We don't do Obama any favors by denying the possibility of the dreaded "Bradley Effect"

[democrattotheend]

I posted a longer version of this on Kos, but I thought it was relevant here too, because I have noticed a tendency on this site for people to get shot down for even mentioning the possibility of the Bradley Effect. I think this does Obama and his campaign a disservice, because failure to even acknowledge the possibility of the Bradley Effect could lead to complacency/diversion of resources that ends up costing Obama the election.

Yes, the polls look great right now. Obama is ahead in by 8-11 points nationally, the Real Clear Politics map shows a possible Obama landslide, and absent some big event he's starting to look unstoppable. But there's still an elephant in the room, and we do Obama no favors by denying or ignoring it. If we want him to win, then we need to accept that because of who he is, Barack Obama is still the underdog and will be the underdog until the day he is inaugurated.

Larry Sabato said that "Obama will need a clear pre-election poll lead over McCain to win; a tie isn't going to do it for him, in all probability. It's naïve to expect that there won't be some racial leakage on election day." Agree with him or not, shouldn't we at least acknowledge the possibility that he could be right? How can we say for certain that he's wrong when we've never had an African American presidential nominee before?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/10/12/92915/053/319/628205

[Danger Mouse]

1. It never existed in the first place. Can we stop pushing this garbage?

[BlueJazz]

41. Sorry...but I believe that younger people and people from the North are..

..a little naive when it comes to the Rednecks in the South.

[Danger Mouse]

59. I may be younger and from the North, but we have plenty of rednecks here, too.

[ShortnFiery]

2. No, we work like hell but don't acknowledge a reason for the GOP to steal another election. eom

[dkf]

3. I thought I heard that in some states it is an opposite Bradley effect

and that he does better in the white communities than he polled.

[whitewomenforobama]

19. I think the counterbradley effect will cancel out the bradley

I wonder if there aren't also white voters who say they won't vote for Obama out of the peer pressure in some communities/families to BE racist, but don't really care about that so deeply once they enter the privacy of the booth.

[Enrique]

21. I think that happened in the primaries

in the South.

[tosh]

27. I believe in this - yes. Down here in the small towns I roam

all but the blatantly ignorant are quiet. There is the occasional tyrade from a fundie loudmouth. THERE ARE NO YARDSIGNS except those for local offices. I don't see bumper stickers or t-shirts here.

Here, the majority is AA. Registrations and GOTV efforts are going strong.

I believe that MANY white voters are quietly resolved to cast their votes for the "intelligent" choice. They just can't afford to subject their businesses, their children and themselves to the scorn of those fundie loudmouths.

[CJCRANE]

4. What about the "erratic old man" effect?

:shrug:

Do Americans really want to vote for someone who considers them all "fellow prisoners"?

[ikojo]

5. I've been thinking this for a long time

Race will be a HUGE factor in the election. I think that a lot of white people when polled are afraid to say they do not support Obama out of fear of being labeled as racist. McCain/Palin have spent a lot of money and have received a lot of media attention with their smears. Obama, trying not to appear to be an "angry black man" has tried his best to keep the campaign focused on the economy. Fine. If he can't get outwardly angry then why doesn't he unleash his surrogates and let them go for McCain's and Palin's jugular? We KNOW Biden has it in him, after all he grew up working class Irish and has probably been in a school yard fight or two or three.

I think this thing is FAR from won.

[Danger Mouse]

8. I think I trust Obama's team to manage things. They've done an excellent job so far.

Why should they completely adjust their strategy now?

[elkston]

6. You seriously think Obama and his team aren't factoring this in?

I do think there will be a slight Bradley Effect. But only a tiny one. We are far enough ahead now to blunt its impact.

So why keep brining it up, then? It would be different if we were declaring victory with just a 2 or 3 point margin. Our lead is widening across many state and national polls.

I just don't see the benefit in constantly bringing this up.

[Danger Mouse]

10. Fearmongering. Hand wringing. Chicken littles.

[democrattotheend]

11. I absolutely think they are. I think we're not

I think the Obama campaign is definitely aware of the possibility...why do you think they released that video showing McCain winning to scare us last week? I think people here and on other blogs are the ones who are not factoring it in, and are getting cocky and maybe too complacent after seeing the polls the last couple weeks.

[fugop]

7. Offset

I think (hope) if any such thing is still in effect, the amount of newly registered young and minority voters will more than cancel it out.

[Nevernose]

9. Ain't shit we can do, & what about the McCain Effect?

Barring some kind of supernatural intervention which magically removes all shades of racism from people's darkest hearts within the next three weeks, there ain't shit we can do about the Bradley Effect, is there?

We should all go knock on some doors or make some phone calls, because the McCain Effect is a much more approachable factor in this election.

[RichardRay]

12. Actually, it did exist, and, actually, there's no evidence of it anymore.

The links to the work demonstrating both things have been posted so many times the URL's are worn out, but the gist is that the statistics demonstrate the Bradley Effect as real in its time and as not having any legs whatsoever more recently.

I have no argument with wanting as much of a lead as possible. Nor do I believe that there are no racists out there who would lie to pollsters, but as an identifiable phenomenon with a quantifiable impact it a chimera.

[nevergiveup]

13. I know several folks who are examples

of the Bradley Effect and I also know a couple of people who are examples of what might be called a reverse-Bradley Effect. How this plays out we won't know until Nov 5 but to deny that race is going to be a factor in this election is totally naive.

[Orangepeel]

14. The "Bradley Effect" doesn't make much sense.

Yes, there are people who won't vote for a black person. But why would they tell a pollster they would? There are plenty of bogus excuses they could use. It is much more likely, in my opinion, that racists would tell pollsters that Obama isn't "experienced" enough or that he's not "trustworthy."

Is the argument for the Bradley effect that people will tell themselves (and therefore pollsters) that they will vote for him but won't be able to bring themselves to do it when they get there? I don't buy that this could possibly be a significant number of people.

There are a lot of reasons for Obama volunteers not to get complacent. If people think it is a lock, they won't bother to vote. But if the actual vote is widely different than the average of all the polls, it won't be the Bradley effect that I blame.

[Demi_Babe]

15. if the Bradley Effect was going to be relevant, we would have seen it in the primaries...IMO

[FloridaGrl]

16. It will be the Obama Effect

I believe there are many people who will not admit they will be voting for Obama. The condition this country is in many people are looking for a new direction- if it were another time maybe but not this time.

[phleshdef]

17. We aren't doing him OR ourselves any favors by worrying about it either.

You can only support a candidate in whatever ways you can. I know I'm no more or less fervent a supporter than I would be if Obama were white. I support him 100% and thats all I can do.

Dwelling on the possibility of some weird statistical error caused by closet racism isn't something we can control. All you are doing is stirring up anxiety over something fairly obscure and uncertain when in fact there are plenty enough clear and certain elements in this election to experience anxiety over as it is.

[WeDidIt]

18. Bradley 1982, 26 years ago

1956 was 26 years before Bradley's election:

January 1956 Autherine Lucy receives a letter granting her permission to enroll for classes at the University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa. (4.4 MB)

Jan. 30, 1956 The home of Martin Luther King, Jr., is bombed in Montgomery. King is a leader in the boycott and its designated spokesman.

Feb. 1, 1956 Motions are filed in U.S. District Court calling for an end to bus segregation.

Feb. 4, 1956 Violence erupts on the campus of the University of Alabama and in the streets of Tuscaloosa. it continues for three days.

Feb. 11, 1956 Autherine Lucy is forced to flee the campus; the university's Board of Trustees bars her from campus.

Feb. 22, 1956 Warrants are issued for the arrest of 115 leaders of the Montgomery bus boycott.

Feb. 29, 1956 Autherine Lucy is ordered by the courts to be readmitted to the university, only to be expelled by the Board of Trustees.

Nov.13, 1956 United States Supreme Court decides in favor of Montgomery bus boycotters, by ruling bus segregation illegal.

Dec. 21, 1956 African-Americans first board buses in Montgomery, Alabama, according to a first-come, first-served basis.

[Lerkfish]

20. you do US no favors by catapulting this garbage BS propaganda, either.

peddle your wares elsewhere...

thanks.

[democrattotheend]

25. If I remind people why they shouldn't get complacent, then I do

Why is everyone so negative? I work with Democratic strategists and we all think it's a valid concern. It's one of the reasons some people have decided not to divert resources to down-ballot races away from Obama.

[Lerkfish]

28. if you were telling us of the bradley effect for the first time, it would be valuable

but its all we hear from the MSM and right wing assholes, so there is no need whatsoever to keep bringing it up, capiche?

[A-Schwarzenegger]

36. "Why is everyone so negative?"

:rofl: :*

[DCBob]

22. More likely there will be a reverse Bradley effect.

Plus GOTV, youth vote, enthusiasm gap, and new registrations will likely push Obama's numbers up even more on election day. Not to get complacent but clearly Obama has the numbers now on his side. But we should not be satisfied with just winning - we now need to work towards a landslide and a mandate from the voters.

[Frumious B]

23. There's absolutely no need to lie not voting for Obama.

There are countless simple excuses and outs one could use to say why they aren't voting for him. It's far easier for someone to use one of those as a cover for racism than to outright lie and say that they are supporting him when they aren't. I think Occam's Razor comes into play here to a certain extent.

[still_one]

24. The media, espeically CNN has been pushing this garbage as a way to say it is OK to be racist

Last week CNN was just pumping this garbage continuously, but what really cut the cake, and told me what their true agenda, was when they though it was necessary to interview 3 African Americans not voting for Obama

This is the same crap they pulled by finding so-called Hillary supporters not voting for Obama

It is there soft peddling of racism covered up with a label

[NashVegas]

26. Actually. Yeah. We Do

Some obstacles are best plowed right over than pondered.

[Undercurrent]

29. The Bradley Effect

is scientifically unproven. Who knows for certain, but there may be a reverse Bradley effect (the yeldarb effect). There are also other political/sociological effects that are proven to exist such as the bandwagon effect.

[Bluenorthwest]

30. The Bradley Effect is and always was bogus

Tom Bradley lost that election for several reasons, the most important being one that California can not bear to admit: they like to elect Republican Govs. It is what they do. The 'effect' was developed to help CA continue thinking of itself as Blue, while still electing Republicans. They always elect them, and each time there is a complex explaination for it. But the fact is, they just vote that way.

[treestar]

55. True, it is amazing how reliably blue they are for the Presidential

election - send two Dem senators - and then come up with a Repug bozo for governor.

[ClarkUSA]

31. You are always posting these fear-based OPs re: Obama's chances. Thanks for your deep concern.

Hate to tell you, but the Bradley effect hasn't been seen in a decade.

Also, any Bradley effect would be a few points at most, which is too small to overcome Obama's large lead in most battleground states.


Thirdly, there's recent polling evidence of a reverse Bradley effect, which should add a few percentage points in battleground states.


Finally, I'm onto your little psych-ops mission here and it is failing miserably -- like McCain/Palin. :)

[DeepModem Mom]

32. I strongly support the right to post on this subject. It's being discussed not only on CNN...

but in other media. There is a good possibility the Bradley Effect is a relic of the past, there is a possibility that there will be a reverse effect. I don't think we know. I innocently posted a news article on the subject a while back (I often post articles I don't agree with), and was villified, as you are being, until I self-deleted the post because I don't like to start or participate in divisiveness here.

But I support your, and anyone's, right to post here on not only subjects that pump us up but on subjects that may be worrisome -- and not be "thanked for concern" or be accused of being a troll.

[ClarkUSA]

33. CNN is supposed to give legitimacy to this bogus OP? Heh. What's next? Quoting David Gergen?

:eyes:

[DeepModem Mom]

35. My point was that it was not only CNN, which another poster referenced...

but all media which has addressed this subject, including many African-American commentators.

[ClarkUSA]

38. It's predictable media masturbation to discuss this - however, they ignore the facts.

The Bradley Effect hasn't been observed for over a decade. Also, recent polling has indicated a reverse Bradley effect,
which I haven't heard discussed much here or on the MSM because they are too busy discussing an election "effect" that
happened over a generation ago. Lots has changed since the 80's.

My main point is this poster has a pattern of posting OPs like this in a hit-and-run fashion. Hmmm.... wonder why? I'll
bet we won't see him/her after an Obama victory on Nov. 4, unless it's to post a thread "worrying" about an assassination.

[casus belli]

34. Racial Leakage? These are untested waters...

The truth is, this is unprecedented. We are travelling in undiscovered territory on a number of fronts - record voter registration, record grassroots mobilization, and the first viable AA POTUS candidate.

I don't think a healthy dose of caution is unwarranted, but Larry Sabato suggesting what we need to win on election day is no better than playing darts in the dark.

We just need to be vigilant, play the best game we know how, and never lose our optimism. Anything else is a waste of energy.

[Essene]

37. Research indicates reverse-Bradley is more real

http://www.physorg.com/news142862643.html

Id expect it wont be all or none.

We'll see turnout be sharper in some places and correspondingly higher numbers than polls indicate.

In a few places, Obama will perhaps come in under the polling predictions.

[Hansel]

39. Why? What good does it do?

All it does is demoralize the voters. If it's going to happen, it will. So why would we suppress Obama's votes by drumming into his voters that it won't make any difference because Obama is going to probably lose a lot of votes due to racism anyway?

If you want to increase the chance that Obama can defeat the Bradley Effect, than stop dwelling on it. Period.

Instead, if you really want to make up the difference of votes that might not really be there due to the so-called "Bradley Effect" then drive up the morale of his supporters by telling them that we need every one of them to be a part of the opportunity to put this great man into office.

I, for one, am highly skeptical that the "Bradley Effect" is going to make a huge difference in what the polls are saying. All of the pollsters are well aware of it and have likely built in questions to to attempt to account for it. And this time racists can hang their hats on the BS that "Obama is a Muslim". They believe this BS precisely because they are bigots because any white man would be taken at his word by these people if he said he is a Christian.

As a result of 911, they should have no concerns about telling the pollsters what they think because they can use that comfortably and not think of it as racism. They think they are just being patriotic. "Murika's at war and them Muslims what to kill us." They also have the "Hillary was cheated" meme to use as an excuse. I think the racists are being quite upfront with their bigotry, because it is in "fashion".

Hand-wringing over the negative is not going to help get the vote out, so if you believe in the Bradley effect, start working on improving the morale of his supporters by saying he's going to win!



Edited for spelling.

[pdxmom]

40. McPalin have given permission for people to be racist. Their casting

of Obama as a terrorist sympathizer, as "exotic" or "different", etc. have allowed people to actually respond in the way they feel. Are there those that will vote against Obama due to racism...of course. I just don't see that people are going to respond to polls differently than they intend to vote.

That said, there is no place for resting on our laurels. We need to all work to the very end. There are a lot of reasons for this, but the foremost is election fraud, and we need as large a percentage lead as we can get.

[treestar]

56. Exactly. And to top it off, Phailin is a woman, so they can feel

they are still politically correct.

[barack the house]

42. I think we can determine just from the financial crisis that there is no bradly effect. Besides I'd>

say Biden has neutralised any kind of Bradly effect if folks are doubtful on Obama. Biden is the perfect antidote to any of their fears.

[ecstatic]

43. Discussion of the BE gives a lot of comfort to Diebold, I'm sure nt

[DeepModem Mom]

44. NYT, 10/11/08: Do Polls Lie About Race?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/12/weekinreview/12zernike.html?ref=todayspaper

....(P)ollsters and political scientists say concern about a Bradley effect — some call it a Wilder effect or a Dinkins effect, and plenty call it a theory in search of data — is misplaced. It obscures what they argue is the more important point: there are plenty of ways that race complicates polling. Considered alone or in combination, these factors could produce an unforeseen Obama landslide with surprise victories in the South, a stunningly large Obama loss, or a recount-thin margin. In a year that has already turned expectations upside down, it is hard to completely reassure the fretters.

Among the non-Bradley factors at the intersection of race and polling is something called the reverse Bradley (perhaps more prevalent than the Bradley), in which polls understate support for a black candidate, particularly in regions where it is socially acceptable to express distrust of blacks. Then there are the voters not captured by polls. Research shows that those who refuse to participate in surveys tend to be less likely to vote for a black candidate. The race of the questioner, too, affects a poll — but no one is sure whether people give more or less accurate answers when they’re interviewed by someone of their own race.

“How much we are under-representing people who are intolerant and therefore unlikely to vote for Obama is an open question,” said Andrew Kohut, the president of Pew Research Center. “I suspect not a great deal, but maybe some. And ‘maybe some’ could be crucial in a tight election.”...

Whatever its causes, the Bradley gap seems to be disappearing....

And even in the least complicated years, polling is a recipe with a good dash of “Who knows?”

[alcibiades_mystery]

45. DOES. NOT. EXIST.

Finito.

[barack the house]

46. I think we would only have to worry about it if we had no critical thinking.

[realitythink]

47. That was in 1982!!

It's a generation ago, most voters over the age of 50 are dead now. Most voters over the age of 25 couldn't vote then. We have progressed a whole lot since then. It's an excuse to use when the election is stolen, just like the ACORN bullshit. We should not let them use these excuses and should be more worried about the purging of the voter rolls.

[On the Road]

48. I Don't Think Some of the Posters Who Used Words Like "Garbage"

noticed the link. Perhaps we should ban posts to Daily Kos as being a right-wing tool.

Anyone who denies response variables understands nothing of this business. It is the single greatest source of error in polling, and it is unpredictable. Of course Obama's support may be overstated due to racial reasons; it may also be understated. We don't know yet. This is new territory. I think Obama is going to win, too, but we do not favors by ignoring it.

[paulk]

49. the bradley effect is real, though I don't think it will be as

dramatic as in the past. I personally know a few people, Republicans and independents who voted for Bush, who say they are going to vote for Obama. I even know a few Democrats who are still sitting on the fence with this. They will say, under pressure, that they will vote for Obama - but will they still make that vote when they get into the voting booth? I don't know.

The Obama campaign has registered a lot of new voters, so that will help to offset things, providing these folks show up to vote.

I don't really understand the denial of race as a factor that comes from so many on this website. To me it's just a continuation of the trend this year on DU where people are shouted down who don't follow the majority consensus. There's a large contingent around here who's main goal seems to be shutting down any discussion that they perceive as detrimental to their candidate.

[firedupdem]

50. Why didn't we hear so much about this bradley effect during the

primary season? Didn't white people vote in the primaries? I would rather concentrate on getting people registered and to the polls.

[stevietheman]

51. I think we'll actually see a "McCain-Palin is unhinged" effect, and it's

possible Obama will win in a super-landslide. Many people who are normally racist will be thinking "McCain and Palin are nuts; I'm giving the n-word a chance because he's the one who can get us out of this mess".

[seabeyond]

52. ok, i have asked before. what is bradley effect. why called bradley

[Democrats_win]

53. Happened in 2006 TN. Harold Ford. It's a concern. Polls are a problem anyway.

Ideas about problems with polls go back to the Great Depression which brought us modern polling organizations because the election showed that the polls were performed incorrectly.

Today's Statistics textbooks tell us that exit polling in 2004 was wrong because those who conducted the surveys were too young and too inexperienced. The textbook says that the USA Today found that youth and inexperiecne both contributed to the incorrect exit polls. "Fundamentals of Statistics" by Michael Sullivan.

Many at DU have talked about cell phones and how that might affect polls. (I'm not yet convinced that it's real, but who knows....)

[scheming daemons]

62. No... you have it exactly wrong.

The final Rasmussen poll in TN in 2006 was:

Corker: 53%
Ford: 45%


The vote on election day was:

Corker 51%
Ford 48%


The Bradley Effect is a myth.


Ford did 5% better in the 2006 TN Senate race than the polls said he would. If there was any "effect", it was a REVERSE Bradley Effect.

[treestar]

54. Quit worrying no one will stop working

We don't just want to win, we want to bury them.

We want to give them as sound a drubbing as possible.

No one will be complacent about just winning.

Look how many DUers in red states are actually getting encouraged. They're not just giving up because the state is usually red. There's some sense of optimism in Texas and Indiana!

Nobody's going to sit back because of the polls.

[Turn CO Blue]

57. We do Obama no favors by not factoring in the Student Effect.

All those newly registered young voters - 18 to 24 years old- that everyone keeps saying NEVER show up, have NEVER shown up, they won't remember to vote.

And what a pisser it is that every time someone on the MSM talks about youth turnout, they throw out those old canards about how the youth didn't show up to vote in some ancient history election and about how Generation Y won't bring it in for Obama. What a pisser.

Ahemmm (clears throat).

However...

They showed up in the Primaries

They showed up to run the voter registration drives.

They continue to show up at the campaign offices to make calls, knock on doors.

They continue to show up at rallies.

Two great generations - the youth and the seniors - are doing most of the work at the field offices.

They're going to bring this baby in for Barack Obama and Joe Biden.


The Reverse-Bradley Effect will counter the so-called Bradley Effect, BUT the STUDENT EFFECT will outweigh the Bradley Effect by a factor of 100.

[DeepModem Mom]

58. WP, 10/12/08: Pollsters Debate 'Bradley Effect'

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/11/AR2008101102136_pf.html

[scheming daemons]

60. A) Acknowledging the BE gives them a reason to explain away a "theft" B) The BE is a myth

Final Rasmussen poll in Tennessee in 2006:

Corker: 53%
Ford: 45%


Actual vote total:

Corker: 51%
Ford: 48%


The "Bradley Effect" was reversed. The "black guy" did 5% better in one of the most racist states in the country than the polls said he would.


The Bradley Effect DOES NOT EXIST. By arguing that it does, you do the GOP a favor, because you provide cover for them when they steal the election.

You do Obama *NO* favors when you talk about the Bradley Effect. In fact, you do the opposite.

[Bubbha Jo]

61. I think it'll be balanced by the unknown "no cell phone polling" effect.

[EFerrari]

63. This morning on WJ, Zogby said it's not happening. n/t