The Bradley Effect,Again?

Very little has been said about Bradley Effect, and what role it may play in this election.
Sparing the details, the Bradley Effect is the difference between what a black man polls on/before election day versus a white opponent, and the actual vote count on election day, named after Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley's run for the governorship of California.
Mayor Bradley, though ahead in the polling throughout the campaign, lost narrowly on election day.

Some observers state that the Bradley Effect is no longer 'in effect'. This has proven to basically be the case. But, what they leave out is that since 1992, there haven't been any racially groundbreaking election contests.

In elections known for a Bradley Effect, there was much,much media swooning over the very real possibility of a truly electable Black candidate breaking a political color barrier.

I remember quite well the hype and infatuation of California's election of 1982, and took part in it. Reporting on nearly ever move and utterance of the Mayor, the media pushed his candidacy like no other before it.
I also remember vivid news stories about Doug Wilder's race in Virginia. (Wilder won, Bradley lost*). Both featured highly capable and proven leaders with appeal that crossed racial lines.


Obama, regardless of what the pundits say, may very well be facing his own Bradley Effect. The media hype is unfathomable. The populace may just be responding to the hype when they tell pollsters what they want to hear.
Obama is the cool thing. Who'd want to be on the outside of it?

The privacy of the voting booth is another matter. It's kind of difficult for me to believe, that after three years of this never ending soon enough campaign, that there is really an 'undecided' segment to be polled.
I'm guessing the 'undecided' count is actually a McCain count that dare not speak it's name in public.

I'm going out on a limb here, but if I'm right, you'll know where you heard it first.

I'm guessing Obama's vote numbers won't equal his polling numbers. I'm gonna give it a 4 point spread. Meaning Obama will actually receive four fewer percentage points of the total vote tally than the final polling suggests. This may not really effect the final electoral math. But then again, you never know.
In some 'too close to call' states, it will matter.

But in a year with so much media hype, and polling hype, if Obama loses a squeaker after already being the all but declared next president, it's gonna be ugly out there.
Best just stay home and watch the riots on television.

And I sincerely hope it does not come to that.


*Bradley returned for a re-match four years later. Once again, the polls showed him leading for months. The media , hyping up the rematch, drooled openly at the possibility for four years previous. By election day it was close. He lost again by a wider margin than the first time.
It was really ridiculous, if you stop to think about it. The then-sitting Governor was not unpopular. There was no logical explanation for the Mayor to be leading in the polls as he did, for as long as he did. And it was the Age of Reagan in Reagan Country. No Democrat of any moderation was going to unseat a GOP incumbant who was not screwing the pooch.