UPDATE 3: RACE WAS NOT A NEGATIVE FACTOR

November 6, 2008

Campaign finance totals from NY Times (as listed today)
Polling data from CNN (as listed today) and Wiki (today)
Numbers are not final so the stats may change some but not much.

RACE WAS NOT A (NEGATIVE) FACTOR
PROVEN ONCE AND FOR ALL
ONLY 2% INCREASE IN BLACK TURNOUT

MONEY WAS THE MAJOR ISSUE
2004 BUSH $5.92/vote
2004 KERRY $5.52
2008 MCCAIN $4.18
2008 OBAMA $10.20

A clear argument can be made that barry's biggest lie - reneging on his agreement to take public financing - won him the general election and widespread caucus voter fraud, proobama media bias, DNC favoritism and the illegal handling of Michigan voters - giving delegates to a candidate whose name was not on the ballot - won him the nomination.

There was not a "massive turnout" and blacks did not vote in "record numbers".
84% of Senator Clinton voters voted for barry.
48% said before the convention they would not.
That's a 6.3 million voter swing with barry's margin of victory +7,738,238.

BUSH vs KERRY +3,012,166
OBAMA vs MCCAIN +7,738,238
OBAMA vs BUSH +2,648,079

2008 Republican turnout -5,090,159
2008 Democratic turnout +5,660,245
2008 vs 2004 total electorate +570,086

Barry outperformed KERRY and GORE in every category.
He won male, female, Black, Hispanic, Asian and Other.
Compared to 2004: Hispanic 9 (+1) Black 13% (+2) White 74% (-3)
He lost Whites but got a net gain of +5 to KERRY and +1 to GORE.
And a net gain among males +12 to KERRY and GORE.

Republicans did not turnout to vote AGAINST a black man.
Approx 8 million (1/3) eligible black voters couldn't be bothered to register.
There was only a 2% increase with a black candidate.
That's the race issue that needs to be looked at in this election.

The true measure of the black pundits and politicians, who pounded barry opponents and pontificated about racist WHITE AMERICA, will be judge by their non-mention of it.

2000
GORE (48.4) 50,999,897
BUSH (47.9) 50,456,002
TOTAL 101,455,899
GORE + 543,895

2004
BUSH (50.7) 62,040,610
KERRY (48.3) 59,028,444
TOTAL 121,069,054
BUSH +3,012,166

2008
OBAMA (53) 64,688,689
MCCAIN (46) 56,950,451
TOTAL 121,639,140
OBAMA +7,738,238

2004 BUSH 62,040,610
2008 MCCAIN 56,950,451
BUSH +5,090,159

2008 OBAMA 64,688,689
2004 KERRY 59,028,444
OBAMA +5,660,245

2008 OBAMA 64,688,689
2004 BUSH 62,040,610
OBAMA +2,648,079

2008 TOTAL 121,639,140
2004 TOTAL 121,069,054
OBAMA + 570,086

2000 Female (52) 54 44 (+10)
2004 Female (54) 48 51 (+3)
2008 Female (53) 56 43 (+13)
Barry picked up +10

2000 Male (48) 43 54 (-11)
2004 Male (46) 55 44 (-11)
2008 Male (47) 49 48 (+1)
Barry picked up +12

2000 Black (10) 90 9 (+81)
2004 Black (11) 11 88 (+77)
2008 Black (13) 95 4 (+91)
Barry picked up +14

2000 Hispanic (7) 62 35 (+27)
2004 Hispanic (8) 44 53 (+9)
2008 Hispanic (9) 67 31 (+36)
Barry picked up +27

2000 White (81) 42 55 (-13)
2004 White (77) 58 41 (-17)
2008 White (74) 43 55 (-12)
Barry picked up +5

2000 Asian (2) 55 41 (+14)
2004 Asian (2) 44 56 (+12)
2008 Asian (2) 62 35 (+26)
Barry picked up +14

2004 Other (2) 40 54 (+14)
2008 Other (3) 66 31 (+35)
Barry picked up +21
.
BUSH $367,227,801 / 62,040,610 = $5.92 per vote
KERRY $326,236,288 / 59,028,111 = $5.52

OBAMA $659,700,000 / 64,688,689 = $10.20 (+ $6.02)
MCCAIN $238,100,000 / 56,950,451 = $4.18

Buying of the election?
Brought to you early and often by foreign donors.
Primary votes brought to you by ACORN.
And delivered in a neat little package by the pro-obama media.

GOD BLESS AMERICA!

Believe it or not they're still tallking about the myth that is the "Bradley Effect"

They keep trying to bring race into the election. Let it go. It reflects ignorance and laziness.

JULIAN BORGER. from the guardian.co.uk. "US election 2008: After everything, race still played a part. If it had been left to white voters, John McCain would be president-elect this morning by a significant margin."

This man is an utter moron. I'm not going to bother going into his crappy ass article. I just want to show that the idiots in the media will continue to point to race when it was a complete non-issue. Obama got the same number of whites as Clinton 43%. If you want to talk about race - black participation was just slightly higher than 2004 - so it was the white and hispanic vote that WON him the election - not the black vote. Let it go - race was not a factor. If it were he wouldn't have won in a landslide > 7 million votes. And had he counted on the black vote to turn out to make him president it wouldn't have happened.
===========

Here's another one from the GlobeandMail.com TU THANH HA
The Bradley Effect IS A MYTH. IT DOES NOT EXIST. and of course the man who first described it isn't going to let it go. The candidate himself said race would not be a factor and it wasn't.

Charles Henry, the political scientist who first documented the Bradley effect: "It's taken two wars and almost a depression to get people to overlook the skin colour and go for the qualified candidate. Obviously it's a major milestone but I'm not ready to put to bed the notion that race is dead in American politics." Dr. Hopkins said the Bradley effect has not had an impact since the mid-1990s.

Of course, he's not going to give up. He invented it - he has to keep it alive. A black man in President of the United States and he isn't ready to put it to bed? What's it gonna take? What higher office is there? And then this. I'd laugh but these folks are dead serious it seems.

Shanto Iyengar, a Stanford University political scientist: There may be a slight penalty for race. If it was a white candidate, it would probably be a wider gap."

Wider gap? 52-47 winning by > 7 MILLION VOTES?
=====================
Another from Wales online by Jon Roper , Professor of American Studies 'Bradley effect' will tell a lot about US voters (emphasis added)

In 1982, exit polls predicted that Bradley would win the race to become Governor of California by a comfortable margin. He lost. Bradley was black and running against a white opponent. His defeat led to speculation about the so-called "Bradley effect". Voters may claim that a candidate's race does not affect their preference when asked directly by pollsters but when they actually vote it still determines their decision.

Two factors may help Obama neutralise and transcend the "Bradley effect". The first is his drive to register more voters in key states, not least among the African-American population. If they think his victory is possible, they will turn up to vote for him in unprecedented numbers. Second, Obama's central message of change is generational as well as political. His appeal to younger and hopefully more colour-blind voters is one which polls can find difficult to measure.

What nobody seems to recall is that Bradley won the vote that day. He lost because of a large flood of absentee ballots from Deukejian's home area. Bradley lost by 93,345K votes out of 7,648,683 votes. There were also issues on the ballot that factored in, the underpolled Armenian vote, it was a weekend poll, a negative ad by Bradley during the last week, coupled with a surge by Deukejian and a 3rd party candidate.

IT DOES NOT EXIST. Polls are flawed. I was polled and I lied on every question and they had the wrong city and name. And black voters coming out only because they think he can win? It was not unprecendented. It was 13% slightly higher than 2004. Therefore without the white vote (43%) and Hispanic vote (67%) Asian (61%) he would not have won. End of story.

=====================
Mercury News MARY ANNE OSTROM a view from a different Standford Professor.

Standford Professor: David M. Kennedy, the Pulitzer Prize-winning history professor: "He's not merely an agent of change as the first black president, he represents a culmination of a series of demographic, cultural and political transformations that have been aligning for two generations. White attitudes about the race issue are changing. If nothing else, this election demonstrates that."

OK. PLEASE. NO MORE BRADLEY EFFECT. Do some writing instead.

Katie Couric - barry on Bradley Effect

About the Bradely effect - that does not exist. barry has already said that race will not be a factor if he loses. Period. The candidate doesn't feel that way - nobody else should - but what would the pundits complain about. What are they going to talk about now that race will be shown not to have an effect at all in the election? Maybe now barry can actually act like the postracial candidate he claims he is.

Katie Couric: A lot of people say it's a phenomenon thats outdated and overstated and misunderstood - having said that do you think we'll see that on election day

BARRY: You know, I have to tell you, I-I'm part of the camp that says it's outdated and overstated. I mean that the fact of the matter is that people have been worrying and fussing about whether or not I'm hampered because I'm an African American since we were campaigning in Iowa. The reason I'm sitting here two days before the election as the Democratic nominee is because The American People ultimately care about whether or not you can do the job.

And how can they know you can? You have done nothing and continued to change your stance on almost everything. They have hope that you can and I hope you won't disillusion them...in the first six months. I hope I never hear this term again. Next it will be the Obama Effect.

CBS VIDEO (can't embed)

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS BRADLEY EFFECT

November 4, 2008

The fact that people - pundits, surrogates, former politicians - keep mentioning it shows how non-informed the media actually is and how much they want to use race to drive the election. Blackness as a hindrance, blackness as a strategy overlooked and blackness as a triumph of America. Joe actually said that if barry wins America is not a racist nation. That is about as idiotic as it gets. And barry's impact on American political campaigns will be massively overexaggerated - as it already is. Things came into play in this election that never were represented before. Things that would have caused a record turnout, which was already in evidence turning the primaries.

HILLARY CLINTON GOT THE SAME AMOUNT OF VOTES AS BARRY.

He was not the sole reason for anything in the primaries and in the general democrats had only one choice. Turnout I argue would have been massive - the black vote in question - which will decide this election. 95% of the black vote against a white woman is not considered racist and yet white blue collar worker is. A joke. An embarrassing joke that people wither don't care about or don't realize. It doesn't matter

1 - president with the lowest approval rating ever
2 - change no matter what
2 - two wars neither of which is popular
3 - the economy is in the worst shape since the depression
4 - America's standing in the world is in the tank
5 - no jobs, no homes, no healthcare, no gas money
6 - Anger at Republicans and general pessimism
7 - 72 y/o Republican nominee
8 - 44 y/o VP nominee who let's face it is not fit for the job
9 - barry never vetted - opponents vetted to death and falsehoods aired with no retractions.
11 - barry's myth on Iraq - it's what got him out of Iowa and held him until the economy became number one. By then the lie had him in the position of inevitability.
12 - DNC behind him and against Clintons.
13 - Illegitimate dealings about Michigan delegates. Imagine this happening to barry leading to Clinton's nomination. There'd be a very different atmosphere and a different nature of "historic".
11 - Female candidate
12 - black candidate
13- Sexism and ageism laughed at and racism used as primary barry strategy and found in any and all possible comments and actions.
12 - barry lied about public finance allowing him to destroy McCain in ads and ground game. This is what won the general election. It is the biggest lie that barry has gotten away with.
13 - PROOBAMA MEDIA BIAS

I say this last (which means the major impact) because they worked to destroy Sen (and Pres) Clinton and kept the racist myth alive, which worked to get out the black vote, without which barry would not have gotten the nomination. This is undeniable and irrefutable, whether you choose to believe it or not. The irony in all this racist WHITE AMERICA is that barry's win hinges on the nonwhite turnout.

Any yet - it will be barry - alone - that gets credit for the turnout and win. It is more wrong than the racial bias the media has shown TOWARDS AS IN IN FAVOR OF barry. Hillary's people trashed - Hillary's people on the ground in places like Ohio and Pennsylvania will not get the credit they deserve.

Colorblindness? Race as a hindrance? Sexism is a myth. Ageism is a joke. Barry will have won this because of his race - the half that he claims. And fatherless children in the black community? What does his success say to them - directly?