." Nothing more.

[rwt1138]

The "Bradley Effect" doesn't exist. There was a last minute push by specific interest groups into areas where pollsters were not concentrating and some other discrepancies that overstated advantages in areas that didn't turn out as strongly as predicted that cost Bradley. To date, I have yet to hear of a single voter who has admitted or claimed that they one answer to a pollster and then balked at the vote because of race. In fact, the Bradley Effect doesn't even make much sense.

I've never met a racially biased person who was ashamed of it; have you? My experience with people who have racist tendencies is that they are unabashedly comfortable with their beliefs, and will happily supply you with plenty of justification--complete with anecdotes of dubious origin--to bolster and support their position. They may tone it down in the company of others, such as as minorities or people in authority whose views are unknown or known to be racially tolerant, but they won't express support for one view but then go secretly vote another.

The Bradley Effect is a convenient conservative myth that allows bigots to pretend like they are mainstream: "see? even liberals secretly feel the same way, we're just more honest about it."

Until someone can present me with something more than a single election with questionable polling practices and some wild conjecture to explain it, I refuse to believe that the Bradley Effect is anything more than a conservative myth.

[Researchguy66]

I'll agree and disagree slightly...there are obviously some people who lie to pollsters to cover up their racial biases. There are undoubtedly others who change their minds when confronted with the finality of actually pulling the lever. While I believe that those groups do exist, I do not believe they are sizeable enough to warrant discussion. Nor do I believe that Bradly lost the election for that reason. The Republican Party's absentee aggressive voting push and late poll movements significantly account for Bradley's loss without a need for an "effect"

Still, I expect that Obama will win with a margin far short of what the polls are showing now, due not to race, but to some tightenting that we always see going into the home strecth. A win's a win, but the difference will keep believers in the Bradley Effect going string for at least four more years.

[rwt1138]

I disagree that this is "obvious", that people lie to pollsters to cover their racial biases. That makes no sense to me and is intuitively non-obvious. Why state that you would vote Obama to cover your racial bias? There are plenty of compelling cover stories I hear for people to borrow instead:
"He's a Muslim"
"It's the experience factor"
"He's a socialist/marxist/communist/liberal/sith lord(pick one or more)"
"I'm not sure he's a true Christian"
The notion that there exists some person out there tortured by guilt into telling pollsters he's voting for the black candidate but secretly longing for McCain just doesn't make any sense to me. I have never met anyone who would lie about WHO they were voting for, just why. For example, my father in law would not vote for Kerry in 2004 because, he explained, Kerry had left his wife for another, richer woman who could finance his political aspirations. That, in his opinion, was too nakedly ambitious and dishonorable for him to support in a president. This year he supports McCain. So I never really doubt who someone says they are voting for, although I often question the reasons they give.
People don't lie about who they are voting for, just why, in my experience.

[kristah]

You have never met a racially biased person who is ashamed of it? of course you haven't! those that are ashamed hide it...they are the people you see here and elsewhere on the internet posting vile garbage, things that they would NEVER say in front of anyone else. They are cowards. But sadly, they exist too.

[rwt1138]

They only hide it until they are sure you won't be one of the "politically correct police". Actually, people these days are far less guarded about hiding their racial preferences and biases than I remember in my earlier years; call it the Limbaugh/Coulter effect. Prejudice, unfortunately, appears to be making a comeback.

[JRsNana]

I work at a restaurant in a small farming/university town. My counter is filled with ex-military men, farmers, barbers.......proud Republicans all.
They are more than aware of opposite political views, but we maintain a very friendly relationship in spite of our differences.
Shortly after the Palin pick, one of my ex-military men said to me "You"re loving John McCain now, aren"t you?" I snapped and let loose with my now-famous rant about Gov. Palin ("undereducated, incurious, vindictive, insult to women, giant step backwards, dangerously unqualified, pandering move¦..) endin with "Country First, my arse!"
Was he confused? Big time. He had been sent to confirm their feeling that his choice of Sarah had been a brilliant, landslide producing move. They were sure that just because she was a woman, every woman was going to immediately abandon any personally held political belief they ever had and rush to vote for McCain/Palin. They were amazed to find out that women actually want a QUALIFIED woman to be in or near the oval office. They thought it was great that she "wouldn"t" answer Charlie Gibson"s "bully" questions. Pointing out that wouldn"t and couldn"t were a tad bit different proved fruitless. They think it"s terrific that she "isn"t a know-it-all".
So, that"s my story from small town America. The Republican men are thinking with their eyes and nether regions and are in total shock that Sarah Palin hasn"t been universally embraced by womankind.

[kjstjohn]

I would not be surprised if the word "Palinesque" entered the English language. It would mean something that is superficially appealing that, when embraced, leads to shame and degradation. Sort of like a mythological siren but not that extreme. Sort of like gold but not so obvious or impersonal.

khstjohn

[HappinessHacker]

You still don't get it...

Electronic voting systems can be easily hacked - here's a link to well known
exploitable security vulnerabilities in electronic voting systems: http://www.crypto.com/blog/ohio_voting
or Google Ohio State Project Everest.

If you're going to try to steal an election, the first thing you do is to discount and
discredit polls and exit polls, hence all the current concerns about the Bradley Effect.

These discussions are dangerous distractions from the real threats we face.

University of Pennsylvania and Ohio State developed excellent analysis of these
real threats to voting system integrity.

Why don't you address real threats instead of serving up more dangerous distractions?

HappinessHacker.com - Atlanta

[harriscrl3]

Thank you I said this exact same thing and part of the reason why people are undecided so far out is because of Sarah Palin and they are waiting for something from her to show she is ready or for McCain to get her off the ticket but if none of these things happen which is likely when they get into that booth they are going to break for Obama instead of McCain. Palin is UNQUALIFIED and McCain is old. If the economy can trump race then Sarah Palin can trump race too. I think its a problem for some conservatives too because they are not saying they will jump their ticket but that may be factor when they get into that booth and realize Palin could be the next President.

Carol

[jobecky20]

I don't think there is a Bradley effect (voters lying to pollsters) in this election. There's a lot of debate about there even being a Bradley effect in the Bradley election --- Jerry Brown, a white man, was also running (for senate I think), and he lost, too, even though polls indicated he was way head. Obama is a candidate who seems to transcend race, somehow. Not entirely sure about a Palin effect...people who like McCain will still vote for him even though they have reservations about Palin.

[kozy]

I don't believe there will be a Net Bradley effect. But in some areas of the country there will be a Bradley effect, and some areas a reverse Bradley effect. They may just cancel each other out. The reverse Bradley effect is a white suburbanite feeling "white flight" social pressure, and therefore, pressure not to say they will vote for a black candidate. Although they intend to vote for Obama in the privacy of the voting booth, they will tell the pollster they are "undecided". Hopefully, neither the Bradley or reverse Bradley effect exists, but that may be too much to wish for.

[cousinavi]

I find the placement of the words Palin, Birth and Defect in the headline in rather poor taste.

I do not object to fair and reasonable attacks on Palin's character, qualifications, intellect or almost any other thing...but I cannot believe the implied reference escaped you.

[mobetta]

This Independent voter agrees that Goldring's basic thesis--that the Palin effect will outweigh the Bradley effect with true Independents--has traction with the most of the electorate who can think for themselves, which seems to exclude the glazed-eyed right-wingers.
However, this writer agrees with cousinavi, that if Goldring or other left wing writers want to be taken seriously, they can leave out the low class innuendo.
His argument could have stood on it's own without the sucker-punches

[PDinCA]

I found that in poor taste, too.

[spotlope]

If we win by racing Republicans to the bottom, humanity-wise, we've won nothing at all. The article might be well reasoned and researched, but the poor choice of title really sinks it. I have never winced at a dig to Palin until now. This isn't being clever, it's just plain cruel.

[MathIsTruth]

I respectfully disagree. "Palin Defect" was merely wordplay on "Bradley Effect", in my opinion. I think what you read into it (that it was an underhand reference to her child with Down Syndrome) is a huge stretch.

I'd be really, really surprised to find out that a liberal blogger would intentionally take that kind of shot at Palin's kid.

Now, did it imply that Palin herself was defective? Perhaps.

[readyfornewleadership]

I agree. this is very very ugly and unworthy of Obama supporters.

[bob8788]

Gallup has obama 52 to 42

our man is doing great but we still have to come out and vote strong folks

http://www.barackobamacans.blogspot.com/

[kozy]

I agree. Complacency can cause a defeat. There are two weeks to go and the GOP's time honored October surprise should happen within the next few days. It will have to be something that can't be refuted by November 4. And, it has to be a big and immediately belivable character issue, a believable terrorist situation of major importance, or a big international crises that does not reflect badly on the current administration. No amount of BS can make the economy look good in the next two weeks. So, Dems should continue focusing on that subject.

[ReddSkye]

The mainstream media will say that no one saw it coming. Colin Powell will be astounded. The Clintons will giggle. Barack Obama will lose the presidential election in a landslide reminiscent of the trouncing George McGovern received.

The media will miss the call because the lens through which they view the world has been sharply curved by progressivism. Like all other "isms", progressivism offers its followers simplistic slogans that are designed to curtail thinking for the simple reason that the authority promulgating the ism is deemed to have already done the thinking.

Obvious to objective observers, but overlooked by the media, is the fact that Obama is a far left political thinker whose philosophy of statism is repugnant to the vast majority of the citizens of this republic. On that ground alone, Obama cannot win the presidency. However, there is another major factor that will compound Obama's losses. A larger number of intelligent women in this country relate to Sarah Palin than identify Senator Clinton. Governor Palin will unleash in these women a desire to proclaim that Northeast urban feminism does not describe them, does not transcend them, and will not muzzle them.

Obama will not be president and the race will not be close. The Democrats will remain imprisoned by progressivism. It could not be otherwise. It is in the very nature of progressivism to suppress dissent as "non-progressive". We have already seen governments based on dialectical progressivism, and the future they promise leads straight to the Gulag.

[Donald-Iowa]

I sincerely hope you've printed out a copy of this post, placed it on your refrigerator, and sent it to everyone you know. On November 5th, you're going to wake up and realize just how wrong a person can be on so many points in just a few short paragraphs.

You actually sound almost intelligent, but you must be living in the same cave as Osama or drinking the Fox kool ade or the Limbaugh slurpies. To even suggest that intelligent women of this country would relate to Sarah Palin is beyond comprehension.

Dialectical Progressivism ?????? Surely you'd care to offer a profound explanation of that term for the less learned among us. :-)

[Adjuster]

The only ism going down this time around is conservatIsm.

It has been tried and allowed to fail on it's own merits or more acurately is lack thereof.

Obama/Biden08

Won't get fooled again!

[wingman1]

A wonderful attempt at ironic humour. You, Sir or Madam, have a future in stand-up.

[bob8788]

I think you may have a future in comedy my friend

http://barackobamacans.blogspot.com

[mobetta]

We should keep a copy of this for reference after the election.