I am less afraid of the Bradley effect than I am of the Genovese effect

You recall the murder of Kitty Genovese...everyone heard her cries for help and everyone looked out their window as she was SLOWLY murdered...because everyone thought SOMEONE ELSE has call the police?

As we watch the polls and think..hell Obama is going to win this thing...NO HE IS NOT..do not watch from your window on history...VOTE DAMN IT VOTE!

A poll has never elected anyone...DO NOT BECOME COMPLACENT..DO NOT THINK OTHERS WILL VOTE INSTEAD OF YOU!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitty_Genovese

or at least that is what each believed, than what happened to Kitty...I read about it at the time and never forgot it.

I stupidly thought you were worried about a mafia type criminal activity rather than the Genovese rape case. There was certainly nothing funny about that. It was one of the most awful examples of humans unwillingness to get involved to protect a victim.

This race is not over till it is over. Tell everyone you know to vote. (unless of course they support McPalin, then let the air out of their tires or duct tape them to a toilet bowl)

that poor man who taped himself into his home..though...oh well, win a few and lose a few! Just makes one wonder if Ridge had not invested in duct tape prior..oh well, we will never know!

NOT because they thought someone else had already called. I remember this happening.

It was lamented at the time that people had become so self-centered, so wary of others, that even good civic deeds were avoided in order to avoid "trouble". It was either "go with the flow" or shut up entirely and pretend the problem didn't exist.

It's heartening to see that mindset turning around politically.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bystander_effect

The bystander effect (also known as bystander apathy, Genovese syndrome, diffused responsibility or bystander intervention) is a psychological phenomenon in which someone is less likely to intervene in an emergency situation when other people are present and able to help than when he or she is alone.

<snip>

A common explanation of this phenomenon is that, with others present, observers all assume that someone else is going to intervene and so they each individually refrain from doing so and feel less responsible. This is an example of how diffusion of responsibility leads to social loafing. People may also assume that other bystanders may be more qualified to help, such as being a doctor or police officer, and their intervention would thus be unneeded. People may also fear losing face in front of the other bystanders, being superseded by a superior helper, offering unwanted assistance, or the legal consequences of offering inferior and possibly dangerous assistance. Another explanation is that bystanders monitor the reactions of other people in an emergency situation to see if others think that it is necessary to intervene. Since others are doing exactly the same, everyone concludes from the inaction of others that other people do not think that help is needed. This is an example of pluralistic ignorance and social proof. An alternative to explanations of rational motivation is that emotional cues to action can be as powerful as irrational ones, and the presence of a group of inactive others is a pre-rational emotional cue to inaction that must be overcome

I agree there was apathy involved..which I am also refering to...but it is really the belief that OTHERS will do what you are unwilling to do...they 'bystander effect'