Obama Supporters Fear Race May Bring Candidate Down
| More news stories on Curious Customs and Beliefs |
|---|
Matthew Bigg, Reuters, October 15, 2008
For supporters of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama it is a nightmare scenario—his apparent lead in the battle for the White House suddenly evaporates on Election Day. The cause? Race.
As Republican rival John McCain celebrates victory, it emerges that a small but decisive percentage of white voters who had declared to opinion pollsters they supported Obama actually chose differently in the privacy of the ballot booth.
With opinion surveys making Obama the favorite over McCain less than three weeks before the November 4 election, attention has turned to the question of how many white Americans might be lying to pollsters about their willingness to vote for a black president.
The phenomenon is known as the “Bradley effect,” after Tom Bradley, an African American who narrowly lost the 1982 California governor’s election despite leading in polls.
His defeat surprised observers who concluded many white voters had not been honest about their intentions. Ever since, pollsters have tried to factor in the Bradley effect in elections featuring black candidates.
{snip}
Analysts counter that since the 1970s, surveys have shown a sharp decline in the number of voters who say they would not vote for an African American for president.
Recent surveys have indicated that Obama’s race is less of an impediment to voters than McCain’s age. At 72, McCain would be the oldest person to assume the U.S. presidency.
FACTORING IN RACE
The analysts also note that few people who are turned off by a black candidate’s race would likely vote Democrat anyway.
{snip}
Politicians rarely address it directly and both the Obama and McCain campaigns downplay the idea the some whites might not be speaking honestly about their voting plans.
The diversity of the U.S. electorate makes it hard to quantify the phenomenon, pollsters say. An older voter in South Florida may be of the same race as a young union member in Virginia or a businesswoman in Colorado but share little else.
The Democratic primaries in which voters in the states picked the party’s presidential candidate painted a mixed picture of the potential for a Bradley effect. In some states, Obama got fewer white votes than expected but in South Carolina and elsewhere it was the opposite.
Commentator Earl Ofari Hutchinson said there was a potential for the Bradley effect to be decisive, and that Obama might need a 10 percent lead in opinion polls to be sure of overcoming it.
{snip}
Pollster John Zogby said he took the prospect of overstating white support for Obama very seriously.
Zogby tries to factor any potential Bradley effect into his polling but said he believes it will be negligible, in part because estimates of Obama’s support had proved accurate during the primaries.
{snip}
(Posted on October 16, 2008)
Comments
Rush Limbaugh has been saying that if Obama doesn’t have a 10-point average lead in the last polls before election day, he’ll lose. And I agree.
A 10-point Bradley Effect simply means that 5% of those polled are saying that they’re voting Obama when they’re really going to vote McCain. Therefore, if a given poll shows Obama up by 6, subtract 10 and you’ll see he’s down by 4. Of course, that is notwithstanding the other problems with polls, such as oversampling of Democrats and of registered instead of likely voters.
An opposite of the Bradley Effect is informally called the Duke Effect, after David Duke. That is, a “controversial” right-wing candidate’s numbers in the polls are well underneath the reality, because his or her supporters are too scared to tell pollsters that they’re voting for that candidate.
Posted by Question Diversity at 6:02 PM on October 16
Tom Bradley lost the race for Governor in California in 1982 because he was a liberal democrat, and he supported the ultra leftist Jerry Brown appointed chief justice of the California Supreme Court Rose Bird(brain).Californians were fed up with that court repeatedly letting criminals and killers off.George Deukmejian turned out to be an excellent governor.
Posted by Peejay in Frisco at 6:15 PM on October 16
If Obama were white there’s no way he would be in the race right now, because his obvious racist past and his communist leanings would have nullified him long ago.
If they’re going to call whites, who say they’ll vote for a black then decide against it, the Bradley effect, what will they call almost 100% of blacks who are going to vote for him simply because he’s black?
In most poeople’s book that’s called a strong racial bias or racism.
These whites are far worse than the blacks themselves. And they’re disgusting as well. Really disgusting.
Posted by q at 6:19 PM on October 16
“The analysts also note that few people who are turned off by a black candidate’s race would likely vote Democrat anyway.”
Why is the Democrat Party savaging its base then? News stories that as many as a third of Democrats are racist? Why did Senator Murtha attack his constituents?
Posted by at 6:23 PM on October 16
Actually, the so-called Bradley Effect was largely a MSM invention to explain Bradley’s loss in his LA mayoral bid. A post-race analysis more strongly suggests that the actual reason for his defeat (by one point, as I recall) was a lower than expected turnout by black constituents and a higher than expected turnout by white middle-class voters.
Of course, if Obama loses, it will all be attributed to the Bradley Effect, ie white racism.
Posted by john at 7:12 PM on October 16
After that white woman got a visit from the secret service because an Obama pollster make a totally bogus report that she threatened Obama with death, why should any white person tell the truth about their voting decision?
After 50 years of liberal tyranny, whites have been conditioned to keep our opinions to ourselves at school, at work, at church and everywhere else.
Can’t wait to see the white hating, america hating media meltdown if McCain wins.
Posted by at 7:30 PM on October 16
Well, this one is just loaded with glittering gems of anti-white garbage and rosy Red rubies of reverse-racism.
First, is this idocy:
“For supporters of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama it is a nightmare scenario—his apparent lead in the battle for the White House suddenly evaporates on Election Day. The cause? Race.”
But what about the opposite? What about his filthy and wild-eyed zombie supporters’ reactions, if whites and Hispanics both split about 50/50 each on election day and blacks carry him over the top by unexpectedly voting for him by 99.99% ? What does that say about them?
I know, I know: They have overcome!
Second, is this vile vitriol:
“As Republican rival John McCain celebrates victory, it emerges that a small but decisive percentage of white voters who had declared to opinion pollsters they supported Obama actually chose differently in the privacy of the ballot booth.”
So how should McComrade rectify that “unfairness?” What should he do?
It will be the first hard decision of his presidency, wouldn’t it?
Should he abdicate to Comrade BO or simply exterminate the white population in his gratitude to them for his profits by way of their hidden “racism?”
There is something to keep you all up sweating at night contemplating.
Third and last, is this abysmally asinine absurdity:
“The Democratic primaries in which voters in the states picked the party’s presidential candidate painted a mixed picture of the potential for a Bradley effect. In some states, Obama got fewer white votes than expected but in South Carolina and elsewhere it was the opposite.”
Well, isn’t that the strength of white “diversity” in the Democratic Party?
Particularly in such states as South Carolina, where they only make up half of the registered Democratic voters?
Give me a break, Comrade BO only did well in places where white Democrats with semi-brains and regular contact with blacks were outnumbered like South Carolina, or near lily white states like Minnesota or Iowa. Anywhere like Ohio or Texas, where blacks hit between 10% to 15% (enough to deteriorate general life, but not dominate Democratic political life) he lost to the Red Queen, Hillary.
It may not seem like it just now, and I could still be wrong as well, but I think Comrade BO will lose because such “blue” states as Michigan and Pennsylvania with sizeable, but not ominously large black populations, will swing white against blackened Red this year, by a considerable percentage of the white vote.
If not….????
Well, then God help us all!
Posted by John PM at 7:44 PM on October 16
For supporters of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama it is a nightmare scenario—his apparent lead in the battle for the White House suddenly evaporates on Election Day. The cause? Race.
———————
Well, maybe this “apparent lead” has been nothing but a mirage all along something stoked and perpetuated by the so-called “mainstream” news media that is obviously in the tank for Obama.
Posted by RHG at 7:57 PM on October 16
No wonder whites conceal who they intend to vote for and their opinions on racial issues. Look what the eviliberals are doing to a white man, Joe the plumber who dared to express to Obama a polite objection to raising taxes on small businesses.
Eviliberals have convinced the city of Toledo to stop him from earning a living.
FROM SOME WHITE HATING LIBERAL WEBSITE
Wurzelbacher registered as an apprentice with the Ohio State Apprenticeship Council in November 2003, according to Dennis Evans, spokesman with the Department of Job and Family Services. Records show his training, which was sponsored by A & W Newell Co. of Toledo, should have been wrapped last year.
“We don’t have a record of completion,” Evans said. “All we know is that he registered in the program and has gone through to the point where we should have record of completion, but we don’t.”
And that’s not the only record that’s missing from Wurzelbacher’s file. He doesn’t have a plumbing license required by the city of Toledo to practice, according to a staffer with the Toledo Division of Building Inspection. Wurzelbacher, who now works for Newell Plumbing & Heating Co., said the owner, Al Newell, has a plumbing license and that “because he works for someone else, he doesn’t need a license.”
But even that’s not true, according to the Toledo Division of Building Inspection. Wurzelbacher can’t legally do plumbing work without a license, regardless of his boss’s certification.
A staff person with the Toledo Division of Building Inspection told On Call this afternoon that her division will contact Wurzelbacher to notify him that he can’t work without a license.
“We’re trying to track him down,” she said.
Posted by MARGARET at 8:00 PM on October 16
I would urge all readers to spread the word to everyone they know. About Obama’s “redistribution of wealth” pipedream. What it really means… supporting our Black population living off welfare. Helping those worthless African countries which can somehow NEVER make it on their own. No matter how much money is poured into their country. But NEVER pick on the racial aspect in this election. Unless you hammer in the point, it’s not race, but his ideology and worthless “grandiose plans” which translates to taking MORE MONEY from the pockets of working class Americans.
That damned “redistribution of wealth” has some bad connotations. He is a closet communist/marxist at heart. Who does not believe anyone should be allowed to own/have more than anyone else. In effect penalizing those of us who make an honest effort to better our standard of living.
Posted by Fed Up at 8:07 PM on October 16
There’s a lot of merit to this argument. I think that at this point, the only way McCain will win is if white voters show some race realism and vote against Obama. Obama is leading in all of the polls, and economic factors should make him the clear winner. I think that this election is really going to tell us something about the state of our country, and the state of our race. If we as white people vote our race this election, it will prove that there’s hope for us yet. One of my biggest fears is that other white people have been too brainwashed to support their own racial interests. If Obama looses this election, it will renew a lot of hope in me about the state of our race.
With that said, I think that an Obama victory would provide more of the circumstances needed for a racial revolution. That’s why part me wants Obama to win. As I mentioned in previous posts, an Obama, Reid, Pelosi government coupled with an economic collapse would almost guarantee a revolution. Immediately following an Obama Victory, scores of White American who have been on the fence will finally realize that our race is in trouble. David Duke said that an Obama Presidency would provide the visual aid needed to show Whites that we’ve lost control of our country. Many White Americans like myself have believed up till now that a black president just wasn’t possible. That’s all changing. If anyone has paid attention to the McCain rallies lately, they’ll have noticed that they’re getting pretty angry. Americans are really starting to see the possibility of a black man winning. If Obama wins, people will finally realize just how far we’ve gone. When the economy really hits bottom, there will be a revolution. For years now, I’ve looked at some older and middle aged white people who wave American Flags and talk about how patriotic they are with wonder. The America they’re thinking of doesn’t exist anymore. I think that an Obama victory would finally prove that to most of them. That’s when revolution will become possible. When those Americans who have held this country together for so long finally realize that their America is no more, then we’ll see change.
With all of that said, I still would love a McCain victory. I have no intentions on voting for him, I’ll be doing a write-in ballot for Jared Taylor. I would love to see all of these whining blacks get their noses rubbed in the fact that whites are still the majority. This is our land, and a McCain victory would say that loud and clear. Imagine what life will be like on November 5th if McCain wins. Despite all the polls calling it for Obama, despite all of Obama’s money, despite the media overwhelmingly supporting Obama, whites chose to stick with their own race. That in and of itself might provide the basis for a revolution. Blacks would have to contend with the fact that whites will never voluntarily let them control our birth-right. This would set race relations back to pre-civil-rights times. Whites would get to see their black buddies true side when he/she riots in the streets, or snubbs them at work. It will provide the divide we need. Now couple that with an economic collapse, and we still have revolution.
While deep down I know that an Obama victory will probably help our cause out more in the long run, I think a McCain victory would still do just fine. Either way, I think a storm is brewing. Ever since I had my racial awakening, I’ve known that a revolution was imminent. I never thought it could happen this soon. I’ve been under the assumption that it would happen 40-50 years from now when we’ve lost our majority, and Blacks and Hispanics use our own Democratic Process against us. It’s looking more and more like that day is fixing to dawn, and I’m excited. We’re still the overwhelming majority in this country. Right now, we would win hands down. PRAY FOR AN ECONOMIC COLLAPSE!!!
Posted by Winston Smith at 9:48 PM on October 16
The pollsters are only reaching prospective voters with landlines. Most young folks have ditched this for cell phones. And young voters lean decidedly left. I would estimate Obama needs 8% or greater going into election day. Presently, taking 8% on a state-by-state basis, the race is pretty much a dead heat with Obama ahead by only ten electoral votes (Obama: 274 to McCain: 264) as opposed to the very wide liberal assessment the media bestows the Dems presently (Obama: 344 to McCain: 164). The bias is astonishing, yet unsurprising.
Additionally, if McCain was not such a jackass and a weak candidate- fundamentally not that different from Obama, the GOP wouldn’t be sweating it right now.
Posted by PMN at 9:59 PM on October 16
Quite often the polls putting obama substantially ahead of McCain are run by the likes of CBS, NY Times, Washington Post, etc. These wild obviously false polls are then incorporated into the average of the daily polls, thereby boosting obama’s numbers beyond what they really are. The dems have done this in every election cycle since at least 2000, probably before. This is done as a form of psychological warfare, giving their side something to strut around and brag about, and get the republicans worried, and maybe even convince them that they shouldn’t even bother to vote. That is what is happening now. Yes, there are a lot of whites who will vote along racial lines, but then they are joined by those who are opposed to liberals of any color. Another group are those who are angry about the economy and say they will vote for obama, but that is only in theory. When it comes time to vote, alone in the booth, most of them will put their theory to the ultimate test, and they will vote for McCain. Combine these three groups together, and McCain has a winning combination. My prediction McCain 52, obama 45, 3rd parties 3. It will be fun to watch MSNBC meltdown.
Posted by greg at 11:17 PM on October 16
The ‘Bradley’ effect? What to make of the fact that 90% of whites don’t believe what the media tells them? What to name that effect? Might ‘the Bradley effect’ be just one more ‘reality’ whites view with suspicion?
Posted by at 12:16 AM on October 17
“Duke effect… a ‘controversial’ right-wing candidate’s numbers in the polls are well underneath the reality, because his or her supporters are too scared to tell pollsters that they’re voting for that candidate.”
lol careful. You just turned John McCain into David Duke in your explanation as to why the poll results can’t be trusted (both do better than the polls indicate). Luckily, the mainstream media hasn’t picked up on that idea yet. Then again, comparing the two might actually give John McCain more votes. It would work for me.
Posted by at 12:30 AM on October 17
Bribes in this country (USA) are institutionalized.
Big, Bad Wurzelbacher didn’t pay his bribe to the poor, little, innocent City of Toledo.
The big, bad plumber hurt the little City of Toledo. (Tears…)
Pay your bribe, Sam, and the city will give you a license.
Posted by at 1:05 AM on October 17
The Liberal media consistently insists that racism is the only reason why a White person would not vote for Obama. Similar sentiments are expressed repeatedly each day in the media. The Left-wing media and those on the Left deride such supposed “racist” attitudes as the “worst of all imaginable
crimes”.
Then, they act surprised when the results turn out differently from their collected data because some of the Whites they’ve terrorized with their accusatory charges of “racism” are afraid to say they do not support Obama!
Blacks and their socialist enablers won’t be happy until ballots are no longer cast in secret!
Posted by at 1:24 AM on October 17
His race could “bring him down”?? How about his odd background, lack of professional accomplishment, and his willingness to take from those who earn money to give to freeloaders. That’s why people should reject him.
Posted by at 10:24 AM on October 17
All of this talk about the “Bradley Effect” is just the media’s attempt to preemptively cover for their own fraudulent polls. Ann Coulter has an excellent article about how the polls are always off (in the Democrat’s favor) by around 6% or more. The media wants a ready-made excuse on election night so that people don’t start asking serious questions about their credibility.
Also, the media always has to create an excuse to explain why liberals lose because they can’t just admit that the American people have rejected their ideas. In 2000, the excuse was that Republicans “stole” the election; in 2004, the excuse was that Kerry was “swift-boated”; the excuse in 2008 will be “racism.”
Posted by at 11:38 AM on October 17
I have never been polled or know anyone who has been polled, in any election, so I don’t understand how they come up with these numbers. Saying that Obama is ahead in the polls because of the economy doesn’t make any sense. How is a black man with no experience or knowledge of economics, never owned a business and his success in life owed to the government, going to bring back prosperity to America? Sorry I don’t buy it.
Posted by at 12:02 PM on October 17
RACISM causing the defeat of Obama would just be the excuse. Since the Obamabots refuse to consider his lack of experience, political background and the like hardly inspire real confidence. Then there’s his marxist ideology reflected in his “reapportionment of wealth.”
I don’t claim calling him a marxist or communist is the BEST label. But I do consider his wanting to take from the “rich” — us middle-class Americans to support our society’s perpetual welfare cheats and freeloaders; or those third-world African nations… sure as hell falls into the marxist ideology. Punishing those who’s honest efforts enabled them to live a somewhat better life than those refusing to apply themselves — like far too many American Blacks.
Posted by Fed Up at 1:33 PM on October 17
Well, I finally got polled.
I was at my office at the church building when a caller from (I could be wrong) Pro-market? telephoned me.
Of course he asked me who I would likely vote for POTUS as well as congress, and from what I told him I could pick up a sense of disturbance in his voice. I then stated why I would not vote for Obama and his voice even changed. He was not happy.
I have never been polled and was shocked and wished I had been ready to go in detail of why I would not support someone like Obama from both a Christian side and a conservative white person’s view.
Posted by Thank God I'm White! at 1:56 PM on October 17
Tell me if I’m wrong here. I thought the Bradley Effect explained the difference between polls and the election results, and not the excuse for why a candidate lost.
Posted by confused at 2:09 PM on October 17
I have problems with Obama’s math, 40% of people don’t pay any taxes but he is going to save taxes for 95% of the people?
Posted by The Guru at 3:10 PM on October 17
It’s not the race that matters, it’s the idiot who spouts off stupid remarks that make no sense. Look at John Murtha from PA, saying western PA is racist, well mr Murtha, you just cut your own throat, and you will take down most all the dems from your state. People are so worked up about this one, the flack will be wide spread. Bad enough that murtha called our Marine’s murderers in Iraq, now this…..I just can’t believe what some of these democratic politicians are thinking, they must think we are all morons like them and can’t think for ourselves. I wouldn’t vote for Obama if he was diamond studded and and handed out hundred dollar bills. I have my ethics, and my morals, which I wonder about those in high places, do they have any at all??? I think not!
Posted by justme at 3:29 PM on October 17
Couldn’t there be an “Obama Effect or “Amy Biehl Effect” where guilt-ridden, do-gooder white liberals vote for Obama only because he is an “oppressed” minority? You can sometimes see it in their glazed eyes the look of smug moral superiority in voting for the Hyde Park Buppie, professor and Community Activist Barak Obama. The election will be close but I predict Senator Obama will win because the “Amy Biehl Effect” is today stronger than the “Bradley Effect.”
Posted by Sardonicus at 3:49 PM on October 17
We all started taking tests soon after we were able to hold pencils. Is it any wonder we consciously or unconsciously try to give ‘right’ answers when responding to surveys? We’ve all lived in terror of failing tests since we were tiny children. Responding the ‘right way’ to surveys is sort of a conditioned response.
Of course, the ‘right’ answer is going to be the ‘nice’ answer: and what is ‘nice’ has, for a generation or two, been defined by The Liberal Orthodoxy. Racism is not ‘nice’. Let’s hope enough Americans have the moxy, this year, to go into their private voting booths and be ‘bad’ for just a moment.
Come election day, when you’re casting your secret ballot, I hope you, like me, will take a few seconds to pray thanks that our votes are still secret.
Posted by Ashamed Scot at 4:08 PM on October 17
Couldn’t there be an “Obama Effect or “Amy Biehl Effect” where guilt-ridden, do-gooder white liberals vote for Obama only because he is an “oppressed” minority? You can sometimes see it in their glazed eyes the look of smug moral superiority in voting for the Hyde Park Buppie, professor and Community Activist Barak Obama. The election will be close but I predict Senator Obama will win because the “Amy Biehl Effect” is today stronger than the “Bradley Effect.”
Posted by Sardonicus at 3:49 PM on October 17
I know what your saying. There are so many white Uncle Toms out there who are even more anti-racist than even blacks. Unfortunately I work with some of these carpetbeggar types.
Seriously, after the Reverend Wright tapes were released Obamalama should have gone away for good. It just shows how sick and getting sicker our country has become.
Posted by S & GS at 6:46 PM on October 18