Folks, It's The Bradley Effect All Over Again

[Yavin4]

Tom Bradley, an African American, was a popular mayor of Los Angeles, CA for many, many years. He was mayor from 1973 to 1993. Twice, he ran for governor and lost in 1982 and 1986. Each time he ran, he led in the polls only to lose close elections. Many suspected that White voters were telling the pollsters one thing, and then voting differently. You can read more about it here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Bradley_ (politician)

This same phenomenon also occurred in the 1989 Virgnia Governor's race, wherein Doug Wilder held a strong lead only to see it almost evaporate on election day:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Wilder

Did we see the Bradley Effect tonight in N.H.?

I suspect so.

[Captain Hilts]

1. And Clinton's polls/votes show the opposite pattern. She gets more votes than polling #s. nt

[SaveElmer]

2. Show evidence...

There is none...14% of white Demcorats in New Hampshire are not racists...

Both of those races you refer to (and I live in Virginia) were general elections...not Democratic Primaries...

[billbuckhead]

6. "14% of white Demcorats in New Hampshire are not racists.."

:wtf: How can you prove someone is not "racist"?

[Zueda]

40. They must be more racist than Tennessee voters!

Harold Ford did not suffer the Bradley Effect in his 2006 senate race according to polls and results. :shrug:

[billbuckhead]

45. Any link?

Ford did ignominiously lose to the mayor of Chattanooga and Ford is far more electable than Obama.

[Rockholm]

75. There are plenty of trucks in NH with Confederate flags.

Racism is alive and well EVERYWHERE.....just as sexism is.

[Renew Deal]

3. I just don't buy it.

I think there's other stuff to look at like how much Hillary was beat up.

[Captain Angry]

4. It might have something to do with who gets polled.

People could tell the truth, and it wouldn't matter.

A poll is a sample. Of people that they are able to reach, be it by phone or in person. That automatically selects out some parts of any population.

I have never been polled, I most likely never will be polled. I'm not going to show up in Nielsen ratings, etc. Therefore, votes like mine might skew the expectations that were generated by a sampling.

When you see some of these polls, look how many people were sampled and when. 300 people at Dairy Queen or 1000 by phone at 2:15PM aren't going to cut it scientifically.

[Azathoth]

10. These were professional pollsters

They're not just walking around a Dairy Queen asking random people. They've been working out sampling methodologies for years. Sure, they get things wrong...but when EVERY polling firm obtains similar results, it's generally a good indication of what is actually happening in the electorate.

[Azathoth]

5. I'm starting to think that's the case

This wasn't just "flawed" polling -- the polls were perfectly accurate for the GOP race and for Edwards.

[featherman]

7. Still it is strange... the Clinton campaigns own internal polling

showed her losing by 11%. They freely admit it. These are professionals who have been around a long time. Something happened. The Clinton people were as shocked as anybody (but very happy). As a political junkie it is a curiosity.

[Didereaux]

8. this is some MSM BS from MSNBC, literally they are trying hard to find some

issue to generate excitement, emotion anything at all. This old race crap was tossed out, it died and they keep trying to bring it back when the pundits start yawning Olbermann is not without blame on this as well. It's pure Fox, pure natl enquirer shit.

[featherman]

9. So the "Bradley Effect" is fiction? It never happened to Bradley or

Dinkens or Wilder, etc.

[Didereaux]

48. I know it is late, so I will give you benefit...I DID NOT say it didn't exist, I implied it

did not come into play tonight.

[Didereaux]

13. BACKLASH, pure old fashioned BACKLASH!

When the candidates own trackers all of them come down to the last day agreeing and then at vote counting time it comes out opposite, the smart people look first to what happened in the last 24hrs. Hillary got bashed good by the TV networks, by the other candidates(and it was widely perceived that Edwards had puposfully whipsawed her with Obama, follow that with the Newspaper bashings by the Boston Globe and NYT...THEN for the first time Hillary showed the rest of the country what I honestly believe was an actual unscripted honest heartfelt emotion backed answer (yes, she quickly recovered and went back to the mask, but it was there, it played all over the media(they wrongly interpreted it as a gasp of despair)...add all those together and toss them at a group of people who think of themselves as charitable and compassionate and you get BACKLASH!

Now the backlash hurt Edwards the most, Obama learned real early on just how much folly there is counting young eggs before they are even laid. Although there was once again a huge turnout, his college army was swamped.

But it all boils down to this, politics is not science, it is trying to sway possibly the most fickle species yet evolved and that is a tough thing to do.

[featherman]

20. Good point and thanks

There is a contrariness about NH voters too... they don't like to be told what they are going to do. The MSM (which I don't watch) fell all over themselves predicting Obama's big win... which raised a lot of hackles among the voters, I'm guessing

[2partynot4me]

62. Well said

no text

[featherman]

11. Let me be clear... I'm not using this as an excuse or a whine

My point is quite the opposite: if Barack Obama was nominated would the Democratic Party be facing this same "Bradley Effect"?
I can't think of a much more crushing moment in my future than to go into November 5 thinking my candidate was going to win by 11 (according to all the polling) only to have him lose to a white republican male by 3%.

It is something to think about.

[Konza]

30. there are people who won't vote for a Black man

just as there are people who won't vote for a Woman.

But those folks wouldn't vote for a Democrat anyhow so why worry about them!

Just do you best and it will work out.
Peace.

[Birthmark]

12. I doubt it.

I think that the media's playing the crying game pissed off a lot of women.

(Note to media: Do NOT piss off women.)

[featherman]

15. I do think that was a swing but maybe 5% not 14-18

But I could be wrong. Clinton's internals showed an 11% loss, Obama's a 14% win. These were the campaign internals, not some bullshit media stuff. And yet...
Hey, I'm a just political junkie... this stuff is interesting to me.

[Birthmark]

26. There were also a lot of last minute deciders.

That's my understanding, anyway. I think between the undecideds breaking for Hillary and the backlash over the hatchet job the media did on her, the swing is easily explained.

[True_Blue]

52. I agree

I was kind of moved by Hillary's show of emotion yesterday and the media seemed to really enjoy attacking her for it.

[Birthmark]

54. Yup.

And it pissed my wife off. That takes some doing...which is pretty much shown by the fact that she's still married to me. :)

[BeyondGeography]

14. Bull...men held steady, women broke late to Hillary

[featherman]

16. And women out voted men 57-43, a 14% differential

[sandnsea]

22. That is true too

Quite a lop-sided vote.

[Egnever]

24. yup thats the difference right there and it turned the polls on thier heads

The cryinbg thing staged geniune or whatever and perhaps the likeability question at the debate made women empathize with her and they made the difference. Good on em.

As much as i dont want her in office it would be a great thing for women and I will take solace in that fact should she get the nod.

[Egnever]

17. No and I really dislike the fact that it is being repeated

I think hillary won tonight because she humanized herself in the last few days and it made women turn out in force for her.

Thats it.

[sandnsea]

18. Can't do that at a caucus

You have to act the way you talk. Maybe that is part of the explanation, makes me sad to think so.

Remember Hillary has a "hidden" vote too. :shrug:

[Anouka]

'you have to act the way you talk'

which is an argument for the Wilder effect after all -- and November is a vote, and not a caucus.

I'm not enjoying the refusal to extend the IA 'colorblind' storyline, to NH.

People voted in IA because of race.
People voted in NH because of gender -- but not because of race. Sure.

I do like the backlash storyline. But those polls....

Anyway, here's a link from another thread for the exit poll information:

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/epolls/index.html#NHDEM

[sandnsea]

50. McCain's vote was closer than expected

It could just be men went and voted for McCain because they thought that race was closer than the Dem race.

I think if it were backlash, the vote wouldn't have split evenly the last few days.

[JCMach1]

19. Obama's vaunted Independent appeal didn't play in NH... those votes went majority to McCain

That made the difference.

[featherman]

27. Disagree, I think... the number I saw was 38% of IND's

voted in the GOP side and 62% in the DEM (probably need to check this). While Obama won most, HRC and JE and others picked up enough also to offset that advantage. That's my understanding

[JCMach1]

56. CNN exit polling showed Hillary doing quite well among those Indys

That was also a bit of surprise... Obama needed to slam her to the floor with those voters and he didn't.

[Texas_Kat]

60. Just like it would in a general election

Clinton had an incredible ground game in NH,

God loves the infantry.

[Laelth]

21. Makes sense.

A caucus is public. The white folks get seen making their declaration. The primary vote, OTOH, is private. The voter can lie in a public statement, but then vote their hearts.

If true, that explains both Iowa and NH.

-Laelth

[Colobo]

23. Very possible... that's what I suspect as well.

[1corona4u]

25. PEOPLE, I'LL SAY IT RIGHT NOW....

YOU ALL START PULLING THE RACE CARD, AND OBAMA'S DONE. That's a fact. There was NOTHING racist about NH tonight, so stop the bullshit NOW.

[Colobo]

29. Hillary will win the presidency

and the idea of a black president is fantasy.

[1corona4u]

31. Just stop it.

That's totally irrational thinking. If all white Iowa voted for him, how can you even say that??? SOUR GRAPES. Stop the crying. Could it posisbly fucking be that they just simply LIKED her better?? Could it be that they think she has a better PLAN????

Stop the racist bullshit. He'll win SC, and she will lose big, and you can bet your ass she won't be crying RACIST!!!!!

Grow up.

[featherman]

34. No need to get nasty. I think the question under discussion

was not who won (good for Hillary, etc) but why the vote turned out as it did despite the internal polling of both campaigns showing quite opposite results (Clinton expected to lose by 11, etc.).

I for one consider it an interesting question in light of the history of the Bradley Effect. But maybe that's not it. I, for one, am just speculating not claiming anything.

[1corona4u]

38. You're creating a CONSPIRACY

Nothing more.

[Colobo]

39. You don't know...

I wish you could understand... but it's ok... it's just something I feel...

[DivorcingNeo]

76. I felt really bad

Reading your post. Don't give up hope. Months ago they said Obama was finished and look at Iowa. NH wasn't that big of a loss. It was 3 percentage points for fuck's sake! He didn't lose! Please see that. Right now, HRC and he are breaking even on Delegates. This means the race goes on.

Don't let that doubt creep in now. *smiles*

[NOVA_Dem]

32. Just accept that white people lied to pollsters and enjoy your victory.

Oh yeah, and my concerns and issues aren't a card to be played but an actual reality in this country. People who use that term are the type that "throw off" polls.

[1corona4u]

33. It's not my victory....

I have no horse in the race.

Do you think Obama thinks that?? I don't.

[NOVA_Dem]

53. I think that white woman felt sorry HRC and lied to pollsters and...

there are "hurdles" to overcome w/ older Dems.

[2partynot4me]

59. I get it

I get what he's saying. Pulling out the race card would indeed be a Campaign Killer but denying shadowy racism exists is naive too. I hope the Keith Obermans and Chris Matthews don't overplay this racism thing because in my experience of observing the talking heads (whether they be liberal or neo-con), I DO beleive they can and DO shape an audience. It would have a two-fold effect. The racists would continue down their dark path and the non-racists would hesitate to vote for someone that the talking heads are saying just can't win. What a mess. But I'm not so sure it was the Bradley effect or at least that the Bradley effect was the entire reason the pollsters were so off. I would mark it up to a multitude of last minute "surprises".

It kind of erks me (as a voter) when I see the media calling a race before I've even had the chance to vote and it could be New Hampshires were feeling pissed and a little cocky and decided on a show-down :-)

[Egnever]

36. You are absolutely correct

Women came out for her and it had nothing to do with race. They liked her this week.

And I think you are also right if the race card is played Obama loses. It looks like the media will be more than happy to play it for him though.

[1corona4u]

42. Nothing, and I mean nothing, pisses 'white folks' off faster

than having the race card played. He will lose if they start doing this shit.

[Egnever]

55. Agree whole heartdly

Hopefully he will come out and put it to rest tomorrow before the media runs with it.

[1corona4u]

57. I hope so...

You know as well as I do, that Obama doesn't think that, at all.

[Anouka]

51. So the race card is only ok when it's positive? (Iowa)

If IA was colorblind, then NH was a repudiation of colorblindness.
Simple. Period. That's the partner the media began the dance with, and that's how it looks heading into SC, whether it's truth or not.

I don't think IA showed colorblindness, but then Obama wasn't supposed to win by anywhere near as much as he did win. NH voting so differently from how it polled is suspect. If NH had gone first I don't think it would have been half as much of a shock, as IA was.

To be honest, I think the debate and Obama and Edwards tag teaming may have helped her after all, because of

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/epolls/index.html#NHDEM

the numbers under "Who Ran the Most Unfair Campaign"

Hillary supporters dissed Obama AND Edwards by 66% and 59% respectively. That is massive. Edwards supporters didn't break a quarter for Obama or Hillary, and Obama supporters were 68% against Hillary's campaign strategies.

Why would that be, though?

[progressivebydesign]

65. Last night Obama's rally was mostly attended by 20-40 year old white males.

He seemed to be doing fine with them. What he's not doing so well with is women, who were noticably absent from the crowd. This isn't about race, and I hate to see that trotted out here today.

[jackson_dem]

28. Why were the polls accurate for the Republicans and spot on for Edwards?

If there was vote rigging it would happen on both sides. Romney is the establishment candidate. Yet he lost by six points as expected. It is sad but race played a factor. Damn it. When will we grow past it? Despite the progress that has made, as Obama's win and his near win tonight show, we still have a ways to go.

[1corona4u]

35. You know what, then get the fuck out of the race.

Tell Obama that racism will never get him in the white house. Who gives a fuck. I know I don't want to hear this bullshit for another 9 fucking months!!!!

[jackson_dem]

41. He can still win despite racism

It just makes the climb that much harder. Obama must have known this from the beginning.

[1corona4u]

43. So what? Did you all think he was just going to waltz right the

fuck into the white house??? It's not going to be a cake walk for ANY of them!!!! Look at John Edwards. Think it's going to be easy for him????

Get a grip. Jesus Christ.

[progressivebydesign]

69. and Hillary can win despite sexism... and McCain could win despite agism.. etc.. n/'t

[featherman]

44. Another half way decent discussion ruined by a screamer

Bye bye... I'm heading elsewhere

[1corona4u]

47. You should have known better than to start this!!!!

It's a very volitile topic.

[TeamJordan23]

37. Exit polls showed Obama winning too. So people must have lied on those also

I also agree that Bradley Effect had a big role in the result. Was it the only factor - probably not. Considering that the % of voters who choose Obama and Clinton was nearly the same for both candidates, I'm not sure how much the Hillary crying moment had on this race.

[Didereaux]

46. Bullshit! Final exit polls matched exactly the outcome

[progressivebydesign]

70. Nope, the exit polls were correct in trending for HIillary.

Gosh, when people here thought Hillary was being treated differently because of sexism, the Obama supporters attacked and called it whining and making excuses. Why the double standard?

[Kat45]

49. On the news I heard that the young people didn't all come out to vote

They mentoned that there were lots of young people cheering for Obama at his campaign events and such, but those numbers didn't vote.

[ShortnFiery]

63. Excuse my tin foil hat, but perhaps all this "press over-exaggeration" about Obama was a ruse to ...

discourage younger voters through overconfidence?

Every DAMN thing about "The Clintons" is highly orchestrated and I'm so damn sick of their DLC machine. They're vicious, but growing I'm tired of false emotion, hissy fits and all of the other "political dirty tricks" both the RNC and DLC have honed into a fine science. :(

[progressivebydesign]

67. That's probably why HRC said early on that you can't rely on the youth vote entirely.

They traditionally do not vote as reliably as the older voters do. They're more likely to caucus or attend things in a fun party atmosphere like the first few primaries, when they're being wooed. But I know from all of the 20-somethings I'm surrounded by, they aren't terribly good at sealing the deal and getting out to vote when it counts. The ones to watch are the older ladies.. the ones that have voted in every election, and wouldn't miss it for the world. They're the reliable voters. I'd be cautious if a candidate seems to have crowds of weeping people and pumped up teens... doesn't always mean a vote.

[Kat45]

74. I agree with you on that one.

When I was twentysomething, most of my friends/peers weren't diligent about voting, and I see the same thing with today's folks of that age.

[2partynot4me]

58. Pale face speak with fork tongue?

What happened in New Hampshire? Bradley effect? Or did Barack lose by a Hillary tear? It's true that it wasn't an open caucus whereas Iowa was.

Possibilities:

- Bradley effect (Pale face speak with fork tongue?)

- Hillary tears and Bill meltdown - face it, lots of us thought Bill Clinton was a great President and the Hillary tears / Bill Clinton meltdown can't be excluded. Older women voted in droves and I even felt touched when Hillary welled up and got all cooshy, cooshy despite my resolve that she will never (should I actually say never?) get my vote after her Iran vote betrayal? I want the Iraq war brought to an end - not have my canidate give Bush a blank check to start a new war!

All in all, maybe folks do need to know more about Obama. What can it hurt? He impressed me BIG TIME! I'll admit it. But maybe it's time to take a deep breath before jumping on the wave? I'll be watching the man. That's for sure. And quite frankly, I didn't leave Hillary. Hillary left me. I actually changed my registration democrat to Independent and after watching these dem clowns in congress spit in the face of those of us who actually BELIEVED their gobbly gook - that's where I'll remain. It's going to be a long, long, long year.

[progressivebydesign]

68. Older women are the voting powerhouses...

but they're being swept under the rug lately because of this elusive youth-effect, which historically doesn't pan out on election day.

[ShortnFiery]

61. I don't buy into it. Obama did well. The PRESS jumped the gun, not the candidate nor the people.

[progressivebydesign]

64. I lived in LA at the time. Tom Bradley was not wildly popular at that time.

It has nothing to with "race". Why are people now coming out and saying that Obama is now hamepered by his race? The only polls worth a shit are exit polls, done correctly.

[Zynx]

66. It wasn't even close in 1986. Look at the results.

1982, that could have been one of many races that simply don't reflect the polls. In Georgia in 2002 Roy Barnes lost literally out of nowhere. He had a 10 point lead and lost by 5 out of nowhere.

[Yavin4]

71. Deny The Bradley Effect At Your Own Peril

The Obama campaign needs to make adjustments on his own internal polls. If his polls show him winning by 6 points then they're really losing by 4 points. Thus, he has to campaign as if he's behind at all times, no matter what the polls tell him.

[jackson_dem]

72. That is what Harold Ford believed

[DivorcingNeo]

77. You know, I agree with that.

I don't know if you are black, but in my household I was told, growing up, that when you are black you have to work twice as hard and be twice as good and everyone else to get ahead.

Sorry folks, that's simply a reality in this country. Senator Obama cannot take ANYTHING for granted. He has to hussle at all times, nonstop. He has to be damn near perfect. Yeah it's not fair, but if he wants to win this Nomination and the Presidency...it is what has to happen.

[David Zephyr]

73. That wouldn't explain John Edwards' poor showing. Hillary won on her own.

I live in Los Angeles County and am still a huge fan of the late Tom Bradley who I got to meet several times.

I remember the great letdown when he ran for Governor and lost. I couldn't believe it because the polls had him winning justs days before.

As an Obama supporter, I don't think that there was a "Bradely effect" in New Hampshire because both John Edwards and Barack Obama experienced setbacks there from what what the polls had them at and almost in equal percentages.

There was clearly no Bradley Effect in Iowa. And I don't see it in New Hampshire.

I have to give Hillary credit. She knew she was an underdog and her campaign worked it like an underdog. I believe that our side clearly got a bit smug and complacent. Hillary was "finished" and we should have known better.

If there was any "cultural effect", it would be that there was a backlash of women as all exit polls clearly show.

Certainly, the "Iron My Shirts" stunt really, really hit a raw nerve with a lot of women and men. It was mean and it was sexist.

No Bradley effect.