I wonder... Are pollsters taking into account the Bradley effect in making their estimations?

[OneAmerica]

If anything, it is sure to cancel out any record turn out by African-Americans. In the swing states, especially the close ones, the difference is easily turned in McCain's favor.
But in your opinion, just how much of a role do you think it will play in the General?

[PretzelWarrior]

1. nope. Obama's going to cruise. Huge advantage with women/Latinos

and with white males Obama is about 4 or 5 points ahead of where Kerry or Gore were at.

Welcome to DU.

[The_Casual_Observer]

2. Anybody who claims to know what the situation will be like in

October/November especially this year ought to be called Miss Cleo. The voting public gave us a bush 3 times. It's doesn't instill a lot of faith.

[RichGirl]

29. You are exactly right.

One thing I've learned from working in campaigns for many years is that you always work as if your candidate is 10 points behind.

My concern with getting obama elected are the original Obama supporters. They have put him up so high on a pedestal that they think they can afford to insult voters. He needs every vote he can get. He needs every single one of the former Clinton supporters. He needs old people...so don't make fun of McCain's age. He needs to straddle the middle. If Kucinich couldn't get more than a few percentage of democratic support in the primaries, than how can anyone think Obama can win by pandering to liberals.

[bluestateguy]

3. The Bradley effect is outdated

The last time it can be documented to have happened was in 1989 (Virginia governor's race).

[OneAmerica]

8. Then what do you call the New Hampshire primaries?

He was up by 15 points the day of. Don't tell me it didn't play a role there.

[blogslut]

12. Barack Obama won 31 contests

How does your Bradley Effect figure into that number?

[FourPieRun]

22. but as we know, caucuses are not really representative of primary or GE results. regardless of which

candidate anybody supported, people must know that caucuses are entirely different from secret balloting in a closed primary or GE.

[blogslut]

24. Uh huh

He won more delegates because of those 31 contests. And everyone knows that delegates are how we choose our nominee.

We have a primary/caucus hybrid in Texas (a state in which Obama won the most delegates) and I like it just fine.

[Occam Bandage]

19. The loss of a temporary bounce combined with a highly effective last-minute

push by Clinton.

[rox63]

35. I don't think it played a role in NH at all

NH is not a particulary racist state, even though it's very white state. NH has only recently turned blue, and parts of the state are still very red. Obama won both Vermont and Maine, also extremely white New England states.

[democrattotheend]

36. No it's not

Sorry to say but I think it's pretty real, and that was evident in lateer primaries. Unfortunately, the Reverend Wright episode had the effect of making people notice that he's black.

[Arugula Latte]

4. Thank you for your concern on this matter.

[blogslut]

5. Thank you for your concern

You do realize that the mythylogical Bradley Effect has already been disproven by the millions of voters that cast their ballots for Barack Obama in the Democratic primaries, don't you?

[AlCzervik]

6. your concern shall be read into the official record, thank you.

[JeffR]

7. Oh pleeeeeeeze...

Try harder.

[Orangepeel]

9. as "the Bradley effect" is that African Americans may poll better than they actually do, pollsters

can't really take it into account.

IMO, it will be a minor factor. I'm not even sure I believe it really existed for Bradley. There are plenty of other excuses that a bigot could use to explain why they weren't voting for the African American. They would just tell the pollster it was because of Wright or inexperience or sexism in the media or that he doesn't wear a flag pin or something else they pull out of their ass. Why would they have to pretend to be voting for him?

And why is it "sure" to cancel out record turnout?

[OneAmerica]

11. I guess "sure" is a prety storng statement.

But it is a strong phenomena and it would seem a strong opponent to AA turnout considering neither is measurable until the day arrives.

[Orangepeel]

31. Who says it is a strong phenomenon?

To reiterate what I said in my previous post and what other posters in this thread said more eloquently, it doesn't make sense. A racist doesn't have to say that they are voting for Obama in order to not appear racist. They just have to pretend there is some other reason.

The Bradley effect isn't measurable at all, even after voting day. It theorizes that polls are wrong because people lie to pollsters. Whether or not the polls are wrong is measurable, but what was really in the minds of people voting in secret can't be measured when the theory depends on them not telling you the truth.

[smalll]

10. Not an issue. Keep in mind -

it seemed to be a big thing in the New Hampshire primary, but keep in mind, that was a DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY (right next door to latte liberal Vermont) --

The Bradley Effect DOESN'T come from racists -- they'll be more than happy to tell random polsters that they won't vote for the black dude. The Bradley/Wilder Effect comes mostly, at least today, from liberals. People who are so non-racist, that they are afraid to admit they will happen to vote for the white person this time. The Bradley Effect NEVER caused trouble for Obama really (except perhaps in NH, again, latte liberals will be the ne plus ultra of Bradley Affectism.)


Let not your heart be troubled.

[OneAmerica]

13. I hope you're right.

I pray as much.

[FrenchieCat]

14. The Bradley effect from almost 19 years ago is still to be feared?

Guess Obama will have to be twice as good than John McCain. You think he can?

[smalll]

16. I'm right. If you're worried about the Bradley Affect, just counterbalance it with equal...

silliness that plays the other way -- you know, that they can't poll all those kids in flip-flops - because they ONLY HAVE CELL PHONES!

One bogosity balances out the other. :shrug:

[monomach]

15. You sound very concerned.

[OneAmerica]

17. I'm concerned about the election in general.

For some reason, I have a bad feeling this election is going to go the way of Gore and Kerry and I just couldn't bear to watch that happen, not at such a crucial moment in history.

[FrenchieCat]

18. So what are you going to do about it? Cross your fingers and hope not to die....

or are you going to work that much harder?

You Sound like a pessimist....aka, a naysayer.

[CreekDog]

27. then what the hell do you suggest?

are you 5? what do you do when you are worried about something?

[Occam Bandage]

20. Polls have been no less accurate this year than in any preceding year, so I'm not exactly concerned.

[AndyTiedye]

21. The Diebold Effect Worries Me More

The "Bradley Effect" will likely be used to explain away the Diebold Effect.

[loyalsister]

23. The "Bradley" effect is and outdated paradigm

There would be an entirely different construct.
In the current situation, I think there would be voters who may be torn in many ways. One may be that some may wax sentimental and wonder what could have been if they were voting for that other historic candidate. That may not be enough to move their inclinations to Obama, but under the right conditions they may not vote.
If for example they felt betrayed by his leadership on women's issues during the election.
If they felt his lead was extremely comfortable or if they were in a state that was already decided.
This would not necessarily "cancel out" the turn out of African Americans. It may "cancel out" gains with white male voters. It may simply have an effect on election returns.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

25. The "Bradley Effect" doesn't make sense.

It postulates that some voters who really are going to vote McCain will SAY that they will vote Obama so that some pollster won't think them racist. This supposedly will explain a black candidate underperforming their polls.

Realistically, people will say that they will vote McCain or not for Obama if that's what they're going to do. They may give a different REASON ("not experienced/something about him I just don't like") other than race for voting that way, but it doesn't make that much sense that they'd actually say they would vote for Obama.

So if a black candidate underperforms their polls, it's automatically because of the "Bradley effect". What about a white candidate like Clinton, underperforming her polls in Wisconsin or Indiana? What is the effect there?

This doesn't mean that race can't account for it, just not a Bradley effect. Say that racist voters turn out in greater numbers than polling models account for, and pro-Obama/Dem voters in lower numbers than the polling models predict. That would account for Obama underperforming polls without postulating that people would actually say they would vote for Obama when they have no intention of doing any such thing.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

26. The increase in turnout with the winning coalition of:

New voters, young voters, blacks and Hispanics, Jews, and most women is enough to cancel out the Bigot Vote. Turnout is key and needs to be addressed. The fact that there are too many unregistered blacks and Hispanics is worrisome for me.

[H2O Man]

28. The Reed Effect

will work in Obama's favor, so you need not be so concerned.

[Adelante]

30. Not to worry

Don't be askeered :scared: we will win.

[Radical Activist]

32. How are you "sure" it will cancel out record turn out by black voters?

I disagree. Obama will finish ahead of what pollsters expect due to high black and youth turn out, as was the case in most of the primary states.

[Thrill]

33. How did this so called Bradley effect workout in places like Wisconsin and Montana

This is more BS, that Repukes want you to believe can happen, so they can steal the election. There is no Bradley effect

[karynnj]

34. The problem would be in estimating the effect

It basically didn't exist in the primaries, where there was no consistent pattern. Tom Bradley's run for governor, for which the Bradly effect was named, was in 1982 - before many voters in 2008 were even born. Consider the changes in society since then. I actually wonder is the Cosby Show, which at one time depicted what was likely the most functional family on TV, could have subtly changed minds very gently through its appealing, intelligent characters.

I think the best set of questions that have tried to measure this ask "if you would vote for a ( ) and then ask would most of your friends vote for. The latter is thought to be the better indicator.

[rox63]

39. Another factor is that many younger voters (30 and under) have grown up with AA heroes

Whether they were athletes, actors, musicians, etc. I don't think that can be said about most people who were voting in 1982.

[Freddie Stubbs]

37. Did he usually get less votes in the primary compared to the polls?

:shrug:

[blondeatlast]

38. Oh, dear. nt

[dsomuah]

40. Seeing as the Bradley effect didn't influence the primary outcomes too much ... I'm not worried