The “Bradley Effect,” also known as the “Wilder Effect,” is a phenomenon of the discrepancy between voter opinion polls and election results. Voters tell pollsters they’re undecided or that they’ll vote for the black candidate, but choose the white candidate come election day. Whites who don’t want to seem racist may say they’re voting for the black guy but have no intention of doing so.
In 1982, black candidate Tom Bradley lost the election for governor of California to a white Republican, despite leading in the polls. Something similar happened between Doug Wilder and Marshall Coleman in Virginia. Wilder won by less than half of one percent, despite poll numbers showing him leading Coleman by an average of nine points.
The so-called Bradley Effect has shown up in other contests. In 2006, exit poll numbers for Proposal 2 in Michigan — a measure that would bar the government from discriminating against and granting preferences to people based on race and sex – showed the race too close to call. Ultimately, it passed by a wide margin: 58 percent. Were white voters afraid to openly support the measure?
Blair Levin, former staffer for Tom Bradley, says the Bradley Effect is a myth. His guy lost “because an unpopular gun control initiative and an aggressive Republican absentee-ballot program generated hundreds of thousands of Republican votes no pollster anticipated,” not because of race. (National Journal)
Will the Bradley Effect manifest itself in the presidential race? Regardless, I believe Barack Obama will win. Such a victory would be less disappointing to me if it signaled the end of race preferences and America’s obsession with skin color. Unfortunately, it won’t.
Comments on this entry are closed.