Musings —10.01.2015 07:19 AM—
- Frank Robinson said that. “Close don’t count in baseball. Only counts in horseshoes and grenades.” But what about politics? Does close count in the political game?
- Well, how close are they? Ekos, which I take seriously, said a few days ago that the Conservatives had “swung into the lead,” with nearly ten-points over the Liberals and the New Democrats. Forum, which I don’t take seriously, said substantially the same thing this morning, on the Star’s front page: the CPC has “a clear lead” in the race, now, with Stephen Harper’s party at 34 per cent support, and the other two guys enthusiastically ripping at each other, seven points back. Other media polls, like Nanos, say the Tories and the Grits are tied. But forget about all that: let me continue with my baseball-based analysis, because God knows politics wouldn’t be politics if we didn’t try to explain it all the time with mostly-irrelevant sports analogies.
- What impact does the Jay’s pennant win have on the proceedings? I ask this question as a Red Sox fan, too: do the surging Blue Jays make everyone feel good, and want to vote a certain way? God knows the country is gripped with B.J. fever, as it were: I saw countless Jays’ caps in recent days, even up in the Yukon.
- One sharp-eyed reader, James Calhoun, offered a theory. I present it to you in full, below.
- Hello all, I’m a lurker here, (and a Tory voter in the suburbs of BC) and I’ve really enjoyed reading the vast majority of the comments on this blog: they’re literate, literary and astute. I wish all political discussions were as interesting as what appears here. Okay…enough smoke blowing….I have a question/premise I wanted your collective opinion on – does the success of the Jays have a potential effect on the election? If they get through the first round there is going to be wall to wall coverage of them across the country. I’m already seeing way more baseball in my twitter/facebook feeds, and I imagine it will seriously bump the election from the front pages (or whatever the online equivalent is) as we all jump on the bandwagon. If the first opponent were New York, and the Jays managed to beat them the nation will be thrilled. And not as engaged with the election as they might otherwise be.Round two of the playoffs would then see the Jays play on Saturday the 17th and the day of the election, being games two and three of the series. I think this scenario has got to drive down the turnout, as extremely casual voters will be rushing home to watch the game, not queue at polling stations.This would seem to make the organization to get out the vote to the early ballots even more critical than usual. Is that fair? I’d also suggest this will skew the voting patterns even more in favour of older voters, as younger ones who aren’t especially engaged skip the vote for the game. I’m trying to think of other cultural/sporting events that captured/distracted the entire nation’s attention for (potentially) the last two weeks of an election. I’m flummoxed. Any precedents? Thoughts? Cheers,James (Oh, and I wish you lot had picked the astronaut. You’d have had my vote.)
- So, what about James’ theory, folks? Now, I don’t like that James used the “blog” appellation, but I will forgive him this once. What do you think? Is it possible that a bunch of grown men playing a little kids’ game could somehow affect the election outcome?
- While you think about that, here’s one from the aforementioned Star archives. I love the juxtaposition of a political campaign and baseball. And how did that one turn out, after September 1993? I remember well.