I have rehashed this entry because the election is over and it appears the "bradley effect" has occured on queer propositions.
"The Bradley effect, less commonly called the Wilder effect, is a proposed explanation for observed discrepancies between voter opinion polls and election outcomes in some American political campaigns when a white candidate and a non-white candidate run against each other. Named for Tom Bradley, an African-American who lost the 1982 California governor's race despite being ahead in some voter polls, the Bradley effect refers to an alleged tendency on the part of some voters to tell pollsters that they are undecided or likely to vote for a black candidate, and yet, on election day, vote for his/her white opponent." (Wikipedia)The "Bradley Effect" was a shocking dose of reality about the inconsistency of polls to determine how truthful people are about their voting decisions. It also went on to show the racial implications of the governor's race.
While it is now 26 years later, the notion of a "Bradley Effect" has resurfaced because Barack Obama, a bi-racial candidate was running for the office of the presidency of the United States of America. It became interesting for political pundits and insiders to ponder whether people were indicating they would vote for the democratic ticket while in private would vote against it because of the racial implications. It turned out that not only did this not occur, but Obama defeated all odds and carried traditionally republican strongholds.
I wonder however whether this can be applied to certain LGBT issues that were on the ballot this Nov. 4th. The marriage amendments in Arizona, and Florida this year have passed, California is still too close to call but likely passed as well. There is also the adoption ban by unmarried co-habitating couples in Arkansas. All of these referendums hold major implications for Americans straight and gay.
People opposed to gay rights often argue that they "have gay friends" or are "not bigoted against gays." It has become increasingly unpopular to be associated with "homophobia." Is it possible there is a segment of the population that claims they will vote against these marriage amendments and in favor of LGBT rights while secretly espousing another point of view to hide their own fear of being labeled a bigot? The exit poll data showed us defeating the bans in California, Florida, and Arkansas, so why are the results different?
Posts
