Welcome to the new version of European Tribune. It's just a new layout, so everything should work as before - please report bugs here.
Display:
Looks good for Obama, --yes.
But you know, we tend to get lost in the "race", the political combat thing. Assume for a moment that he wins big. He then has a mandate---for what?
As I said below, it is the political consultants and the cynics who see electoral victory as the end game.

Given the presidency, --why not do something with it?

Sigh. Perhaps I'm wrong to hope for real creative solutions. His latest economic ideas are very "safe". And rather empty.
90 more days in the old home, -eh?  

Capitalism searches out the darkest corners of human potential, and mainlines them.

by geezer in Paris (risico at wanadoo(flypoop)fr) on Mon Oct 13th, 2008 at 05:08:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Speak of the devil - Nate Silver has just posted on the Bradley effect...

FiveThirtyEight.com: Electoral Projections Done Right

It was Tom Bradley's 1982 race for governor of California, in which he lost to George Deukmejian in spite of leading in the public polls, that gave the Bradley Effect its name. But now Lance Tarrance, the pollster for Bradley in that race, has an article up at RCP suggesting that the Bradley Effect was merely a case of bad polling -- and that his campaign's internals had shown a dead heat:

The hype surrounding the Bradley Effect has evolved to where some political pundits believe in 2008 that Obama must win in the national pre-election polls by 6-9 points before he can be assured a victory. That's absurd. There won't be a 6-9 point Bradley Effect -- there can't be, since few national polls show a large enough amount of undecided voters and it's in the undecided column where racism supposedly hides.

The other reason I reject the Bradley Effect in 2008 is because there was not a Bradley Effect in the 1982 California Governor's race, either. Even though Tom Bradley had been slightly ahead in the polls in 1982, due to sampling error, it was statistically too close to call.


Vote McCain for war without gain
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot dotty communists) on Mon Oct 13th, 2008 at 05:28:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]
and it's in the undecided column where racism supposedly hides.

What a silly thing to say.
Boy, is he wrong about that.
As any undergrad with a single course in institutional racism to his credit knows,
As any person of color can tell you,
-racism hides itself in your university on the tenure committee, in your bank next to the loan officer's desk, on the Colonel's desk who passes you over for promotion, in the personnel office when layoffs are decided--

Those whose perceptions of people--and thus votes-- are altered by race are certainly not limited to undecideds. Sometimes they themselves don't know who they are---they just "Didn't feel right about him/her,"-- when it came down to actually pulling the lever.

I think time will show there are many, many of them.

Capitalism searches out the darkest corners of human potential, and mainlines them.

by geezer in Paris (risico at wanadoo(flypoop)fr) on Tue Oct 14th, 2008 at 01:43:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Again you are confusing endemic, institutionalised, and unconscious racism with "the Bradley effect".  Most racists (certainly all anti-black racists) will vote against Obama - and have no qualms about telling a pollster (which is often an automated computer) so, whether or not they give "race" as their primary reason.

These guys are all in the numbers above in the MCCain Column.  The argument about the Bradley effect is whether (or why) some should pretend to be undecideds (or Obama voters).  There simply is no recent evidence to support this, and as noted by Lance Tarrance (in the RCP article referenced by Nate) there never was a "a Bradley effect" in the first place - just bad polling methodology covered up by an excuse that voters were lying.  Lance Tarrance was one of the original pollsters in the Bradley elections and his Polls never showed Bradley as having better than a "toss-up" chance - i.e. within the MOE.

The Bradley effect is one of the great Urban myths of modern US politics.

Vote McCain for war without gain

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot dotty communists) on Tue Oct 14th, 2008 at 07:32:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Again you are confusing endemic, institutionalised, and unconscious racism with "the Bradley effect"

Frank, this is a waste of both our times, and the rest of the diary is worth more consideration than it's getting.
Last round, please.
 You're wrong. And Nate's wrong, in my opinion.
You're not reading my original diary.
---difference between poll words and voter deeds.

I try hard to make my point in few words. Perhaps the above was too few.
Racism is a socially unacceptable position on which to base a vote.
Ergo, racists lie about their opinions to pollsters, and then pull the lever, in  the privacy of the voting booth, based on something- perhaps something more base.
Hence one type of polling inaccuracy.
"Bradley effect?" Bah. This is in reality a subset of a problem universally faced by all social researchers who use interview data.  
What is it that people really think-- vs. what will they admit to an interviewer?
What is the connection (if any) between their words in an interview, and their life actions?

Let's agree to disagree--or, you can assume senility or good drugs have simply addled my wits--but please stop patronizing me.

Now fire away.

Capitalism searches out the darkest corners of human potential, and mainlines them.

by geezer in Paris (risico at wanadoo(flypoop)fr) on Tue Oct 14th, 2008 at 08:05:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]
geezer, don't loose your point.

He has to have coattails. He has to win big. But he has to destroy the barrel heads who will do to him what they did to Clinton in his first two years...I remember it well when he couldn't get his budget through. It was heartbreaking. The reptiles had the media terms set, they got to play Waco against the Dems, they figured out how to destroy the health care proposal, they won, and continued it for the next six years, then this last 8.

Barry O'bama has to politically knee-cap the opposition, then when he is boss, sit down with them like the terrorists they are, and read the rules of behavior from here on out.  

Never underestimate their intelligence, always underestimate their knowledge.

Frank Delaney ~ Ireland

by siegestate (siegestate or beyondwarispeace.com) on Tue Oct 14th, 2008 at 10:38:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]
In short, we must elect a program for change, with his trademark on it and by a wide margin, or his will be a failed administration.

A mandate for a program of change is do-able NOW. All available evidence suggests that popular support for real change is strong. The economic oligarchy will never support real change. They have the power and the dough, and any ethic of communal responsibility- compassion for the "lower orders"- has long died in the world of the board room and the trading floor. So he cannot lose them by taking a chance--he never had them.

--If he has the "audacity". How do you guys do that superscript TM thing?

As many have pointed out, it will be easy to attack, to blame a black president. It's swimming down an old, foul stream--far easier than attacking a youthful, charismatic, WHITE Clinton.
-And, as you say,-look what happened there.

Obama's situation is similar in some ways to that faced by FDR, but Obama has a chance to begin his real race with a head start--and he will need it.

 

Capitalism searches out the darkest corners of human potential, and mainlines them.

by geezer in Paris (risico at wanadoo(flypoop)fr) on Wed Oct 15th, 2008 at 04:28:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Type
Audacity™
to get Audacity™.


A vivid image of what should exist acts as a surrogate for reality. Pursuit of the image then prevents pursuit of the reality -- John K. Galbraith
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Oct 15th, 2008 at 04:47:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Thanks.

Capitalism searches out the darkest corners of human potential, and mainlines them.
by geezer in Paris (risico at wanadoo(flypoop)fr) on Wed Oct 15th, 2008 at 05:28:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series