Baseball is an art. As was true with a large portion of America, I was gripped by the American League Championship series between the Boston Red Sox and the New York Yankees. The series pitted perennial rivals, for the second season in a row, in a do or die match where the winner would go on and the loser would go home. On one evening, there was the unfortunate collision of this rivalry with another colossal match this fall, the Presidential elections. With baseball on television and the Presidential debates on the radio, I began to see similarities between these two epic struggles.

I propose the Red Sox are similar to the Democrats and the Yankees can be seen as a metaphor for Republicans. Aside from the obvious shared New England origin, the Red Sox, much like the Democratic candidate, Senator John Kerry, have been called upon to prove themselves. To prove they can overcome their own history. To prove they can overcome their opponents. To prove their point. But more importantly, they've been called upon to inspire their fans to believe they can indeed overcome these and any obstacles. Many parallels can be drawn between this historic series and the soon to be historic election where the Kerry sports a blue cap with adorned red "B" on the front and President Bush dons a similarly blue cap with an entwined "NY" above the brim. Here are a few similarities that stood out to me.

First, both have history. The Red Sox and Yankees have a legacy running all the way back to the founding days of baseball. Talk about "the curse" from the early 1900's which was the year the Red Sox sold legendary slugger Babe Ruth to the Yankees and have not since basked in World Series victory glory. Stating the obvious, the Presidential race also has a history. These same two parties have been debating over the best course for the US for years. The rivalry hit fevered pitch after the hotly contested 2000 election where in extra innings, then Govenor George W. Bush was declared the winner by the slimmest of margins.

A second parallel revolves around the franchises, popular baseball has a long standing notion of the Yankees as an evil empire in baseball. Enjoying the largest media market, the Yankees have seemingly unlimited resources to buy the best players in baseball. Their players, likewise, are able to secure lucrative endorsement deals at home and abroad. Bush too has enjoyed backing by large corporations and been able to buy some of the best advisors, speech writers and campaign leaders in politics. Their endorsements take varied forms from political posts to book deals.

The Red Sox have the second highest payroll in baseball. However, there is a more organic feel to their financial outlays. The Red Sox team is also a mix of high profile players and underrated, undervalued talent that creates a more blue collar, working guy's team. They seem younger and seem to provide what some may call freshness while others may call scruffiness to the game, especially in contrast with the polished, shaven Yankee squad. The Sox's methods may, at times, seem unorthodox, but they get the job done. While the question of orthodoxy of either political camp can be questioned, I believe the Sox's edginess could be interpreted as (gasp, he gon'dun said it) liberalness while the starch and pinstripes of the Yankees emit a conservative feel.

Since we are talking numbers, for the record:
----------------------------------------
Yankees Payroll 184.2 million
Red Sox Payroll 127.3 million
Percent difference 44.69%
as of April 2004
----------------------------------------
Bush fundraising 433.5 million
Kerry fundraising 310.8 million
Percent difference 38.48%
as of August 20, 2004
----------------------------------------

This year, the Red Sox would not risk late inning heroics. This year, they sought a decisive victory that would leave no fan or detractor with a notion that they barely squeaked by. How? Manager Terry Francona would use a foray of pitchers, including ace Pedro Martinez, in relief. He would keep the pressure on the Yankees from inning 1 through inning 9 both offensively and defensively. And most importantly he would ask each player to contribute with their individual skills to achieve a win as a team and not just the 2004 team, but for every team since 1918.

I admit I was about to abandon ship and write the Red Sox off. Too often scorned, too often let down. They were in, what seemed to be, an insurmountable situation against the Yankees. On Wednesday night, however, the Red Sox made a believer out of me. But they I believe they have what it takes to be crowned the best team in baseball. I believe they can use their collective talent to win it all.

Unfortunately, I am still on the fence with the Kerry camp. I believe he will do a better job than the current President, but I am not sure I believe in Kerry in the way I believe in the Red Sox. He and his running mate, Sen. John Edwards, are undoubtedly talented, smart individuals. But what I think is bothering me, and perhaps other Democrats, is their vision of how the team will come together and achieve a win? President Bush has an all star team of household names like Colin Powell that many Americans associate with greatness. The media has been critical of how well this team may or may not work together, but regardless of what happens in the clubhouse they present a consistent, polished front. Even if you don't necessarily agree with them, you get the feeling that you know what they stand for. Yankee pride anyone?

In the New York Times Magazine article "Without a Doubt" published on October 17th, 2004, Ron Suskind talked about how this unity may dissolve should President Bush win a second term. The source of this unraveling is unimportant, but the fact that dissolution of the consistent message exists may be a detriment to the Republican party. Similarly, the Yankees unraveled in a way no team has ever unraveled in baseball history, allowing the Red Sox to not only win, but to come back from the brink of elimination.

On the campaign trail though, every Republican falls into rank and shows support for their man. Even with questionable policy decisions and evident character flaws, the party and his followers are willing to overlook these traits and support President Bush. On the baseball field, the Yankee loyalists still cheered for Alex "Slapper" Rodriguez despite his blatant attempt at cheating in Game 6.

The Democrats' cloudiness on issues, I believe, is due in part to the type of campaign which has been waged thus far. With a lot of emphasis on the war, the Kerry camp struggles to distinguish in sound-byte form, its policy for Iraq over the Bush plan. The Kerry camp has shifted gears a bit this week and begun harping on simple issues, like stem cell research, to help focus the campaign. Perhaps this is similar to the idea in baseball that the basics win games? Solid pitching coupled with good defense and timely hitting are fundamentals to winning at baseball. Returning to fundamentals may be what helps the Democrats win some votes.

On paper, the Red Sox were the better team. Many sports analysts though, were asking if the Sox had the mental toughness to rise to the challenge of the Yankee juggernaut. On paper, many news analysts and pundits show that Kerry should be a landslide winner due to numerous controversial Bush policy decisions. Even though there are the empirical dimensions to both baseball and politics, we still play the game. Perhaps pollsters should be more interested in likely voters' team affiliations? I am sure someone can more easily answer the question of "Red Sox or Yankees?" than the question of "Bush or Kerry?"

As a continuation note, the Houston Astros, from Texas, will be playing their game seven tonight for the National League's place in the World Series. Should they win then The Series will feature Texas versus Boston. Art continuing to imitate life?