Case in point: Obama, Clinton et al have gone out of their way to woo the Jewish, mainstream white and religious vote. Yet during the recent Jena 6 problem and the unjust incarceration of a young Black boy, Obama said nothing leaving Hillary Clinton and John Edwards – two white candidates – to speak on behalf of Black people. Blacks must be wary of “Obamania” not because he’s not a good candidate or has not done very well considering the treacherous nature of American politics but because this early euphoria can dissipate in a matter of seconds dashing all the puffed up hopes of a people long denied upward mobility and a place at the table of the American Establishment.
There is a phenomenon in politics called “the Bradley Effect” that might have had a hand in Obama’s loss in New Hampshire – one that offers an object lesson on this presidential campaign. This is a practice of white voters lying to pollsters by saying that they will vote for a Black candidate but do the opposite when they get into the privacy of the election booth. The inaccurate poll reading, as was the case in New Hampshire, that had Obama leading Hillary Clinton by over 10 percentage points is to my mind a classic Bradley Effect” result.
In a now indispensable poll-driven election campaigns that can with the scientific tools available predict the outcome of elections with near certainty, the Obama loss in New Hampshire, no matter how it’s spun, reeks of the Bradley Effect. Thus, one must be very careful and wary of a repeat performance in states where the vast majority of voters are white that see a Black-skinned Obama as a threat to the US status quo.
The Bradley Effect caused pollsters to reach inaccurate and misleading conclusions because whites do not want to appear racially biased or prejudiced against a Black candidate and thus lie to these pollsters by saying that they will be voting for the Black candidate and then doing the opposite. When such cases occur the poll results mislead political campaigns that either end up losing (Tom Bradley, Los Angeles Gubernatorial elections 1982) or winning by a razor-thin majority (David Dinkins, Mayoral elections, New York 1989).
While I recognize that Barack Obama is not a Black candidate and that he has to appeal to white voters I find his silence on the fact that Blacks have been disproportionately affected by the sub-prime mortgage crisis, the fact that Blacks have only half of the good things that white Americans have and double the bad things, the fact that Blacks suffer twice the level of unemployment and twice the level of the United Nations World Health Organization’s yardstick for measuring poverty, infant mortality, and the fact that Blacks continue to be brutalized by two separate and unequal systems of justice very troubling. Nor am I suggesting that he focus exclusively on Black issues to the detriment of his campaign.
Flashy smile and nice-sounding speeches is no reason to ignore the Black community. It is my view that regardless of race, class, social standing and religious beliefs ALL of the United States presidential candidates should earn their votes. But it is the Black community and its political leaders who are to blame for selling the Black vote cheap without demanding commitments or concrete, tangible programs and services in return.
The idea that the Black community should support this or that candidate now for a promise to help the community after being elected does not work. We should demand of our leaders concrete guarantees for the Black vote or stay home on Election Day.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
