Debunking the Bradley Effect

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/27313459#27313459

See: http://www.newsweek.com/id/164972
Stating that Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act wasn't what caused the meltdown, and noting that "economists on both sides of the political spectrum have suggested that the act has probably made the crisis less severe than it might otherwise have been."

Nowforthetruth needs to get out of third grade, get off the Internet, and get a girlfriend. Dude, you are jaded and really only present one perspective in this forum. The world is complex. there is more going on than what's in your head..... And, all of you talking about race makes it seem very similar to racism.... Talk about what YOU are going to do to make our country and world better.

Lori, in some states convicted felons are allowed to vote once they have paid their debt to society. Whether you agree with the policy or not, it is the law. If you don't like that law, work to change it.

Personally, I believe that crimals should be rehabilitated and made full members of society if they can show that their behavior has improved. In Scandinavia where they provide intense psychotherapy for prisoners and expect them to WORK as part of their incarceration, the recidivism rate is below 5%. In America, repeat offenders are the norm.

Our prisons, which are pens filled with drug-fueled violent males living aimless lives where they do no meaningful work and receive no real psychiatric care, are just breeding grounds for crime. Young men go to jail as freshmen offenders and come out hardened criminals, with contacts in the underworld and muscles bulging from lifting weights all day.

Our penal system is beyond stupid.

The few offenders who make it through this and come out reformed deserve to be included in society.

As usual, the MSM points out that "6 percent of the electorate may be voting against Obama because he is black". Yet, no mention at all, of course, is made of the 95% of blacks who are voting for Obama because he is black. Why is one of these thought of as racism, and not the other?

I guess for some the Bradley effect is some of our posters last hope for "saving the nation" from the evil Obama." Secondly, many states in the Democratic Primaries had early voting, therefore they went with the name that they recognized the most, CLINTON. Keep in mind, people knew who Obama was, but it didn't originally match a Clinton.

Congressman Murtha upgraded the citizens of W. Pa. from "racist" to "rednecks." Not doub't they are clinging to their guns and religion as we speak.

"Press Releases

AJC Strongly Condemns Rev. Jesse Jackson???s Comment on American Jews
October 14, 2008 - New York - The American Jewish Committee (AJC) has condemned the Rev. Jesse Jackson's statement about "Zionists who have controlled American policy for decades."
"Rev. Jackson's remarks, which appeared in an interview with the journalist Amir Taheri in today's New York Post, echo classic anti-Semitic conspiracy theories about Jewish power," said AJC Executive Director David A. Harris. "This statement, regrettably, is not the first troubling comment by Rev. Jackson regarding Israel, Zionism and the Jewish people.

Arguing as a private citizen that an Obama administration could bring significant change to U.S. foreign policy, Jackson was quoted as saying that "Zionists who have controlled American policy for decades" would lose much of their influence should Senator Obama be elected president."


http://www.ajc.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=ijITI2PHKoG&b=849241&ct=6107743

And people are upset about what some in the crowd are saying at Palin events? Isn't this the same Democrat leader who once called New York "Hymietown" ?

See: http://www.newsweek.com/id/164972
Stating that Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act wasn't what caused the meltdown, and noting that "economists on both sides of the political spectrum have suggested that the act has probably made the crisis less severe than it might otherwise have been."

Oops! The "perfessional" "journalist" forgot to mention that THE ONE was supposed to win California by 10 points. Instead he lost by 10 points. I guess that wouldn't prove this "unbiased" report. So, no need to mention that kind of thing...eh... er... ahem.

Well, he fooled everyone. Welll, almost everyone. At least those willing to ignore all the cases where the exit polls in the primaries showed a HUGE Bradley effect, and just mention a couple that didn't, and then launch into a historical analysis on Bradley to try to disprove everything and anything--instead of looking at what ACTUALLY just happened --in front of the whole nation: "Nothing to see here! PAY NO ATTENTION TO THAT MAN BEHIND THE VOTING CURTAIN! THERE IS NO BRADLEY EFFECT! WE THE SNOOZEWEEK PUNDITS FORBID IT!!!"

Uh, right. See you Nov. 4.

If the Bradley Effect was truly in effect, we would have seen it more so during the Democratic Primaries. Remember, we have to keep in mind that generational shifts have occurred in our voting populations. Many of the people who are voting now are "use" to people of color. Even if they grew up in small towns, the younger white generations easily have black friends, spouses, classmates etc. Therefore, the Bradley effect may be alive for some, but not for all.

I'm not quite so certain that the effect won't play a role. The Bradley effect describes those on the cusp of racism. Those who would be described as "Not quite racist" or "barely racist". If 6% of our population is going to vote for racist reasons, a proportionate number are likely to be effected by the Bradley Effect.

Insightful analysis as always, Nate. Too bad most of the comments here are a bit off-topic. It can't be emphasized enough that claiming a Bradley effect no longer exists is NOT the same as claiming that voters are no longer racist.

John McCain's campaign seems to be playing a little hardball with the media in the final two weeks of the presidential race.

The campaign on Tuesday issued a statement decrying NBC News for its "apparent refusal" to air Joe Biden's controversial remarks that Barack Obama would face a "generated crisis" early on if he is elected.

"Biden's remarks capture perfectly the message of this campaign: Barack Obama is too risky, too inexperienced, to serve as commander in chief -- that his election by itself will provoke our enemies, and that his brief record raises serious questions as to how an Obama administration would respond to such a challenge," McCain spokesman Michael Goldfarb said in the written statement.

"This campaign highlighted Biden's remarks throughout the day yesterday," he continued. "Yet on NBC Nightly News last night, when Andrea Mitchell reported on Biden's remarks, she failed to play the relevant portion -- the portion that this campaign and a variety of news outlets had found controversial, or revealing as the case may be."

A representative from NBC News could not be reached for comment.

The Atlantic also posted an expletive-laced interview with McCain adviser Mark Salter on its Web site Monday in which Salter assailed the media for their treatment of the Republican ticket.

"I think, starting with the Democratic primary, there has been a different standard for Obama than there has been for any candidate running against Barack Obama. And maybe this should have set off more warning bells with me," he said. "I think much of the media has a thumb on the scale for Obama. I think the thumb has been there the entire time."

Salter added that "the press has been harsh consistently" on the McCain campaign.

Insightful analysis as always, Nate. It's unfortunate that most of the comments are essentially off-topic.

I was in the Los Angeles area at the time of Bradley's campaign for Governor of California. I attribute Bradley's loss to what I call the "Bradley/Weld" effect rather than the popular "Bradley Effect" described here.
Why Bradley/Weld? Bradley was the popular Mayor of Los Angeles at the time. Had he been elected Governor, the people of Los Angeles ??? the largest city in the state -would lose their Mayor. While they may have stated a preference for Bradley over Deukmejian in polls, what they really wanted was Bradley to continue as Mayor. I remember hearing office talk to this effect at the time.
Similarly, in 1996 William Weld (the popular Governor of Massachusetts ) took on John Kerry for a Senate seat, making a very strong challenge. Kerry pulled off a big win over Kerry for the same reason Deukmejian won against Bradley ??? by electing Kerry, voters were able to continue to have Weld serve them (as Governor) while also getting Kerry (as Senator). As I recall, Kerry???s win was much stronger than predicted by polls.