Many think 'Bradley effect' won't hurt Obama Voters seen as less inclined to lie about the impact of race on their choice of candidate

Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley reacts to supporters cheers Tuesday, Nov. 3, 1982 in Los Angeles during the early hours of returns in the state gubernatorial race. Bradley lost in a very close race to Republican challenger George Deukmejian. less Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley reacts to supporters cheers Tuesday, Nov. 3, 1982 in Los Angeles during the early hours of returns in the state gubernatorial race. Bradley lost in a very close race to Republican ... more Photo: Associated Press Photo: Associated Press Image 1 of / 4 Caption Close Many think 'Bradley effect' won't hurt Obama 1 / 4 Back to Gallery

In a presidential campaign that has provoked an array of questions about race, one of the most persistent has been whether white people lie to pollsters about whether they would support a black candidate, a theory known as the Bradley effect.

Pundits often discount black candidates' leads in polls, saying support never materializes at the voting booth.

But many political experts say that while racism inevitably will play a role in whether some voters will choose Sen. Barack Obama, white people being surveyed seem to be pretty honest with pollsters about their biases.

The Bradley effect is an idea based on former Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley's unsuccessful race for governor of California in 1982. Though a Field Poll showed the African American candidate ahead of his opponent, George Deukmejian, by as much as seven points in the week before the election, Bradley lost the race. Pollsters theorized that some white voters said they would support Bradley but did the opposite once they got into the voting booth.

In this presidential race, in which Obama is ahead of his rival, Sen. John McCain, according to numerous polls, many say they are concerned about racism but not a Bradley effect.

"We are picking up prejudicial sentiment in this race, and there are a core group of people who say they will not vote for Obama because he is black," said pollster John Zogby. "But I think we are in a post-Bradley-effect America. We have honorable bigots. They say they won't vote for him, and then they don't vote for him."

The changes in how white voters respond to polls reflect, in part, a shift in how black politicians discuss issues as well as a move by pollsters from in-person interviews to more anonymous phone and Internet surveys, the experts say.

"We haven't seen a Bradley effect in some time, and I don't expect to see one in this race," said Dan Hopkins, a political scientist at Harvard who has studied the phenomenon. "It is popular to discuss because it provides a way for people to talk about race."

Frank Gilliam, dean of the school of public affairs at UCLA, agrees that race will be an issue but doubts the Bradley effect will emerge.

"I think what is interesting is the number of white voters admitting they won't vote for Obama because of his race," Gilliam said. "At rallies where there are all-white audiences, they are clearly riled up by more than his stand on the issues. Republicans continue to play the race card, saying 'He doesn't represent us' or 'He's an elitist who doesn't love America.'

"I think people will vote on racist motivations, but they are expressing their preferences straightforwardly in the polls."

Bradley's loss

Some also suggest that the effect wasn't as big a phenomenon in 1982 as believed - that there were other reasons for Bradley's loss.

Mark DiCamillo, director of the Field Poll, pointed to a post-election analysis that showed the loss was attributable to variables other than white racism, including heavy GOP absentee voting, a gun-control measure and a low turnout of minority voters.

"The race aspect was only a small chunk, no more than two or three percentage points," DiCamillo said. "The same effect was seen in other states in the late 1980s, when other prominent blacks appeared to be ahead but lost, but it wasn't as dominant as people say it was."

Hopkins, the Harvard political scientist, studied gubernatorial and Senate races from 1989 to 2006 to research the Wilder effect, another name for the phenomenon. The name comes from Virginia Gov. Douglas Wilder, who in 1989 had a 15-percentage-point lead two weeks before the election but won by a narrow margin. It has also been called the Dinkins effect. In the 1989 race for mayor in New York, a poll showed African American candidate David Dinkins with a 14-point lead over Rudy Giuliani four days before the election - but Dinkins won by only two points.

From 1989 to 1996, Hopkins found that African American candidates lost two to three percentage points of the support they had in the polls. But after 1996, he says, the effect disappeared.

The broader context

Hopkins suggests that the Wilder effect dissipated after welfare reform, a racially charged issue, and when black candidates began discussing social issues, like crime and poverty, in a larger context rather than complaining about racism and the plight of African Americans.

"As racialized rhetoric about welfare and crime receded from national prominence in the mid-1990s, so did the gap between polling and performance," Hopkins wrote in his report on the phenomenon, adding that the effect could return if race again infuses prominent topics in national politics.

When he talks about race, Obama focuses on broader issues, academics say.

"During a racially charged campaign, a candidate's race will be foremost in voters' minds," said Gilliam, the UCLA professor. "Race hasn't had its normal expression in this campaign. Obama is clearly a black candidate, but we are post-civil rights, and he is not talking about white privilege and racism and the need for healing or placing blame.

"Obama hasn't talked about race in a way that bothers whites."

In an interview with CNN, Obama's wife, Michelle Obama, said she too doesn't believe the polls are wrong.

"If there was going to be a Bradley effect, or it was going to be in play, Barack wouldn't be the nominee," she said. "We have to focus on the country as it is. That was several decades ago. And I think that there's been growth and movement."

Whatever happens, Gilliam says, race and polls will remain part of the election discussion.

"If he wins, people will say the race problem in America has been solved," the professor said. "If he loses, everyone will say there is no justice."