There has been a lot of talk lately that Barack Hussein Obama may fall victim to the dreaded "Bradley Effect." For those of you who don't know what that is; (I didn't until a few weeks ago) the Bradley Effect is named for the former California gubernatorial candidate Tom Bradley. In the 1982 governor's race, Bradley was showing double digit leads in the polls however when election day rolled around, such was not the case, in fact he lost. See, Tom Bradley was African-American and when the pollsters asked the people questions like "would you vote for a non-white candidate" they typically answered that they would, or that they were undecided. However, on election day, they were not so tolerant. Some speculate that when people go to the voting booth there is some sort of social desirability bias and they vote for the white candidate. I have noticed that a lot down here in LA. People say race is not an issue, but when push comes to shove, it is. Whether they know it or not.
Not all people buy into the Bradley Effect. In fact Barack Obama's campaign has lead many to offer an contradictory theory. This other side claims that because of race, Obama's poll numbers are underrepresented and when asked to vote, the voters ignore the race issue. For instance, black voters may be hesitant to say that they will support him and then on election day, they pull a reverse of the Bradley effect. Obama's Super Tuesday victories showed some signs of polls both over and under representing the actual results.
So what will it be? Bradley, Reverse Bradley, or soemthing else? I hope that it is something else. I hope that on election day race is not a factor. I think the Bradley effect shows problems in our society and I think that the Reverse Bradley effect shows the same problem. As you are learning right now Fitz, the reverse of flawed reasoning is still flawed reasoning.
The ongoing fight for Civil Rights is not fighting for the inverse of the old. It is hoping for a new America. Race should not be an issue. Anthropologically, the concept of "race" is a myth. It should be politically too. I hope that when Americans go to the polls, they cast their vote not because of race. Voting for Obama because he is black is no better than not voting for him because he is black. It is still basing a decision on the superficial. "Let us not judge men by the color of their skin, but by the Content of their Character."
Mis Hermanos y Yo
17 years ago
4 comments:
Very interesting post Beauzer.
But using the same reasoning, as you wrote, race should not be an issue, one could argue in the same manner for the abolishment of affirmative action.
The preferential treatment--whether in an election, an employment opportunity, or an acceptance into a school--of a group of people based on race or, as an extension of the argument goes, any physiological difference, directly makes race an issue.
I'm not offering a solution one way or the other, but showing one hotly-debated example how the Reverse Bradley Effect has been established in the United States' consciousness and its institutions. Perhaps a quarter of a century is not enough to overcome the (reverse) Bradley Effect.
Fitz, That is obviously a very good issue to bring up, and one for which I do not have an answer. My feelings on affirmative action are too complex and confusing for me to try and right down.
However, with the presidential race. I think that at this stage. We clearly have two highly qualified individuals and race should not be an issue. I will not say that there are times when race is an issue and may be more warranted. I wish we could get away from that but we can't sometimes. So, in this presidential campaign race should be the least important factor. In theory I would hope that race is never an issue, but looking subjectively into things like the job market, reality trumps my hope and theory
Who is Fitz?
Post a Comment