I've read Nate's post, AND I was a campaign worker in Bradley's ill-fated gubernatorial campaign. I think one reason why the Bradley Effect didn't seem to show up in the primaries is because choosing either the black guy or the white woman in a poll were both "acceptable" and/or "PC" choices. Different story when the poll choices are the black guy or the white guy.

There are other factors in play this cycle: "cell voters," "Diebold/Sequoia," and the Caucasus Surprise, among others. I don't know how large a factor the Bradley Effect will (or won't) be, but: it's early, Obama has money to fight back with, and Bush has tarnished the Republican brand. I think we should be concerned, but it's definitely not time for full-on-panic mode. Yet.

Posted at August 15, 2008 4:20 PM in response to Blowing August: Will The Convention Give Obama The Big Bump He Needs?

You did this? Great job.

Please upload it to YouTube and give us the URL. The collegehumor.com URL kinda gives it away, and many people don't trust TinyURLs anymore.

Posted at August 13, 2008 2:48 PM in response to "BARACK OBAMA: A TREASONOUS DECEPTION?" or "No, THIS Needs To Be The Next Viral Video."

What makes this argument laughable is that if the reverse had happened - Edwards' affair was exposed before Iowa - Obama (very likely) still wins Iowa because his organization there was better and he would have been the focal point of anti-Hillaryists.

But now the refrain would be, "Why was the affair exposed now when it happened years ago? Edwards dropping out of Iowa cost Hillary the caucus and therefore the nomination!"

Posted at August 11, 2008 2:52 PM in response to For the Love of God, Just Let it Go!!!

I'm sure you meant that George H. W. believed wealth required service.

Posted at August 5, 2008 10:17 PM in response to Of Writers and Leaders

I think it's OK. There's plenty of precedent for letting delegates of losing candidates vote once for their candidate, and then everybody switches votes once the jockeying for being the state to put the winner over the top is done.

The difference is that this delegate race is historically close. But I seriously doubt that Hillary thinks she can win the nomination, or that she can win the general if she somehow steals the nomination.

You think the FISA fold stole enthusiasm from the Obama campaign? Can you imagine what a downer the rest of the convention would be if Hillary stole the nom? I don't think that Hillary or Bill are so politically dense that they could ignore the consequences of such an event.

Of course, I reserve the right to change my mind pending further statements/actions from Camp Hillary.

Posted at August 2, 2008 10:08 PM in response to Hillary advocates "cathartic roll call" at the convention

I agree with CVille Dem that if the election stays close, there's a strong possibility that voting machines and Election Day voter "registration" shenanigans will carry the day for the Republicans. There's also the question of how large the "Bradley effect" is going to be. And the September/October/whatever surprise will have an effect, also

But it's still early - the conventions haven't even happened yet. Offer townhalls for debates on a one-for-one basis. Even if McCain "wins" the first townhall, that will be it - Obama is too good and quick a study to "lose" any others.

Posted at August 1, 2008 3:01 PM in response to Why Can't John McCain Close the Deal with Voters?

And lost both times?

Posted at July 25, 2008 1:39 PM in response to Prediction on McCain's VP

BobLT, you'll notice that Dusty says that MM does not have the brains that (insert deity here) gave a grapefruit. So grapefruit are smarter than Michelle Malkin.

OK, so Dusty set the bar pretty low on that comparison. But I'm sure that Dusty believes that grapefruit are the fine, upstanding, Amurrican fruit that they are.

Posted at July 25, 2008 1:45 AM in response to Malkin's "JAW-Dropping Political Miracle" Provides Big Fees For BMW Direct

President Obama

Iambic trimeter, even.

Posted at July 21, 2008 10:23 PM in response to A minor Clarification of "Our Clown in Afghanistan"

Only if the Addlepated Arizonan simultaneously selects a high-profile, younger Congresscritter to run as Vice-President. Perhaps even with an eye to racially balance the ticket... may I suggest a man of letters, Senator Audacious himself. This would create a campaign for the ages, Obama-McCain vs. McCain-Obama. Energy and Experience set against Senility and Superficiality. America would not have to choose the lesser of two evils, and get both weevils at a single stroke!

I don't get all the crap about hats, though.

Posted at July 20, 2008 10:23 PM in response to Senator Byrd Should Take His Name Out of Obama’s Hat, Or, How Your Intolerance For a Good Roorbacking Causes Me To Endorse Senator McCain