Let's first look at the definition of "The Bradley Effect" :

The Bradley effect, less commonly called the Wilder effect,[1] is a proposed explanation for an alleged discrepancy between voter opinion polls and election outcomes in American political campaigns when a white candidate and a non-white candidate run against each other.[2][3][4] 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.

Half-jokingly I told Patrick Ruffini, former online communications director for Rudy Giuliani, that he was a "Reverse Bradley Effect" waiting to happen. Knowing what I know about his admiration of the inner workings of the Obama campaign and his lust and longing for a right-wing netroots, I see Patrick as part of a potential trend : Of republicans who will say publicly they will vote for McCain but come November 4th they'll pull the level, in the privacy and the sanctity of their voting booth, for none other than Barack Obama. Why? 

There is more than enough evidence with the snap polls for the debates, the daily Gallup polls and the scores of the Conservative Intelligentsia endorsing Obama. That conservatives, more so than republicans, seemed to be scared shitless of the prospect of having not only 4 more years of neo-con economics but four more years of neoconism with the dangerous error that is Sarah Palin as President.

Of course, I am not saying Patrick will vote for Obama, but weirder shit has happened during this election campaign.

I mean, republicans were laughing at McCain not with McCain during one of the "undecideds" polls. You know what I mean?