some historical & recent NHL playoffs history

When you think of the NHL, you usually think of matchups such as this: 

Well, you're in luck, considering that is the current East final matchup in the NHL this season! The last time these 2 teams met in the playoffs was 1979 (more on that later), but to have a chance at championship #'s 25 & 5 all-time, respectively, they'll most likely have to get through these guys: 

Before you start thinking that the East final is the only matchup out there, keep in mind: Chicago not only faced & defeated L.A. in last year's West finals en route to championship #9 all-time, only culminated by the unthinkable "17 seconds" comeback against Boston last June... Between that, the 20-something game point streak a few months earlier, & the fact that they've faced both Minnesota & L.A. in back-to-back playoff runs, I don't think anything short of divine intervention will stop them from championship #10 all-time next month! 

Being born & raised in Jersey, I've rooted for both local NFL teams & the "Bombers" for as long as I can remember, but when it comes to the NHL, having a team actually winning championships as "Jersey's team" automatically drew me to their side, instead of the Rangers' side, especially with playoff series like these: 

That series was most memorable, at least for me, for seeing any team manage to close out a series at MSG, which has normally been unkind to such events, & the following series was also memorable for its own reasons: 

May 2012 was more memorable not for the fact that the series ended here, but for the fact that it was a complete "carbon copy" of 1994, at least through the 1st 5 games... What happened the following month was supremely upsetting, but at least they can't push "1994" on us anymore without getting reminded of what happened almost exactly 18 years later! 

Earlier, I told you I would get back to 1979: 

That series clinched championship #22 of (currently) 24 all-time, & it also started similarly to the current series, to an extent, with N.Y. winning game 1 in Montrèal before Montrèal the next 4, including 2 at MSG, to clinch #22! 

There's another series that looks extremely similar to the current series: 

The only difference between the 2, however, is that Montrèal dropped the 1st 2 games in Philly before winning game 3 in Montrèal, & also before Chicago won its 1st championship since 1961, also in Philly! 

Barring the obvious (a chance to face either Chicago or L.A., although most likely Chicago), there are 2 more reasons I don't want these East finals to go the minimum 4 games & end at MSG: 

No, for those of you thinking so... She might be only 19, but she's not related to this Rock & Roll Hall of Famer, unfortunately: 

That might be unfortunate, but I guess that makes more sense than for them to be distant relatives, yet taking drastically different paths in the music industry, where 1 is, as mentioned, a Rock & Roll Hall of Famer, & the other is basically an entire Canadian province's "foil" for the "real" anthem singer so far these playoffs: 

It would be even better if those 2 ladies could witness just 1 more win these playoffs, if only so the Rangers are forced to clinch the East on home ice, but until that gets decided, I'll just keep poking fun at the failed Boston Bruins: 

ICYMI (in case you missed it), that was the result of the bet between mayors Denis Coderre of Montrèal & Marty Walsh of Boston... As low-key ******-off as I am deep down inside that a team I've grown to secretly despise could very well clinch championship #5 all-time next month, although I still don't see that happen with the Chicago Blackhawks most likely awaiting them, as an "otherwise" N.J./N.Y.C. sports fan, nothing makes me more satisfied sports-wise than seeing a Boston sports fanbase be forced to plant opposing colors atop its City Hall for the foreseeable future! Enjoy it while it lasts, Bruin fans... With your team on the verge of another "rebuilding" phase in the near future, I don't foresee you even getting the chance to even be making such bets anytime soon! 

2016, & the dangers of borderline single-party rule

Out of all topics that could possibly be discussed in political arguments, the 1 topic I've seen discussed the least, at least among people other than talk-show hosts looking to silence all dissenting opinions, has been 1-party rule emerging in some states more than others! When the topic is discussed, the states pointed to most often have been California (heavily Democratic), Florida (largely Republican), & Texas (heavily Republican)! Obviously, that topic hasn't been able to be discussed in any countries where the federal governments have been largely plagued by 1-party rule, something that has, thankfully, been curbed here, for the most part, in D.C.! The federal House & Senate have almost never leaned more than 70-75% for either party, so while 1-party rule has, fortunately, been avoided there, some states have tilted dangerously in favor of 1 party or the other, & here are some of the most dangerous (for lack of a better word) examples of 1-party rule states!

Before I do that, however, I'd like to give my opinions on each of the potential 2016 candidates:

the Republican candidates, in order:

There was a time when I thought Scott Brown was just another radical conservative, but now that he's moved into New Hampshire, I think he's moderated his views just enough to avoid carrying that "stigma" across state lines with him!

Do we srsly need another Bush in Washington?

The antithesis of Obamacare seems to be what Dr. Ben Carson has portrayed himself as, but just like Barbara Buono here in N.J. last November, he's too unknown aside from health care policy for me to cast him in any way, shape, or form...

For all the crap that Governor Christie has taken, I'm sure voters of all affiliations will appreciate his ability to embrace bipartisanship when necessary, such as after destructive natural disasters like Sandy, when conservative media was deliberately trying to sabotage the relief efforts to keep the "sheeple" pleased!

On the other hand, the master of singlehanded idiocy, Ted Cruz, is next... If it wasn't for his antics during the government shutdown last year, then I wouldn't find him so reckless, but, well...

Huckabee... failed Fox News Propaganda host, failed radio host... Why this guy couldn't take advantage of either of those talk show monopolies is beyond me!

Huntsman provides another example of conservative over influence, in my opinion... If he hadn't been pushed out in both '08 & '12, I'm sure he could've "pandered" just enough to the right wingers without compromising his relative moderation!

Jindal has also been known to bash extremism within his own party, so, just for that, I'd be willing to support that, even if all of his policies would make him seem like "1 of them"!

In a state known to elect Republican mayors & governors as recently as the beginning of the millennium (more on that later), King has seemed more conservative than I believe he is, but that might just be because of the Democratic-leaning composition of the N.Y. state government right now!

**** Nugent...

Randy! Srsly, tho... I appreciate his statements in recent days about pushing back against extremist elements & falsehoods (most recently, about voter I.D. laws), but that doesn't make him moderate enough for me just yet!

Just like his predecessor, Daniels has mostly kept his successes "under the radar", while making sure to not make any inflammatory statements made by any Indiana politicians public...

Since Texas is so heavily conservative (more on that later...), you'd think I'd be inclined to bash Rick Perry, but just as long as he doesn't take his "take no prisoners" attitude with him from Austin to D.C., then I'd gladly support him if it meant expanding his state's prosperity nationwide, à la Bill Clinton taking his "New Democrat" approach from Little Rock to D.C. back in the early 90s!

I've always thought foreign policy has been both under appreciated & underutilized by many previous administrations, so if you prefer true "peace through strength" politicians, then Mike Rogers is for you!

Unfortunately, I won't support any candidates on the losing end of previous electoral results... That & extremist budget plans that keep getting shot down are reasons enough for me not to support Ryan!

Same thing with extreme religious fundamentalism... You can't push that on people at every turn, as Santorum did, & expect to win over everybody else!

Just like Huckabee, Scarborough has been a failed talk show host, except Scarborough is (1) somehow still going, & (2) planted in some weekday morning slot where no ratings happen!

Trump, Trump, Trump... If it wasn't for his near-sabotage of Atlantic City, then I would support him, but that & his continued promotion of crackpot conspiracy theories are enough to keep me far away from him!

Among the "others", I would most likely support: Daniels, Kasich, Martinez, Portman, Rubio, & Sandoval... All of the other people among the "others" are either busy pushing extremism on us right now (especially "Colonel" West), or are part of previous administrations (Rice) or losing electoral campaigns (Cain, Palin)!

the Democratic candidates, in order:

Biden & Clinton are both (1) part of the current administration, (2) old as dirt, & (3) prone to verbal gaffes exposing their liberal beliefs for what they are: dangerously uncompromising, yet still vulnerable to being labeled "soft"!

Dean was unsuccessful in '04, but that doesn't preclude the turnaround that Vermont experienced under his leadership throughout the 90s!

O' Malley has been too far-left for me... I'm no fan of far-right politics, either, but when these people push harmful policy after harmful policy on an entire state without so much as consulting any constituents, then I just can't support them!

Sanders actually calls himself "big-S-Socialist"... 'nuff said!

Balancing out all the uncompromising liberalism, however, is former Montana governor Schweitzer... If you didn't catch that recent interview with some news outlet in which he openly promised to run as the "anti-Hillary" Democrat, then that to me is more than enough evidence of moderation!

Among the "others": Bullock, Hassan, Kucinich, Locke, Nixon (despite the negative connotations associated with that last name, I've found Jay to be incredibly different from Richard!), & Warner... Just as with the conservatives, I think the rest of these "others" are just too liberal for my liking!

Now that I've expressed my preliminary opinions on 2016, I'd like to remind you people of who was in charge of N.Y.C. & N.Y.S. just after the turn of the millennium!

 former N.Y.C. mayor Rudy Giuliani

former N.Y. governor George Pataki

(both conservative-leaning Republicans in what has otherwise routinely been 1 of the biggest "blue" states in the nation!)

 the California Assembly

 the California Senate

 the Florida House

the Florida Senate

 Just putting in a word for the Garden State...

 the Texas House

the Texas Senate

some long overdue remakes were just announced...

... & I officially can't wait for this coming November!

 If you've followed the seemingly ever-present video game maker Nintendo just in recent days, you've most likely noticed that both Microsoft & Sony are outpacing the WiiU & 2DS/3DS in terms of sales, & out of those other 2 companies, Sony's PS4 is outpacing the Xbox One by a wide margin!

OBLIGATORY NEWS WEBSITE LINK: http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2014/05/07/nintendo-misses-wii-u-and-3ds-sales-targets-posts-229m-loss/

A few "choice words" from that article: "Worldwide sales ended up at $5.6 billion, down from a revised forecast of $5.79 billion, which was once projected to be $9 billion in April 2013." OOPS!

"There was an operating income shortfall of $455 million, more than the predicted $343 million, and a far cry from the original prediction of a $981 million positive result." 2x OOPS!

"They haven’t been just off lately, they’ve been way, way off." Surely, those sales figures would suggest otherwise, wouldn't they, Forbes? /s (sarcasm)

"Last April, Nintendo predicted 9 million Wii Us and 18 million 3DS handhelds would be sold during the fiscal year. In January, that was revised to 2.8 million and 13.5 million. As of today, the final numbers were even lower, at 2.72 million and 12.24 million respectively." It always ***** to miss expectations, but to miss them by that much signals more than just lagging sales...

"Nintendo says that they will refocus on making games for the Wii U that employ its great “differentiator,” the gamepad." ......

"Nintendo has said they won’t be debuting any new hardware at E3 this year, and in their main video presentation they will likely be announcing new Wii U and 3DS titles to try and get fans excited." If that isn't a sign that they've given up on those 2 systems to some extent, then I don't know what is!

Later on in that paragraph, however: "There are great Nintendo games on the horizon this year, and perhaps they’ll be enough to start reversing the company’s fortunes after a tumultuous couple of years."

... which leads me to this:

... which leads me further back in time, to:

Those 2 games are - actually, nope - I started with the whole series from the beginning in 1996! 

From then on, I haven't been able to give up on any of these games at all - sure, Nintendo & everybody else involved in the production of each "generation" so far has sure tried its darnedest to make us give up sometimes, like the original gen 3, but these announced remakes which just dropped without warning over at Nintendo of Japan yesterday (JST, not PDT) could have just saved the franchise, & perhaps even 1 or more of the other companies usually in with Nintendo on the making of each of the games in this wonderful series so far, be it Game Freak, Creatures, Inc., or heck, even Nintendo itself, since that seems to be what it does best; 1st party, not 3rd party; leave all the 3rd party stuff to Microsoft & Sony, even though Microsoft & Bungie seem to have had some major "working relationship" changes recently: http://gamerant.com/bungie-joe-staten-microsoft-creative-director-halo/ 

That being said, I hope the gen 3 redux scheduled worldwide for November of this year does recapture some peoples' 2003 nostalgia all over again, since if that doesn't happen, then I think whichever other division (Game Freak or Creatures, Inc.; not necessarily any of Nintendo's many divisions) ends up taking the biggest losses from the possible gen 3 redux ****show could "call it quits" as a result... All that "doom & gloom" (no pun intended with "gloom") doesn't make me any less excited for November, however!