Wednesday, April 23, 2008

The "Bradley Effect" and Closing the Deal

Going in to the Pennsylvania primary, the Real Clear Politics average of Pennsylvania polls showed that Pennsylvania voters preferred Hillary to St. Barack of Obama by about 6.1 points. Most of the polling data put Hillary's lead from between three and seven points.
Yesterday, Hillary substantially outperformed these predictions: as of this morning, it appears that she defeated Obama by about ten percentage points in terms of total votes cast. When Florida and Michigan are factored in, Mrs. Clinton may well lead Obama in terms of total votes cast -- which considerably improves her chances of getting superdelegates to dump St. Barack.
But lets go back to the polling. Of the polls taken in Pennsylvania just prior to the election, only the Zogby poll of 675 likely voters (taken on 20-21 April) was close to being accurate -- nailing the actual results almost dead on. What's going on ?
Blogging Caesar gave us a possible explanation yesterday, warning us that the "Bradley Effect" would be in play in Pennsylvania. The "Bradley Effect" refers to the possible explanation for a tendency (when there is a white candidate running against a non-white candidate) for the non-white candidate to score below the result predicted in the polling data. This is theorized to occur because, supposedly, white voters lie to the pollsters to avoid being perceived as racists.
Possibly this effect was in play yesterday, but it is equally possible that voters are simply getting to know Barack Obama a little better. The primary process is normally for vetting candidates, but in the process we have seen this year, Obama was practically the Democratic candidate before anybody knew what happened, thanks to much of the big media being convinced that St. Barack was the new Messiah.
Maybe the romance has been too fast to make it easy to close the deal; and Democrats, on the cusp of handing their party over to a total newbie, are having a little buyer's remorse ? The Democrats may now be wondering if St. Barack is the Messiah or McGovern; if he's Jack Kennedy, or Adlai Stevenson ? Either way, "Mr. Change We Can Believe In" might be a leap of faith too far.
Whatever. For those of us happily on the outside, it's a time to make up some popcorn and watch the cash get spent. Bash on Democrats.

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

The Dems are being "Hoist with their own petard".

Over the past four decades they have produced and cultivated within the African-American community a small, permanently aggrived minority that will, for lack of a better word, riot on command. It is not unlike the mob that played such a large part in the politics of Ancient Rome. This group serves as the "no peace" part of the "no justice, no peace". They are the stick with which "Civil Rights Leaders" extort concessions from buisness and civic leaders... a small percentage of which are then passed on to the members of the mob, but much (or most) of which is retained by the aforementioned "Civil Rights Leaders". It boils down to "You give me X amount of dollars/city contracts/patronage jobs, etc. OR I fire up the mob and you'll have a cross between Tiwana Brawley and the Watts Riots here.. and the media will blame YOU for it."

Well, if the Dems fail to nominate Obama, this mob will turn its' fury on them... Denver 08 will look like Chicago '68, only worse.

It matters not what Obama does between now and then. He could eat a live mouse on live TV (and MSNBC would praise him for his commitment to organic foods). It matters not what Hillary does; she is clearly the stronger candidate come November. If Obama does not get a coronation in Denver, the mob will riot, and the Democratic party will be destroyed.

If this means that the Dems have to write off the 2008 Presidental Election and run someone who simply can not win... that is what they will do. Not only does it preserve the party, but when McCain beats Obama they will tell the mob "See? We told you the Republicans are all racisit! See! You NEED us!".

Then in 2012, the field will be open for someone else... likely one of the Superdeligates to run.

louielouie said...

i was with you right up until the last para.
i don't think i agree with you on that. hussein is a young man. i think hussein will be a factor in presidential politics for decades to come. he may go back to illinois and run for governor. he may even run for mayor of chicago. but i think we will have to live with him for a long time. maybe even as a third party candidate.

Candidly Caroline said...

Jefe, I thought you might appreciate that I heard about Hillary Clinton's win last night from Laura Ingraham. She was the featured speaker at a Majella Society benefit gala. I'm just learning about this group, but I like that they take a "positive approach to life."

El Jefe Maximo said...

I've never had the pleasure of hearing Ms. Ingraham in person, although she's certainly impressive on radio and television.

I confess I had not heard of the Majella Society before, CC, but I checked it out via Google and it looks like a worthy organization.

I agree, LL, that Obama will be with us for some time. If he loses out at the end to Hillary, I could see him coming back four years hence after she crashes and burns, as she would. However, if he is the nominee and crashes, he'd better get used to the Senate, or go run for Governor of Illinois, or accept a cushy professorship someplace. Maybe he could try again after a period of time, as ALGORE could.

louielouie said...

you know how there are times when you want to say something, that you've heard or read, but you don't. you don't because what you say may make someone mad. even though that person knows you're a bigot, you don't mean to say something that would make them mad. i mean everyone has opinions and some peoples opinions are different, and that doesn't make them bad opinions, but they could still make someone mad even though that is really not what you want when you say something that you've heard or read.

ah hell.
I can't figure out why we are even bothering to hold an election.
On one side, we have a bitch who is a lawyer, married to a lawyer, and a lawyer who is married to a bitch who is a lawyer.
On the other side, we have a true war hero married to a woman with a huge chest who owns a beer distributorship.

Is there a contest here?
Am I missing something?

El Jefe Maximo said...

You know, LL, there's a doctoral thesis out there someplace, either on a computer someplace, on some dusty bookshelves, or in somebody's head, about the speed of circulation of internet jokes. I saw that same joke just yesterday.

Roy said...

Wait! I heard that Hillary won a nailbiter. She BARELY won. She doesn't have a chance. Your polls must be wrong...or maybe the media has already picked its winner.

It's shameful that we have to watch the media pander to the Obama campaign. I think the ship is starting to turn the wrong direction for Senator Obama.

Of course, now I'm a racist for not wanting him to be the President. A close friend who always leans to the left said it best when I asked her who she was voting for this fall: "McCain, of course. Have you listened to Obama? He sounds like an idiot." Well spoken my friend.

hank_F_M said...

It was always said, that what ever her other attributes, Clinton was one of the best and toughest campaign managers around. Over confident the first part of the cycle and caught by surprise few others could have staged this comeback.

The Rezko trial just got more interesting. It seems one of the witnesses who plea-bargained, offered much more evidence after the agreement than promised or is relevant to the current trial. He claims they tried to get the Rove to have Patrick Fitzgerald fired as prosecutor for Northern Illinois. The defense forced this out and there is more but what? Whether Obama is involved or not I think the defense is trying force a dismissal so as not to interfere in the election. A dollar to a donut that Clinton finds a way to make this stick to Obama, deservedly or not. Losing a candiadte to currpution charge in this type of campaign will do no good for the democrats, or the politcal process.

Politics is always better as a spectator sport, I wish that is all that was at stake.


P.S. This will be in the news I’m sure as a “Rovian Plot” TM though given the nature of NE Illinois politics the real story is that he refused to cooperate. The administration has consistently protected Fitzpatrick against Illinois politics, Republican and Democrat.