The Bradley Effect

[NJSecularist]

Just a history lesson on what happened in Wisconsin 20 years ago. All of us Obama supporters can hope that the same thing doesn't happen on Tuesday.

http://www.freedomtrail.org/profiles/jessejackson.htm
Jackson's campaign, however, suffered a signifcant set back less than two weeks later when he was defeated handily in Wisconsin primary by Michael Dukakis. Jackson's showing among white voters in Wisconsin was significantly higher than in his 1984 run, but was also noticeably lower than pre-primary polling had indicated it would be. The discrepancy has been cited as an example of the so-called "Bradley effect".


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_effect
In the 1988 Democratic presidential primary in Wisconsin, pre-election polls pegged black candidate Jesse Jackson — at the time, a legitimate challenger to white candidate and frontrunner Michael Dukakis — as likely to receive approximately one-third of the white vote.Ultimately, however, Jackson carried only about one quarter of that vote, with the discrepancy in the heavily white state contributing to a large margin of victory for Dukakis over the second-place Jackson.

[treyDC]

1. I do believe that Clinton support in wisconsin is underestimated

Wisconsin has been a Clinton stronghold for years and I just don't see her losing there despite what the polls might say now.

[NJSecularist]

3. I think Obama has very good support in Wisconsin

But I certainly wouldn't be surprised if Hillary won Wisconsin.

[bluestateguy]

2. We have not seen as much Bradley effect this year

Maybe in New Hampshire, but even there, I'm not so sure it wasn't just bad polling.

A lot of those Wisconsin primary voters from 1988 are probably not even alive anymore, and the really racist ones have probably since become Republicans.

[Yael]

4. Jesse Jackson is divisive. I don't see any comparision here

[NJSecularist]

6. Let's wait until after Tuesday to decide that

But Obama is divisive. Have you seen this forum?

[Adelante]

5. The country has changed a good deal since then

We haven't seen it factor into this primary, so far.

[Renew Deal]

9. I agree

I think the Bradley thing has not been an issue in 2008, but there is some voodoo in Wisconsin.

[Bluzmann57]

7. Jesse Jackson was never a viable candidate

He ran to make a point and was never a serious candidate. He certainly has a right to voice his opinion, but I do not think that his candidacy '84 or '88 will have anything to do with the Obama campaign in '08.

[Renew Deal]

8. Look at Edwards in 2004 too

Polls had Kerry up big over Dean and then Edwards. Kerry won by 6 over EDWARDS. This was a bit of a surprise.

Kerry 327,672 40% 30 100% reporting results by county voter survey results
Edwards 283,327 34% 24
Dean 150,682 18% 13
Kucinich 27,232 3% 0
Sharpton 14,685 2% 0
Clark 12,687 2% 0
Uncommitted 1,136 0% 0


Polls are below:

Democratic Polls
Reuters/MSNBC/Zogby Poll
Mid-date: 2/14/2004
Wisconsin
Est. MoE = 4.0%

John Kerry 47%
Howard Dean 23%
John Edwards 20%
Dennis Kucinich 2%
Al Sharpton 1%
Unsure 7%



American Research Group Poll
Mid-date: 2/12/2004
Wisconsin
Est. MoE = 4.0%

John Kerry 53%
John Edwards 16%
Howard Dean 11%
Dennis Kucinich 2%
Al Sharpton 2%
Unsure 16%



Market Shares Corp. for The Journal Sentinel and WTMJ TV
Mid-date: 2/6/2004
Wisconsin
Est. MoE = 3.8%

John Kerry 45%
Wesley Clark 13%
Howard Dean 12%
John Edwards 9%
Dennis Kucinich 1%
Al Sharpton 1%
Unsure 17%
Other 1%



University of Wisconsin/Capital Times/Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Badger Poll
Mid-date: 1/31/2004
Wisconsin
Est. MoE = 4.7%

John Kerry 35%
Wesley Clark 11%
John Edwards 9%
Howard Dean 8%
Joe Lieberman 8%
Dennis Kucinich 2%
Al Sharpton 2%
Unsure 19%
None of these 6%

[ShortnFiery]

10. Yeah, Robert Novak is big on that "Bradley Effect" theory so much so that he recently wrote an

OP ED in the Whoreshington Post. Yes, that traitor's advice is real popular here at DU.

More like the hard corps Republican base's wet dream? :eyes:

[NJSecularist]

11. I have never read Robert Novak

Nice try, though.

[union_maid]

12. Jackson was never viable

Polling has been so volatile and also inaccurate in this particular primary season that you can't really be confident until the polls are closed, so I'm not saying that Obama has a lock or anything, but there's no comparison to Jackon's campaigns. There was never as great a chance that Jackson was going to win the nomination as there was that Kucinich would win in 2004 or this year. In fact, his actual chances were probably more in line with Mike Gravel's, even though he did enjoy more name recognition and popularity. You could vote for him to make a point. Nothing wrong with that in the primary, but Obama is a perfectly mainstream candidate. It's not comparable.