“1980 In Slow Motion.”  That is a quote I read today from some professional pundit; I find it to be quite accurate.  The 2012 presidential race seems to be wrapping up and barring any totally unexpected event from left field, the cake would appear to be baked.  There is a momentum that has been gathering for the Romney campaign since the first debate and even though it has ebbed a bit here and there, it has nonetheless continued unabated and shows no sign of letting up.  It appears to be sweeping not only the nation, but more importantly the acclaimed swing states.  When I look at the campaign pictures on the internet and television, I am struck by the images of President Obama.  He seems to be like the struggling, frustrated, and tiring man trying to hold back the overwhelming weight that threatens to crush him.  The harder he struggles to combat it, the more frantic he becomes and the more desperate he appears.  Romney is increasingly more energetic and relaxed.  As we all know, both campaigns have the best pollsters in the business and have a very good idea where this whole deal is headed.

As I had written a few blogs back, the recognition is slowing sinking in that Ohio is quite possibly more essential to Obama than it is to Romney.  The current state of play begs the question: What if Romney now wins Ohio?  If, in fact, Romney wins Ohio, then it is quite likely that he will also win Pennsylvania and Wisconsin (perhaps Michigan as well?).  Rather than the popular notion of a “razor thin” victory for one side or the other, we could very well be looking at a big win for Romney.  It is only reasonable to expect that if that big win occurs, then the close Senate races that will determine control of that body will tilt Republican.  Romney might very well be coming into office in January of 2013 with Republican control in the House and the Senate, and a big elector count, thus setting the stage for some very significant first-term legislation.

On the other hand, if Obama prevails in what would likely be a narrow electoral victory, he will be facing, at best, a Republican House and a Senate with a small Democrat majority; a perfect formula for gridlock and executive action adventures.  This same scenario might apply to Romney if he squeaks out a win and is unable to extend sufficient coattails to the Republican Senate candidates engaged in competitive races.  Either way, it is difficult to see how continuing tensions between our Legislative branch and our Executive branch bode well for dealing with the major issues facing our nation; issues such as the expiring Bush tax cuts, the continuing deficit and debt problem, immigration reform, and the Middle East tinderbox. 

If you look at the possible outcomes based solely on an “ability to govern” basis, I submit that the preferable outcome is a big Romney win.  Romney may not be the panacea that his campaign makes him out to be, but there is little doubt that his first two years in office will give the American voting public a glimpse of what Romney and Republican philosophies can or cannot do for the country and come November of 2014 and 2016, establish a good basis for how we would like to go forward.

Three Things To Improve Baseball.  I’ve been a baseball fan my whole life.  I was never a great player, but they never kept me from imagining (like millions of kids before me) being the hero in the bottom of the ninth inning.  I must say, however, that today’s game suffers in comparison to some of its sports competitors.  NFL games move much more quickly.  College basketball is much more passionate.  Even NHL playoffs, with their low scores, rate higher on the “action per minute” dial than major league baseball these days.

At the risk of showing my ignorance, I will suggest three things to improve the game for its many viewers; both in the parks and at home on the screen:

1.      Speed the game up.  How you do it is up to the folks who write the rules.  The constant stepping in and out of the batter’s box; the eternity between pitches; the deep thought processes that seem to occur between plays…all of this is dragging the game out.  Baseball is a game of anticipation leading up to action to begin with; we need more action and less anticipation.

2.      Implement instant replay.  Now how you do this, once again, is up to the rules makers.  There might be a replay official in the booth to view the film; there might be a limited number of challenges per team; it could even be discretionary for the umpires.  Whatever the circumstances of the process, there is far too much invested in potentially critical calls to rely on the fallible judgment of umpires who are not always that reliable; especially when a better system is readily available.

3.      Finally…what is up with the strike zone?  I swear there are some umpires who call more strikes balls than strikes strikes.  As I understand, the umpires have long claimed their unalienable right to call balls and strikes according to their own strike zone.  What possible purpose is there for having a strike zone in the rule book if it going to be adjusted by each and every different umpire that calls a game?  Whether or not the strike-trackers that we see on television are accurate, they clearly show that each umpire has their own ideas about high, low, and off the plate.  In my humble opinion, the game would be much improved by an increased effort to uniformly enforce a universal (see rule book) strike zone and to grade umpires on how accurately they call balls and strikes.

America’s pastime is still the great game it always was, but it has taken some hits over the last few years with strikes, lockouts, prima donna players, and Gordon Gecko owners.  A bit of tweaking around the edges might serve to bring some lost love back to the game that this type of drift has resulted in.