“That One is The One” ‘08

I disagree with your strategy of focusing exclusively (or almost exclusively) on races that are currently extremely close. There is just too much time left, and in races such as Georgia or North Carolina, donations might create or prevent a scenario in which a candidate could take advantage of events on the ground to make a moderately close race into a very close one (thereby attracting much more money from the Senatorial committees and others).

If events cause a three point swing in senate races in general (in either direction), donors who want to focus only on the closest of the close races will find that they have been giving to exactly the wrong campaigns. The races they gave to would not fit that definition on election day. Earlier money means more than later money, and it also makes sense to do some fishing in case there is a repeat of the VA senate race from last cycle.

Of course, I don’t expect my $100 or whatever to make the difference, any more than I expect my vote to make the difference (when was the last senate race or house race with a margin of one vote?) But our voices can make a difference (and yours in particular, Sam), so I think it makes sense to expand the definition of how close a race is to warrant attention.

Just my two cents. Again, great site!

Anyhow, thanks for sounding sane and thoughtful.

Here is an interesting Salon article that I just read on the subject:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/10/13/obama/index.html

I do think that people can make efforts to calm down the rhetoric. If that effort is made by our political and religious leaders, as well as by ordinary people (on blogs, for example), it might make a difference in the emotional atmosphere in this country.

You also said that voter fraud is not likely to be a factor. Which is true, but for an individual voter who is deprived of his or her vote, it is a factor. Which is why we need to publicize the following: If voter fraud or vote suppression is suspected: call the Election Protection Hotline
at 866-OUR-VOTE (1-866-6887-8683)
Their Web site is http://www.866ourvote.org
They also need volunteers.

Although I agree with you that Obama very probably has this wrapped up, I have two reservations, and these are related to each other.

First, Pollster.com has him winning 224-158 in states in which he or McCain crossed the finish line, that is, exceeded 50% when undecided and other candidates are included in the total. He needs 29% of the remaining 156 electoral votes, and he is leading in 83%.

Second, the Bradley-effect paper that you cited may be confusing periods and cohorts. In the 18 Senate or Governor elections involving a Black candidate in 10 election years from 1989 through 2006, it found that the average Bradley effect went from 5-6% to zero in nearly the first seven years (five election years). The conclusion was that the Bradley effect is a thing of the past: a product of “a specific period in political history.” However, maybe history will repeat itself with Presidential elections, especially considering their greater gravity. The good news is that your meta-margin (6.2%) exceeds the initial Bradley effect.

Continued appreciation for your site.

I’ve enjoyed your comments / analysis immensely. I just happened to pick up a New Yorker (October 13th issue) and Packer’s article, “The Hardest Vote” is a kind of Kohut effect analysis (Kohut’s article about ‘non-polled undetected racism’) basically suggesting that unlike those who want to appear to others (and perhaps for a moment or two, to themselves) as non-racist (a kind of Bradley effect, or in Jay Smooth’s words, “Tolerance Fatigue”), here are conscious unadulterated racists who are out of the polling loop, and lots of them.

So, it would be interesting to run a racist coefficient array (i.e. different probable outcomes) demographically (i.e. so called blue-ish states) and see what, if any significant effect we could predict considering as well past more localized elections where there was a sharper colour line).

Best

Joshua

Article reference: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/10/13/081013fa_fact_packer

Quote from article:

Obama has had particular trouble with the prized demographic group that once delivered the Presidency to Roosevelt and his successors. Anecdotally, and in polls, unusually large numbers of working-class voters seem to remain undecided or determined to sit the election out, as if they couldn’t bring themselves to vote Republican this year but couldn’t fathom taking a chance on Obama. Roger Catt, a retired farmer and warehouse worker, who lives in a small town near Eau Claire, Wisconsin, characterized the choice this way: “McCain is more of the same, and Obama is the end of life as we know it.”

And another somewhat contrary quote:

“At one point, he had doubted that Obama stood a chance in Glouster. “From Bob and Pete’s generation there are a lot of racists—not out-and-out, but I thought there was so much racism here that Obama’d never win.” Then he heard a man who freely used the “ ‘n’ word” declare his support for Obama: “That blew my theory out of the water.””