As soon as the results started trickling in the explanations began as to how the polls could have been so wrong. Was it the voters reaction to the media’s coverage of a show of emotion from Hillary? Or could it have been those damn Diebold machines again?! On MSNBC, WaPo’s Eugene Robinson brought up one explanation that’s now being floated around: the Bradley Effect, in which people supposedly lied to pollsters about whether they would vote for a black candidate.
Download | Play 
Download | Play
NBC’s political director Chuck Todd on the Bradley Effect and why it may have been an influence in New Hampshire primary and not in the Iowa caucus:
In Iowa - a very public caucus . In New Hampshire, you have a voting curtain. And the privacy of the vote versus not.
And Howard Fineman explained why he thinks that could be a problem for Obama if true:
It’s Barack Obama’s burden and blessing that he can’t really - I don’t think - talk about this a whole lot. His whole message is about bringing people together. He can’t start complaining about miscalculations in the polls.
Do note that there seems to be some reason to doubt that the Bradley Effect explains the outcome, especially considering the polls were actually right about Obama, they just didn’t account for the surge in votes for Hillary. Ezra wonders if it wasn’t the caucuses that did the discriminating.
Don’t look to me to postulate one way or another (I will say that Pam’s “Tweety Effect“ echoed by Rachel Maddow holds some appeal for me though). We’ll be hearing lots more about the reasons for the pollster’s failure in NH in the days to come. I’m just enjoying the fact the polls lied so the pundits now have to eat crow and it’s starting to look like we might have an actual race on our hands where the voters and not the powers that be get to do the deciding. Who’d have thunk?
Filed Under: Barack Obama, Election 08, Hillary Clinton, MSNBC, Racism/Bigotry
No Trackbacks To “The Bradley Effect - The Barack Man’s Burden?“
Why ask why?
Have we absolutely ruled out vote fraud on this case?
Where is the next primary? SC? Ours is Jan. 29th.
Ours if Februrary 5th, but by then the nomination may be a foregone conclusion.
As an Obama supporter I say. Forget over analyzing. 5 days ago he was supposed to lose big.
It’s on to NV where the SEIU, The Culinary Workers Union, and UNITE HERE have endorsed him.
And hopefully tweety can keep his mouth shut.
What polls?
Or are you referring to the MSM’s ‘prediction’ ala Kreskin?
In a general poll regarding democratic candidates - large portions of votes cast for both O’Bama and Edwards were anti-Clinton votes. Under those circumstances, its clear that there were more anti-Clinton votes cast than pro-Clinton votes.
Really, this is about the confluence of the MSM’s face and egg. Nothing more.
oy, howard fineman weighs in to give his reason for the reason that the pollsters and pundits, like, umm, fineman, were wrong…
i wish these ‘experts’ would stfu.
it is like watching a snake trying to swallow itself.
billw, I made this point on a thread below, and would like to make it one more time, as it’s actually more relevent to your thread:
When you have this many different polls all showing the same exact thing leading up to the election, and when we have a state with 81 per cent Diebold machines, which are clearly easily hacked, as seen in the HBO special, and when you have Senator Clinton ready to concede Nevada and South Carolina just two days ago, and when you have high young turnout (who overwhelmingly favor Obama) and then, on election day, the Democratic candidate favored by Rupert Murdoch and his corporate friends “miraculously” eeks out a victory, it’s probably time for Robert Mueller to launch an FBI investigation.
It was probably multiple reasons. But prior to Iowa, Barack was supposed to have lost anyways. He actually closed the gap. Glad that Barack is not using the race card - can’t say that about Hillary and her constantly using the Gender card.
Anyone notice the difference between Obama’s concession speech yesterday and Hillary’s last week. She blamed and dismissed Iowa voters. Obama did not
I’m just hoping it’s still a horse race by Feb. 5. If so, it will be the first time in my voting life (and I’m in late middle age) that the nomination will NOT have been decided before I get to vote.
I’m beginning to think the fix was in. Not from Bill or Hillary, from higher up.
Bastards had the nerve to do it on Elvis’s birthday, too.
Other political pundits have even another explanation. With N.Hampshire comprised of
45 percent “Independents”(a very, very large number when compared to other States)
it is being surmised that many of them-there independents(tho perhaps favoring Obama)
voted for McCain on the Repub. side of the aisle, feeling that Obama was a shooo-in
and that McCain needed to come out on top in their State instead of either Romney
or Huckabee. Not saying it has any basis, but that’s another prespective. Only interviewing the Independent voters will give us an answer.
@billw - I do not see where Ezra says that Iowa discriminated
Well whatever the reason it’s over now and I’m ready to move on. I don’t think there are that many people in NH who would allow the “Bradley effect” inside the voting booth with them. I think we should pay attention to our favorite candidate, help them where we can and ignore the shit out of the talking heads on tv who don’t know a damned bit more about the future outcome of any election than we do.
i’d be willing to bet that people lied to the media and pollsters just because they could screw with them.
no other reason.
the exit polls matched the results so I’d say these elections were on the level. I’d sya poor preelection polls were to blame. Or was the MSN lying about the preelection polls to influncence
The Tweety Effect! Now there’s a name for Chris “You sure smell good” Matthew’s blatant, visceral misogyny. I’m still waiting to hear any of the MSM (Main Stream Misogynists) use the correct term “misogyny” rather than the more palatable “gender bias.”
Hail to the Chimp @ 9:
I did notice that Barack didn’t cry. Good. The president shouldn’t cry, as surely as there’s no crying in baseball.
from all i have read today about the NH primary, one common thread runs through a lot of posts: distrust.
distrust of the process, of the people, of the machines, of the pundits, etc. (and i am right there with y’all).
what kind of democracy is it when citizens aren’t sure whether or not votes are being counted? we have known for years and years that there are systemic problems with voting in america, and–in the country that portrays itself as the bastion of democratic action–nothing has been done.
debating issues, politicians, platforms, etc. is what, as americans, we should be talking about. and it is stunning that, in 2008, we have to wonder whether or not our vote machines are rigged, if voter rolls have been purged, voter caging, and on and on.
and, further, the bush legacy is a legacy of distrust. from the TIPS program to the PATRIOT ACT to bush’s criminal and orwellian misrule, our social environment is marked by distrust.
america? where are you????
Polls really show only trends and relationships, not necessarily concrete data.
But the MSM hates vagaries and look for stories, that are inevitably wrong, but like boosh, they blame the intelligence.
What I think happened in NH was Iowa. Clinton always had her base of supporters (look at any national poll) and they assumed she was just going to win the primaries…set ‘em up, knock ‘em down. Iowa dispelled that notion.
So the Clinton activists got out there (boots on the ground) and rallied her supporters to the polls. Obama did a better job of that in Iowa, Clinton did a better job in NH.
Now that Obama supporters realize they don’t necessarily have the momentum, there will be more pressure on them to vote in the upcoming states. So both Clinton and Obama supporters are ‘fired up, ready to go’. Should be a nail-biter from here on.
Emmit @ 17:
Yoda didn’t cry, even after all the Jedi were wiped out. He needed to hold it together.
Obviously, Yoda’s a movie character, but my point is that the President shouldn’t publicly cry, he needs to hold it together for America.
Emmit @ 11:
Elvis Costello?
sassafra @ 14:
Good one and a great idea. Think I’ll use if ever polled. I feel obligated to screw with
the MSM every opportunity presented. They are mostly ALL sleeze bags.
Orangutan. @ 2:
There is no such thing as vote fraud unless it’s done by the Republican Party. LOL! I remember once pointing out how many Dems were corrupt (it’s well documented online) as well as the Republicans (same…well documented) and was attacked for being Pro-Rep, or anti-Dem for pointing out how idiotic partisan politics truly are. Sigh. Nothing has really changed.
VOT-ER FRAUD!
Come on?
Can’t we just raise the idea?
It’s so obvious. Is it not important?
.
WHY did just Obama supporters ditch for Hillary?
WHY did the polling for the GOP and the rest of the Dems not flintch?
MY ASS the Bradly effect! If that was the case, it would have been evident in more than one candidates polling numbers.
.
I believe the media said We the people LIE> and I believe the machines are rigged.
Emmit @ 8:
shhhhhhhh!!!!! Don’t wake them. THAT only happens versus RePublicans.
23 Doggiebobo
I remember back in 1988 getting phone polls on the Bush/Dukakis election. One asked me if I was a Republican or a Democrat, and I answered I was a cynic. Another asked me if the election were held tommorrow would I vote for Bush or Dukakis, I answered Pee Wee Herman. And another I remember asked me if I was a liberal or a conservative, and I answered conservative, I believe in the Divine Right of kings.
Ummmm… Wouldn’t the effect be the exact opposite? People would be more willing to vote for him in a private phone booth instead of a public forum. This “theory” makes absolutely no sense. It’s an election and believe it or not, people can and often do change their minds at the last minute. Now please, back to the normal Hillary bashing that goes on here.
Also, #6 - by that same logic if you count up all the Obama/Hillary votes that’s a lot of non-votes for Edwards and if you count up all the Hillary/Edwards votes that’s a whole lot of non-votes for Obama. So I guess they are all big losers but especially Hillary. It’s clear that in reality she should drop out of the race. And none of that even counts all the Repbulican primary votes that obviously didn’t go to her.
Emmit @ 21:
Oh good god. What the president should not do is deceive the nation into going to war based on bad intel, or outright lies. The president should not put through budgets that drive up debt. The president should not undermine the constitution.
Cry? Crying is what humans do. Presidents are humans. I fail to see how this is a problem.
I haven’t committed to a candidate yet. I’m certainly not going to choose a candidate because she’s a woman or he’s black.
ysbaddaden @ 29:
Damn, and you live here in Texas(as I) and YOU get polled every 20 years. When is
it my turn?
Samson- @ 18:
Everyone in America, nay, the world, should watch the HBO documentary, Hacking Democracy.
No one should trust those damn machines. It’s like someone said over at HUufington Post, we’re probably not getting our country back until we all show up on election day with baseball bats and demolish every Diebold machine on the premises.
I think many on the left grew complacent regarding the voting machine problems after the 2006 mid-terms.
JW @ 31:
I agree with everything you said, even the part about the president crying in private. Of course we’re all human and cry. But in public the President should hold it together.
Emmit @ 34:
thanks emmit, i will check that out… lemme bop over to netflix to see if they have that.
.
Congress members get $4,000 pay raise
WASHINGTON - Fortunately for members of Congress, their pay isn’t tied to their approval ratings. Lawmakers in 2008 will receive salaries of $169,300, a boost of $4,100 over the pay they have lived with since January 2006.
I have doubts about the Diebold voting machines used. The difference between the New Hampshire polls and the NH voting results is suspicious. My big concern is not that I suspect the Clinton campaign rigged the NH results, but rather that the voting process is not as transparent as it should be.
I don’t buy the Bradley Effect as an explanation. My observations indicate that people who won’t vote for someone because of race don’t lie about who they’re going to vote for, they just make up another reason for why they’re voting the way they are.
“I’m not voting against Obama because he’s black, I’m voting against him because he doesn’t have enough experience.”
Samson- @ 36:
You can click on that link I gave you, if you don’t want to wait. I think almost all of it’s up on youtube.
So let me get this straight, a 2 term Senator that has raised over $100 million dollars and recently won re-election with 80% of the vote wins a primary in a state very close to her own and has generally polled ahead of the other candidates and that can only mean one thing: it’s blatantly obvious that the election MUST be rigged. Right, got it.
Sounds like the Diebold/Premier effect.