History will be made tonight in World Series Game 7 finale - America's Game is Back with the Cubs and Indians at the Plate - Tens of Millions will Tune In

.

The last Cubs victory in the World Series was 1908, 108 years ago, the longest championship drought in all sports.  For the Cleveland Indians it has been 68 years, since 1948, making the combined total of years without winning the series an astounding 176 years.

The ratings will be through the roof as these two classic franchises take the field, in the  finals of a hard fought series.

Both coaches, Joe Maddon of the Cubs and Terry Francona of the Indians, are class acts.  As Steve Wulf of ESPN sports wrote;

"It's probably time to eject "skipper" from the baseball lexicon. The word is just too inadequate. The modern manager is so much more than the captain of a ship. He is a counselor, a teacher, a leader, a thinker, a storyteller, a cheerleader and a bearer of news, both good and bad.

If there's one thing this epic World Series has demonstrated, it's that the Cubs and Indians are here because of their managers. It's not just a coincidence that two storied Midwestern franchises with Cs on their uniforms are facing each other in the seventh game, hoping to finally write a happy ending. It's also a dazzling demonstration of how the manager has evolved in modern baseball.

Joe Maddon and Terry Francona are both Italian-American, both close to their families, both from small, working-class, Pennsylvania towns. They're not exactly alike -- the ready-for-his-close-up Joe likes fine wine; the self-effacing Tito fondly recalls Boone's Farm -- but they share a sensibility for their players, a willingness to think outside the box and a gift for expressing their thoughts honestly and humorously."

The teams are young, hungry, and gritty with new stars being born in every game.  In spite of the amazing drought in championships, these are two of the best teams in baseball and deserve to be there.  Both are underdogs when it comes to the series but one will reign supreme and cast off the decades old jinx.

The Cubs battled back from a 3-1 deficit and must win two straight in Cleveland to be world champions.  One will win tonight but in truth both are winners as they have brought America's favorite past time back with class and power while for one night will knock politics from the minds of the public hungry for a feel good story.

The following is a great account of game six by Yahoo Sports writer Jeff Passon.

Cubs rout Indians to force Game 7 of World Series

Jeff Passan,Yahoo Sports 8 hours ago 

CLEVELAND – Game 7 of the World Series is coming Wednesday. This seemed almost preordained, even after the Cleveland Indians found themselves in control of the Chicago Cubs. Both of these franchises have spent far too long craving a championship for it to come down to anything less than a do-or-die, empty-the-bullpens, batten-down-the-hatches dance to 27 outs. This is a baseball dream, and it’s coming live at 8 p.m.

Game 6 of the World Series came and went Tuesday. It was a blowout. The Cubs thumped the Indians, 9-3, and made the three-games-to-one advantage Cleveland held seem like a millennium ago. By the third inning, flights were being booked into Cleveland and ticket prices were spiking and the inevitability of 176 years of championship-free baseball boiling down to one game was titillating the collective mind of a country suddenly enthralled with postseason baseball.

Mostly, admittedly, because of the Cubs. Lest this further the Indians’ Other Team™ complex, the Cubs are the story captivating the country, 108 years of heartbreak hanging over their heads, their binary destinies either a delicious, satisfying end to it all or the most painful tease yet. The Indians aren’t some mediocre story, of course, not with their 68 years and the prospect of blowing the same lead their across-the-street neighbors, the Cavs, came back from to steal a championship from the Warriors over the summer.

This is baseball, of course, and there is no singular, transcendent figure like LeBron James patrolling the diamond for the either team. Corey Kluber has been the closest thing, and he’ll start for the third time this series, giving Cleveland its best hope after Trevor Bauer lost Game 5 and Josh Tomlin imploded in Game 6, the latter in a first-inning flurry and third-inning meltdown.

The Cubs’ first run-scoring burst wasn’t entirely Tomlin’s fault. After Kris Bryant walloped a 433-foot home run with two outs, Anthony Rizzo and Ben Zobrist roped back-to-back singles. Addison Russell followed with a fly ball to right-center field that should’ve been an out until a miscommunication between center fielder Tyler Naquin and right fielder Lonnie Chisenhall caused the ball to drop between them. Rizzo and Zobrist scored, staking Cubs starter Jake Arrieta a three-run lead.

Even though he needed no more, the Cubs provided it in the third. A walk and two singles loaded the bases and prompted Indians manager Terry Francona to pull Tomlin. Russell deposited the third pitch from reliever Dan Otero 434 feet over the left-center field wall, becoming the youngest player to hit a grand slam in a World Series since Mickey Mantle and tying a World Series record with six RBIs. It was the third inning, the Cubs led 7-0 and Game 7 was practically inevitable.

Cleveland did muster a pair of runs and was threatening in the seventh, with two on and two out. Cubs manager Joe Maddon summoned closer Aroldis Chapman, who squeezed out of the jam by a hundredth of a second. Francisco Lindor hit a chopper to Rizzo, whose flip to Chapman came just in time to get Lindor – a call that was reversed after first-base umpire Sam Holbrook called him safe.

The next inning was little trouble for Chapman, and Maddon pulled him after a walk in the ninth at 20 pitches, a number that shouldn’t significantly affect his ability to pitch multiple innings in Game 7. It was a call made easier by Anthony Rizzo’s two-run home run in the top of the ninth that gave Chicago a seven-run lead. Pedro Strop gave up a run and Travis Wood recorded the final out for the Cubs. With starters Jon Lester and John Lackey both available to pitch in Game 7, Chicago’s bullpen is fortified for its run at history.

The Cubs are trying to do something only the 1925 Pirates, 1958 Yankees, 1968 Tigers, 1979 Pirates and 1985 Royals have done: come back from a 3-1 deficit in the World Series. Here’s an even more heartening note for Chicago: Only the 1967 Red Sox and 1972 Reds game back to force a Game 7 after being down 3-1 and lost the finale. These Cubs have adopted something of a Rocky theme, with the original film and its sequels playing on clubhouse TVs before Game 5, a tense 3-2 affair, nothing like the blowout of Game 6. It still imbued in Chicago a greater sense of hope than the gloom that hung over the city after Cleveland took Games 3 and 4 at Wrigley Field. Game 5 brought back the signs that said It’s Gonna Happen and left at least some semblance of optimism going into Tuesday.

It was warranted, and now, with standing-room-only tickets starting at $2,000 and actual seats running closer to $2,500, with the highest TV ratings in decades expected, with Major League Baseball riding this close-to-a-dream series to its close-to-a-dream conclusion. Now all it needs is a compelling Game 7 that will remind one city why the wait is worth it and the other about how getting so close can feel worse than not being there at all.

Why is President Obama the only Democrat on Earth Defending the FBI Director?

.

Can FBI Bombshell morph into Nuclear Explosion if Clinton is Guilty?

One of the enduring mysteries of the first weekend of the FBI presidential election bombshell is the reaction of those with most to gain or lose as a result.

Democrats, after getting over the initial shock, have turned on FBI Director James Comey en masse with only one exception to date.  On the Republican side, there is a split reaction with most applauding the action by the FBI Director while a few from the anti-Trump holdouts claim it was not fair to Clinton.

As for the campaigns, the Clinton campaign is desperately trying to turn attention to Trump's character and away from the email mess, while Trump continues to rise in the polls.

The most mysterious reaction of all comes from the most likely of sources, President Obama.  Why is Obama, who is known as the most partisan retiring president in modern history, the only prominent Democrat to defend FBI Director Comey?

At the White House news briefing yesterday, Monday, Obama Press Secretary Josh Earnest said he would "neither defend or criticize" the actions of the FBI Director, a sound byte jumped on by the media.

He also said President Obama did not believe the FBI Director was "meddling" in the presidential election as all other Democrats claim including Clinton.

Then Earnest went on to say Obama believed the FBI Director "is a man of integrity, a man of principle, and a man of good character."

The great mystery, why is the President the only Democrat on Earth praising the FBI Director in the face of a massive avalanche of criticism by fellow Democrats?

The action is odd, highly out of character for a president who never hesitates to jump into a political fray, and with the presidential election on the line it does not help the Clinton candidacy.

Perhaps it is a result of the Clinton campaign pivot away from the Barack Obama legacy after running on his record for most of the campaign.  Ever the opportunist, Hillary Clinton has become increasingly critical of the Obama legacy as the campaign reaches its conclusion from Obamacare to foreign policy.

Could it be Obama senses Clinton will abandon his legacy once elected, as Bill Clinton abandoned the Democratic party platform after being elected in 1992?

Or, and this is an equally ominous conclusion, could it be he knows that FBI Director Comey would not take such drastic and controversial action if there was not sufficient reason to do so, in which case the FBI bombshell could morph into a nuclear explosion if Clinton or her staff violated the laws.

We shall soon find out the truth.

.      

News Bulletin - Donald Trump moves ahead of Hillary Clinton for the first time since May according to latest ABC News Washington Post tracking poll!

.

Trump gains 13 percent in past few days in stunning reversal of polling data, now leads in voter enthusiasm and toss up states!

As of today, Tuesday, November 1, Trump has powered into the lead in the national poll and has closed ground in numerous toss up states with most polls now showing the race too close to call. 

While politicians debate the people speak and so far, the news is not good for the Clinton campaign.  In spite of a valiant effort by ABC and the Washington Post to explain away the Trump surge, indicative of their long opposition to the GOP standard-bearer, the facts are facts.

Trump has gained 13 percent from October 23 to October 30.

Trump voter enthusiasm is 8 percent ahead of Clinton, which represents a 7 percent loss in enthusiasm by Clinton.

In five ABC News designated toss up states, Trump now leads 48 percent to 41 percent, an astounding advantage ABC claims is not significant.

Fasten your seat belts, there are just seven days until the election.

.   

Hillary finishes greatest poll crash in presidential history - Sunday the margin hit 1%!

.

The astonishing poll collapse of the Hillary Clinton campaign in the ABC News Washington Post tracking survey dropped to a single digit lead Sunday, a change of 11 points in one week.  Her is what the Washington Post had to say in explaining the amazing fall.

Post-ABC poll finds tight presidential race, with mixed reaction to FBI’s review of Clinton’s emails

"Republicans' growing unity behind their presidential nominee, Donald Trump, has helped pull him just 1 percentage point behind Hillary Clinton and has placed GOP leaders who resist him in a vulnerable position, according to the latest Washington Post-ABC News Tracking Poll."

According to the Post they explain the collapse in the following way.

"Greater Republican unity has buoyed Trump's rising support, which has wavered throughout the year. Trump's 87 percent support among self-identified Republicans, ticking up from 83 percent last week, nearly matches Clinton's 88 percent support among Democrats. Independents also have moved sharply in Trump's direction, from favoring Clinton by eight points one week ago to backing Trump by 19 points."

.

Listen to Survive Election Post-mortem Blues

.

Bobby McFerrin - Don't Worry Be Happy

(Double click for full screen)

OFFICIAL Somewhere over the Rainbow - Israel "IZ" Kamakawiwoʻole  May 20, 1959 – June 26, 1997

(Double click for full screen)

ABC News Washington Post Poll completes Historic Clinton Collapse before FBI thunderbolt - will it now fall off the cliff?

.

More Weiner Woes as Hillary Clinton caught between Bill Clinton and Anthony Weiner sexual antics.

Today ABC announced Clinton's lead now 2%, within margin of error, just five days after the same poll showed a 12% Clinton landslide!

As the liberal media rushes to explain away the stunning FBI reopening of the Hillary Clinton email investigation, the ABC News tracking poll reported this morning, Saturday, Clinton now has a 2% lead over Trump.  Of course this was before the FBI report yesterday afternoon.

Of course, ABC and the Washington Post have no logical explanation for the greatest poll collapse in presidential history as ABC reported a 12 or 13% lead for Clinton just five days ago and this morning reported a 2% lead.  No candidate for president has ever lost a double-digit lead in just five days.

Professional apologists for the network blamed the dramatic collapse on a settling of voters into the Trump column, yet this supposed settling happened before the FBI bombshell hit the news.  Just a few days ago liberal media said the election was over based on the double-digit lead of Clinton, a lead that has now evaporated into thin air.

The Clinton campaign demands the FBI release the newly discovered emails from the Anthony Weiner criminal investigation, after refusing to discuss them for the past year.  Mr. Weiner, a former disgraced Democratic congressman from New York, is married to Huma Abedin, the top aide to Clinton who has been her eyes and ears for 20 years. Is this a desperate move that could backfire, if Weiner's wife kept emails on her husband's computer, only time will tell.

All major tracking polls show the race a dead heat for the first time.  Gone is the news media speculation that there would be a Clinton landslide.  News media like ABC News and the Washington Post have a lot to explain and the next round of polls should show for the first time the real status of the election.

Tactics by the biased news media to attempt to influence the election should be a matter of debate for years to come.

.    

Hillary Clinton collapsing in polls as Liberal Media hit panic button - Oops, maybe the election is not over yet! Her House of Cards comes down!

.

News Media Scrambles to explain away Hillary collapse in Polls - ABC caught in Middle with faulty sampling data 

The Washington Post ABC News tracking poll shows Hillary Clinton collapse from a twelve-point lead to six points in just three days.  This astonishing collapse in her lead does not even reflect the devastating news about the Obamacare financial fiasco, or the never-ending stream of damaging emails released by Wiki Leaks, which detail how the Clinton organization made a non-profit foundation into a multi-million dollar slush fund for the family.

The tracking poll, under ABC news anchor and political director George Stephanopoulos, deviated from three other tracking polls by twelve points just three days ago when all the liberal news networks declared the race was over and Hillary was the winner.

Stephanopoulos, you might remember, is a former United States Democratic Party political adviser who served as a Communications Director for the Bill Clinton 1992 Presidential Campaign and worked for President Clinton with Rahm Emanuel, Clinton fundraiser and Obama Chief of Staff.  George subsequently became Clinton's White House Communications Director, then Senior Adviser for Policy and Strategy before departing in December 1996.

Did I mention George Stephanopoulos also contributed several thousand dollars to the Clinton Foundation, after he joined ABC News, which seems to be a conflict of interest for a news anchor of a major television network?

The Hillary Clinton campaign adopted the news media strategy of saying the presidential race is over, thus allowing Clinton to reduce the number of campaign events, to attend a concert by British pop singer Adele, and redirect her efforts to getting house and senate candidates elected.  Over-confidence by the nominee seemed to be dominate in the past few weeks.

What in the world, is a British endorsement going to do in the American presidential campaign?  Last time a politician tried to influence an election in another country, like when President Obama went to the United Kingdom and told the voters to vote against withdrawing from the European Union or there would be a world economic collapse, the British voters ignored him and voted to leave the EU, and there has been no economic collapse.

Now Hillary attends a concert of Adele, gets an endorsement, and considers it a campaign event.  About the only contribution Adele can make to the American election is to remind Hillary how to handle being sick and cancelling concert appearances, which she does often.

As for the polls, when word leaked out that the polls were purposefully over-sampling Democrats, not even the Washington Post could stand the heat.  Three days ago, the poll reflected a nine percent over-sample; today the same poll reduced the Democrat over-sample to seven percent.  There was no mention of this poll manipulation in reports today of the huge collapse in Clinton support by ABC or George.

The ABC poll remains six to seven points different from all three other tracking polls due to the continued over-sample of Democrats.  In truth, there is a dead heat in the race and it is far too close to call, very different from the networks and newspapers claiming last week, the race was over, and projecting a Hillary landslide.

So does this constitute "rigging" the election as Trump claimed?  The voters will be the judge on Election Day.  Enjoy the next week of liberal national media types choking over the real status and all of a sudden trying to explain Trump might have a shot after all.

. 

Harvard versus Yale - The Ivy League versus the World - The Presidency of the United States to the Winner

.

Will the Yale and Harvard Streak End?

Now average Americans are going to have a hard time accepting this because average Americans consider the Ivy League to be something found in the history books, movies, or maybe in prose or fiction books.  The Great Gatsby comes to mind.

When it comes to power, the Ivy League is IT but normally in terms of the dominant Ivy influence over Wall Street, the international banking community, and the engines of commerce.

Where did the following Latin phrases come from?

In Deo Speramus - (In God We Hope)

In lumine Tuo videbimus lumen - (In Thy light shall we see the light)

Quisquam qui ars  - (Any person -Any study)

Vox clamantis in deserto - (The voice of one crying in the wilderness)

Veritas -(Truth)

Dei sub numine viget - (Under God's power she flourishes)

Leges sine moribus vanae - (Laws without morals are useless)

Lux et veritas - (Light and truth)

Those are the mottos of the eight venerated Ivy League schools.

Brown

Columbia
Cornell
Dartmouth
Harvard
Princeton
Pennsylvania
Yale

It seems we understand the power and influence of the Ivy League in terms of commerce but we really do not when it comes to national politics.  In fact, the attitude of the general public, in terms of the Ivy League in politics, is rather bleak.

According to recent Rasmussen polls, only five percent (5%) of American Adults think it is better for America to have presidents only from Ivy League schools.  A recent Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 85% believe it is better for the country to have presidents who come from a variety of schools.

Try this!

There have been 43 men who served as US President including President Obama,  It is often said that President Barack Obama is the 44th President of the United States of America. However, President Obama is only the 43rd different person to serve as President of the United States. This is due to the fact, that President Grover Cleveland served non-consecutive terms and so is often counted as both the 22nd and the 24th President.

• Fourteen out of forty-three presidents have attended one or more Ivy League schools.

• Twenty-five out of one hundred U.S. Senators have attended one or more Ivy League schools.

• Fifty-seven out of one hundred and nine Supreme Court justices have attended one or more Ivy League schools.

All considered, more than a third of all U.S. presidents, Supreme Court justices, and currently serving U.S. senators have attended an Ivy League school for undergraduate or graduate study.

It gets better.

When Obama completes his 2nd term next January we will have had 28 straight years of presidents from Yale and Harvard alone, consisting of Bush 1, Clinton, Bush 2 and Obama.  In fact, in the 227 years we have elected presidents, remember George Washington first took office in 1789, the Ivy League has held the presidency 85 of those years, or 37% of our history.

Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump will be the 15th president from the Ivy League and that may be a bit much for a nation in which the Ivy League represents just 8 out of 4,140 institutions of higher education.

For those of you into decimals the Ivy League makes up under two tenths of one percent (.001932) of our institutions yet controlled the presidency 37% of the time.

Public 4-year institutions        629
Private 4-year institutions   1,845
Total 4 year                            2,474

Public 2-year institutions    1,070
Private 2-year institutions      596
Total 2 year                            1,666

Total 4 and 2 year                 4,140

Money talks and legacy institutions prosper but you may be surprised when it comes to the costliest universities in America, long thought to be dominated by the Ivy League.

A recently compiled list of the 20 Most Expensive Colleges in the country shows prices, which include Tuition, Fees, Room and Board, range from $63,750 to just under $67,225 per year.

   #1  Harvey Mudd College $67,255
   #2  Columbia University $66,383
   #3  New York University $65,860 
   #4  Sarah Lawrence College $65,630
   #5  University of Chicago $64,965
   #6  Bard College at Simon's Rock  $64,519
   #7  University of Southern California $64,482
   #8  Claremont McKenna College  $64,325
   #9  Oberlin College $64,266
 #10  Scripps College $64,260   
 #11  Bard College $64,254
 #12  Haverford College $64,216    
 #13  Duke University  $64,188      
 #14  Dartmouth College  $64,134  
  #15  Northwestern University $63,983
 #16  Trinity College $63,970  
 #17  Pitzer College $63,880
 #18  Southern Methodist University  $63,840  
 #19  Amherst College  $63,772
#20  John Hopkins University $63,750

Source: Business Insider and U.S. Department of Education

To my amazement only two Ivy League schools, Columbia and Dartmouth, made the list.

Compare that to a list of the best colleges and universities in the world for 2016.

1. California Institute of Technology - United States of America
2. University of Oxford - United Kingdom
3. Stanford University - United States of America
4. University of Cambridge - United Kingdom
5. Massachusetts Institute of Technology - United States of America
6. Harvard University - United States of America
7. Princeton University - United States of America
8. Imperial College London - United Kingdom
9. ETH Zurich – Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich - Switzerland
10. University of Chicago - United States of America
11. Johns Hopkins University - United States of America
12. Yale University - United States of America
13. University of California, Berkeley - United States of America
14. University College London - United Kingdom
15. Columbia University - United States of America
16. University of California, Los Angeles - United States of America
17. University of Pennsylvania - United States of America
18. Cornell University - United States of America
19. University of Toronto - Canada
20. Duke University - United States of America

Source: The Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2015-2016

Sorry rest of the world, but fourteen of the top twenty are from the United States, including six of the top ten.  Harvard is the top ranked Ivy League school but six of the eight Ivy League schools are in the top twenty in the world.  

What does this all mean?  Here in the colonies it seems the more other schools catch up with the Ivy League in terms of the number of schools and the cost of education, the stronger those dastardly Ivy League schools get control of our presidency and political processes.

Harvard was the first university in America founded in 1636.  By 1800, six of the first 16 universities in America were Ivy League, 37%.  Now the Ivy League represents less than one percent of institutions of higher education.  In spite of that we are completing 28 straight years of presidents from just two Ivy League schools, Harvard and Yale, and now Hillary or Donald assure an extension of that Ivy stranglehold on the presidency up to 36 straight years.

Isn't it about time we give someone else a chance like The California Institute of Technology, Stanford, MIT, Slippery Rock, or even The Pennsylvania State University New Kensington Campus of the Commonwealth College, (the longest college name in the USA)?

My goal was to attend Yale for undergraduate and Harvard Law for graduate school and I went through the multi-year application process, but fate had other plans for me and I wound up at the University of Arizona in Tucson.  Though I retain my Ivy League loyalty, even I think enough is enough, give someone else a chance.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/57fd1b55e4b0b665ad818b8b?timestamp=1476206436838