The point of the analogy was that it requires the batter to:
Assume his at bat doesn’t matter, and/or:
Believe his sending a message is more important than the outcome of the game.
It also assumes message integrity - that the message desired is the message received.
The message I get is that those who consider voting for Virgil either haven’t thought it through or don’t care if Obama wins.
If each team gets millions of at-bats, he's probably right.