Newsweek - National News, World News, Health, Technology, Entertainment and more... | Newsweek.com
SPONSORED BY
Full Post
Posted Wednesday, October 22, 2008 4:19 PM

Could Obama Get a Reverse 'Bradley Effect'?

Howard Fineman
He is an old gent, in his eighties, but a hale and hearty one, wiry and strong.
 
Ernie said that he'd never smoked, and drank but little, and watched what he ate.

These all good things, considering that he needed to work, and the work he did required him to lift bags — sometimes heavy, hard-shelled golf bags — for the businessmen who rode his rental car shuttle to and from the St. Louis airport.

He had been reared a Democrat, he said, as had nearly everyone in St. Louis in those days. It was Truman's time in Missouri — a state with more than a dram of Southern Comfort in its blood.

In recent decades, Ernie had voted for Republicans from time to time. But considering recent economic events, he said it was time to return to his ancestral political roots.

And then, in a tone that was as much confession as joy, he told me sheepishly: "I'm gonna vote for the colored boy. I like the way he's talkin'."

I think of Ernie, who I encountered when I went out to St. Louis for the vice presidential debate, when I hear all the talk about the so-called Bradley effect.

Even non-political junkies know the idea: some whites harbor racist beliefs and won't admit to polltakers what they really think, which is that they would never vote for an African-American.

But assuming that there is indeed a Bradley effect (named for the late mayor of Los Angeles), what if there's an opposite?

I'll call it the Ernie Effect — voters, especially older or more conservative voters in Red States, who don't want to readily admit to neighbors (or pollsters) that they plan to go into the voting booth and pull the lever for Barack Obama.

"What usually happens in larger races with an African-American candidate is that undecideds — usually less political, less educated — just break against him en masse," said Democratic consultant Jim Jordan.

But, it's also "conceivable," he said, "that in some parts of the country — the South, the rural Midwest — that there’s a certain stigma, among white working class men, that attaches to an Obama vote."

The Ernie Effect could exist anywhere, but in this election, it’s being most closely watched, naturally enough, in conservative-leaning battleground states.

And Obama’s recent travels in a lot of those states appears to be further evidence that he and his campaign believe in the Ernie Effect – even if they never met the man.

Yes, they are flush with cash, ridiculously so, but these shrewd and meticulous people wouldn't be wasting candidate time and ad money in states such as West Virginia if they didn't think that whatever Bradley Effect there might be canceled out by a possible Ernie Effect.

So on Election Night, keep a close eye on the exit polls as they compare with the actual raw vote. Look for semi-rural or exurban places where Obama is supposed to get his clock cleaned, but where – if I’m right – the senator from Illinois may do better than the exits show.

In particular, look at the toss-up states – all of them red in recent years: North Dakota, Indiana, Ohio, West Virginia, Florida, North Carolina, Virginia – and yes, Missouri.

Then we'll know how many Ernies there really are.

Advertisement
You must be a registered user to comment.  Click here to register.  Already a user?  Click here to login.

Member Comments

Posted By: csfoster (October 27, 2008 at 10:51 PM)

Simply stated, Senator John McCain is on the wrong side of the major issues and as a consequence will find himself on the wrong side of the Bradley Effect.  

Most Americans want us out of and to stop spending money in Iraq, Senator McCain does not. Most Americans believe the central front on the War on Terror is in Afghanistan/Pakistan, Senator McCain does not.  Most Americans view giving tax breaks to companies who ship jobs out of the country as wrong, Senator McCain does not. Most Americans do not believe that their employer paid health should be taxed, Senator McCain does. Most Americans do not consider giving a tax break to the middle-class as "wealth redistribution socialism", Senator McCain does.

Senator McCain believes that electing Senator Obama poses a risk while most Americans believe that having Governor Palin one bad 72-year heart beat away from the presidency is a far greater risk and a poor reflection on Senator McCain's judgement.  Senator McCain believes in giving reasons to vote against a candidate while most Americans are looking for reasons to vote for a candidate.  

All things considered, most Americans are looking to a new brighter future as expressed by Senator Obama rather than doing the same old tired past things as represented by Senator McCain. And finally, while Senator McCain remains hopeful they will vote on race over their pocketbook,  

most Americans will vote for their pocket book over race,  It is called economic self-interest.

Sorry to say Senator McCain, the Bradley Effect is not likely to  be coming to your last minute rescue.  Indeed,  the much greater likelihood is that you and the Republican Party come November 5th will have been rightfully repudiated in a landslide due to......

The Converse of the Bradley Effect  


Posted By: givemeabr8 (October 26, 2008 at 12:41 PM)

Hey everyone...I hear all sorts of things about Obama...like his "Associations" with folks like of Ayres, and then there's Khalidi and then a guy named Michael Klonsky and Rezko and then the religious dudes Flager and Reve Wright...  and someone told me that while living in Hawaii his mentor was a guy name Fank Marshall Davis Gonna watch Sun(oct26) 9ET on Foxnews Sean Hannity's show on Obama to understand


Posted By: KIMBER93 (October 25, 2008 at 9:21 PM)

My 83 year old registered Republican mom in mid-Missouri has definitely gone Ernie all the way. She's not only voting for Obama, she's been sending him money. She doesn't talk about it with her friends unless they ask her point blank, though - she doesn't want to hear their noise.

She voted for Bush the first time (but voted for Kerry in 2004) and now thinks Bush is the biggest disaster to ever hit our country.