The Reverse Bradley Effect

November 4, 2008 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (9)

So after months of Democratic race-baiting, it seems not all Republicans wear hooded robes. Exit polling by CNN shows not only that Obama's skin color wasn't terribly important, but that the presumptive President-elect actually benefited from being black.

As CNN's Bill Schneider notes:

About 20 percent of voters said race was important in how they voted, and those people voted for Obama by an 11-point margin, 55 percent to 44 percent. That means more people voted for Obama because of his race than against him. So much for the "Bradley effect."

And of the 80 percent of voters who said race was not a factor in their decision voted nearly the same way, breaking for Obama 53 percent to 45 percent. That means race played a role, but it was not a decisive factor.

  • Click here for the latest election results.
Tags:
CNN,
2008 presidential election,
Barack Obama,
race

Reader Comments Read all comments (9)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

Your argument shows your bias, and your poor grasp on the rudiments of the English language suggests that you should likely be studying instead of bashing the next president--how can you be sure that what you have read about him is true if you have inadequate reading and writing abilities? I would also like someone to give me a "brake," because mine are getting pretty worn down and I don't have the money to buy a new set. Take care anyhow, keep it civil or keep the hate to yourself.

Paul of SC 5:03PM November 07, 2008

I am the ‘proof-in-the-pudding.’ I am white (albeit Jewish), raised by liberal, Depression-era, Roosevelt Democrats. When my middle brother went away to USC on a football scholarship (no, really), one of his black teammates came to live with us for a year; a pretty unique experience in 1960’s Orange County. I, on the other hand, am also a registered Republican and an unrepentant ‘neo-con’ supporter of the war on terror. But I voted for Obama not just because of my family history, but because, as Thomas Friedman put it, his candidacy represented the end of the Civil War, finally. So while my vote was, at least in part, racial, I do not believe that it was ‘racist’ or even ‘reverse-racist.’ My vote was practical: we need to continue not only the healing process which is our shared, historical legacy, but we need to continue to perfect the ideals of the great American experiment started by the founding fathers. The fact that, at least since Reagan, all reasonable and fair-minded Americans can agree on an inclusive interpretation of these ideals --- that we are ALL created equal and should have an equal opportunity to achieve based on a meritocracy in the social/economic realm and a representative democracy in the political realm --- is what has so enthralled the rest of the world. We have proved again that America is a land of opportunity, that our rough-and-tumble society of rugged individualists is open enough to embrace the immediacy of the moment and once more remake itself in the image of an ever more perfect union. So my vote was for the candidate that I felt was best qualified to write the next chapter of the American narrative, not who was best qualified to protect our interests abroad. It was a leap of faith, certainly, to give this young, charismatic but clearly less experienced black man a chance to take the reigns of executive power. But seeing the images of jubilation and, truly, relief, from his supporters, at finally having reached this juncture in our history, reassured me that my choice was the best one for all of us, as Americans. That was my choice this time, but, as always, only time will tell if it was the best one.

Raoul Rabinowitz of CA 4:04PM November 07, 2008

Let's see... Obama has a 900 dollar spending proposal, an arguably unconstitutional health care agenda, very little political experience, no military experience, broke a campaign promise, defended some very un ethical people's reputation and one of the most anti american agenda's I've ever seen in a presidential candidate, he was running up against a war hero with 26 years of experience as a senator. Let's face facts... If Obama was a white guy named Matt Jones he would've never made it. What does this say to the average young white person?... It doesn't matter what you accomplish in life... If you're up against a black man, you'll lose....I'm not racist, I started this election actually rooting for Obama but after reading his plans, and learning about his life.. I was amazed he even made it to the primary's.. after talking to alot of Obama supporters I can tell you from personal experience it race was the most important factor 70% of them. Even the white people who wanted to prove that america was not racist... Which doesn't make sense to me, If We elected a man solely on the color of his skin in order to prove to the world we are not racist.. Doesn't that show we are just as (if not more) racist as ever?

Nick of GA 2:58PM November 06, 2008

Sam Dealey

Sam Dealey

Sam Dealey, former editor of the Washington Times, is a principal at Monument Communications, a public-relations consultancy in Washington, D.C.

advertisement

advertisement