PDA

View Full Version : Could the 'Bradley Effect' Hurt Obama?



Parkbandit
10-14-2008, 06:15 PM
(Oct. 14) - Sen. Barack Obama has a sizable lead over Sen. John McCain, polls show, but those numbers could be deceiving if the "Bradley effect" comes into play.
The Bradley effect is named after former Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley, an African-American who ran for California governor in 1982.
Exit polls showed Bradley leading by a wide margin, and the Democrat thought it would be an early election night.
But Bradley and the polls were wrong. He lost to Republican George Deukmejian.
The theory was that polling was wrong because some voters, who did not want to appear bigoted, said they voted for Bradley even though they did not.
"People will usually tell you how they voted after the election, but we found in the Bradley campaign ... that people were actually not telling us who they voted for," said Charles Henry, who researched Bradley's election.
The Bradley effect is also called the "Wilder effect," after Douglas Wilder, Virginia's former governor. He won by just one-tenth of a percent, but as he pointed out to CNN, "people forget -- in the exit polls, I was still double-digits ahead."
According to CNN's latest poll of polls, Obama is leading McCain by 8 percentage points, 50 to 42.
Some analysts say the race could be much closer or even tied if the Bradley effect is factored in. iReport.com: iReporter pleads with voters to 'stop the racism'
"It leaves a question mark over this race, and we won't have the final answer until the votes are counted," said David Gergen, a senior political analyst for CNN.

http://news.aol.com/elections/article/could-the-bradley-effect-hurt-obama/210605?icid=100214839x1211094025x1200708670

_________________________________________

One can only Hope.

BriarFox
10-14-2008, 06:44 PM
Probably just wishful thinking by conservatives:

1) The polls that show Obama leading aren't exit polls, and so there isn't that face-to-face contact that might make people ashamed of appearing bigoted (the hypocrites).

2) The overall tenor of race has changed dramatically in almost 30 years.

Warriorbird
10-14-2008, 06:51 PM
Wilder had a %age drop... but he did win Virginia...

Stretch
10-14-2008, 07:04 PM
Yeah, I think this will probably cost Obama the election, but good lord I hope Palin bows out

Crazy Bard
10-14-2008, 07:11 PM
No.

crb
10-15-2008, 09:27 AM
...because this didn't happen in New Hampshire in January of 2008...

Kefka
10-15-2008, 09:39 AM
A reverse Bradley Effect most likely.

Mabus
10-15-2008, 09:42 AM
A reverse Bradley Effect most likely.
Explain please?

Kefka
10-15-2008, 10:13 AM
Explain please?

Polls may underestimate Obama’s support by 3 to 4 percent

Current polls of the presidential election may be underestimating Barack Obama’s support by 3 to 4 percent nationally and possibly larger margins in the Southeast and some strongly Republican states, according to University of Washington researchers.

Psychologist Anthony Greenwald and political scientist Bethany Albertson, who analyzed data from the 32 states holding Democratic primaries, said race played an unexpectedly powerful role in distorting pre-election poll findings and the same scenario could play out in the election between Obama and John McCain.

“The Clinton-Obama raced dragged on so long, but it generated a lot of data. It is the only existing basis on which to predict how a black candidate will do in a national general election,” said Greenwald, who pioneered studies how people’s unconscious bias affects their behavior. “The level of inaccuracy of the polls in the primaries was unprecedented.”


http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1008/A_reverse_Bradley_Effect.html?showall

Gan
10-15-2008, 10:21 AM
I think people voting against Obama due to race is as much of an issue as people voting for Obama due to race.

With regards to the "Bradley" effect, I think that trying to estimate the accuracy of polls in any condition is risky. Not that we have not hammered the veracity of polls to death already here on the PC. I for one treat all polls as suspect.

AnticorRifling
10-15-2008, 10:22 AM
If you guys aren't aware there is a thread that invovles some lol'ing at dong and crazy bitches, please direct your attention to it. Thank you.

DeV
10-15-2008, 10:30 AM
I think people voting against Obama due to race is as much of an issue as people voting for Obama due to race.
I agree.

My girlfriend's father is a Moderate Republican who is voting for Obama, which is still shocking the hell out of me. He lives in Northern Florida and went into a Hardee's for breakfast yesterday. He's a social butterfly and they live in a pretty small town so he starts conversating with some of the guys at the breakfast counter. At one point the discussion turns to politics, of course, so her dad asked one of the guys ranting about Obama what were some of his reasons for not voting for him. The guy replied with a straight face "because he's a n*****. Her dad got up and walked away.

You also have people like my god-mother who never really gave a shit about the presidental campaign before, yet she firmly made up her mind to vote for Obama back in 2007 because he's the first black man to have a chance to become president and when will that opportunity ever present itself again? I was like.... w.t.f, any other reasons you'd like to add. I avoided the subject with her altogether until the primaries were over.

Retards on both sides I tell ya.

Tea & Strumpets
10-15-2008, 10:44 AM
I think people voting against Obama due to race is as much of an issue as people voting for Obama due to race.


I agree, but people have always voted based on issues that aren't really relevant, so it's not really anything new just because race and gender are the retard issues this election.

For example, for some people political party eclipses any of the issues (ie. some people vote Republican no matter what, and some people vote Democrat no matter what).