If Bradley lost by 90,000+ votes out of 8 million, isn’t it safe to say that there were at least that many racists who voted against him?
Barry Soetoro is an empty suit with a whole wagonload of race cards.
Even if the Bradley Effect was real, it occurred 26 years ago when race was a larger issue and some were apt to more racist than they are today.
The writer is incorrect on his definition of Bradley Effect. They lie to pollsters because they dont want to be accused on being prejudiced, not because of their prejudice.
And this is from an article linked in another thread here on the WVa campaign:
“Casey, the Democratic state chairman, alleges...
“John McCain is confident that ignorant, redneck racists are not going to vote for Barack Obama, because Barack Obama is black,” said Casey.
I don’t agree with the Wall Street Journal — we lived in Yucaipa and several Dem neighbors didn’t like Bradley and wouldn’t vote for a black Democrat liberal and they were registered Democrats. They were outspoken about it. I asked one of them if Bradley were white, would you vote for him and he absolutely. He didn’t care he was liberal.
I didn’t vote for Bradley because he was was a Democrat liberal. As for Governor Moonbeam who was running for Senate, I wouldn’t vote for him for dog catcher.
First, I did an extensive analysis of this a few days ago. The coincidence is too high-—it’s not just Bradley. It’s Dinkins, who was ahead 6-8 and barely won; it’s Harold Washington who was polling almost 10 up and barely won; it’s Wilder who was 8 up and barely won; it’s Harvey Gantt who was 6 up and lost by 6; it’s Ken Blackwell who was 8 to 14 down . . . and lost by 25. Indeed, the ONLY races where I haven’t seen this to be a factor is when it’s a REPUBLICAN governor, and then Lynn Swann lost by almost exactly the polled amount-—but he was a sports superstar; and Michael Steele had about a 2% variation from polling. Harold Ford also lost by more than the polled amount, I think (don’t quote me).
Coming “Palin Effect?”
I didn’t follow that campaign but I’ve heard that the “Bradley effect” is bogus — that what happened was media polls under-representing R. districts such as rural areas etc.
The Atty General’s race (white vs. white) showed virtually the same difference between public polls and election day. Anyone know for sure?
That’s why the R. private polling showed a sizable discrepancy with the MSM polling all along.
Gee, maybe the MSM was trying to discourage R. turnout by making it seem like a lost cause for Rs.
Who the hell cares!
Tom Bradley was a Liberal’s Liberal. He was Left as “H”.
The argument however about race is valid when one reflects upon the Leftist bent of the Candidate as racist as well.
Tom Bradley was not a man of all the people.
The Bradley effect is BS. Bradley lost because of a last minute smear campaign involving crime stats and the race of the criminals.
Bradley wasn’t all that liberal, especially considering the very liberal constituency he represented. In fact, he was a good Mayor, IMO. He served 5 terms (20 years) and was reelected by large, and bipartisan, margins.
He exhibited none of the cronyism of his predecessor, Sam Yorty-a Dem turned RINO, was very pro business, and was as race-less a man as you could ask for. His management of the negotiations and logistics leading into the 1984 Olympics was masterful...and profitable, for Los Angeles.
If he were to enter politics today, he’d be a Conservative Republican by the standards of today’s Republicans.
Nobody ever claimed that Bradely lost because of race. That’s not what the “Bradley effedct” is. The effect is the difference between his showing in the polls — which, right up to Election Day, showed him ahead, generally comfortably — and his actual performance.
Most experts think that people who had no intention of voting for Bradley tole the pollsters that they would do so, and they believe that that was because of Mayor Bradley’s race.
The Bradley Effect has to be figured when looking at Obama’s polls, as well as the well-known skewing of teh samples with an overrepresentation of Democrats.
In spite of those two factors, McCain is within the margin of error.
bmflr