Jump to content
270soft Forum

vcczar

Steering Council Member
  • Content count

    4,192
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About vcczar

  • Rank
    Professor

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (formerly Austin, TX and NYC)
  • Interests
    politics, history, coffee, walking, and everything else.

Recent Profile Visitors

4,084 profile views
  1. I will upload 1992-2016, all at the same time. It will be very soon if I can get @thr33 to get me the endorsers very quickly. I have all day tomorrow off. I could feasibly have them all done in a week or two. Then I'll work on 2020. In January, I'll start the "Final" updates, which will probably take all of 2018 to finish.
  2. If an endorser leans towards an independent, then I will adjust their support accordingly for that candidate. Perhaps 50 for their registered party, and then 75 for the independent candidate. Independent endorsers who could be surrogates will either have no favoritism towards any party, or will have favoratism towards specific candidates only.
  3. All I need you to do is the following (assuming @TheLiberalKitten is fine with you taking over): Endorser Name, ID name, description, home state, barnstorming bonus, and then their surrogate name, ID name, home state bonus (+2), and if they're a Republican put 50 towards Republicans on the surrogate page, or if they are a Democrat, but 50 towards Democrats. Make sure there are 50 state governors, two senators for each state, and that the Speaker is there. Don't worry about anyone else. I'll set the stances, and the surrogate abilities, but you are free to set them as you see fit, and maybe that will cut down on the time that I need to do it, as I assume you'll get some or most of them right on the nail. I'll need you to do this for both 1992 and 1996. I'll send you the file I have below. You may have to do the same for 2000 and 2004, but I don't know yet. Hopefully, not. United States - 1992-endorsercheck.zip 1996-BetaEndorserCheck.zip
  4. Basically, @TheLiberalKitten was going through the Governors and Senators, Speakers, in the 1992 and 1996 scenarios to make sure they were accurate. As these scenarios were copied from a later election, many are incorrect, so LibKit was correcting these for me, so I could focus on updating the other aspects of the scenarios. If this is something you feel like you can do with relative swiftness, then LibKit could pass this project on to you.
  5. 1992-2016 What-if candidates

    We should keep this on topic or Anthony will shut this down @Patine @ThePotatoWalrus
  6. 1992-2016 What-if candidates

    $10 billion in the bank is a kind of success, but it doesn't mean the person is overall successful. Among fellow billionaires (his peers), he might seem even more unsuccessful. How come Trump doesn't have $25 billion by now, or $50 billion. But again, that's all about monetary and financial success. He's had numerous bankruptcys and failed side projects, all rather embarrassing. I'd say a small business owner that has never had to declare bankruptcy, has been in business as long as Trump, and has received mostly positive remarks on both his/her character, has been honest in their trade and interactions with persons and fellow business owners has been much more successful than Trump. Money is only one sign of success, and for some it may be a rather minor form of success. I better mark of success is avoiding major mistakes, and that is also just one sign of success, but I think one that is a better measure for success than money.
  7. England 1640

    That's true, but it was still a major issue. So many people migrated from 1620-1640 ("The Great Migration"), that the country was considering efforts to discourage people from leaving. Colonial policy would be based on how much autonomy these places should have, in the realm of defense, religion, and economics/trade.
  8. @TheLiberalKitten I'm not sure if you've gotten your computer fixed, but I'll be working on scenarios all day tomorrow. If I get on a roll, I might have several of them finished.
  9. 1992-2016 What-if candidates

    Hes also been more of a failure than 99.9% of the population...he has the wealth and influence to be at the top of either category. His real estate blunders in the 80s and 90s are among the highest profile real estate blunders in US history. This was also how it was presented in the late 80s and 90s, it's not just a recent spin on it.
  10. England 1640

    I'd definitely play this one if it's made well. Colonial policy, and public entertainment could be issues. Relation w/ France, 30 years war, Irish policy, rights of Catholics, relations w/ spain
  11. What if Poll for historical scenarios

    @Patine and @jvikings1 How about I do just this then, lower charisma by 1, lower ground support, lower fundraising. This, I think, would allow the what-if candidate to be used for a non-consecutive run, or for a 3rd or 4th term in office. These drops, to me, would reflect the desire that a huge portion of the party would likely want someone new (or not attached to a loss). I'll keep integrity and corruption at that candidate's default.
  12. *Sen. Kamala Harris-CA, age 53 *Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom-CA, age 50 (running for governor in 2018) Sen. Tammy Duckworth-IL, age 49 *Sen. Cory Booker-NJ, age 48 *Sen. Martin Heinrich-NM, age 46 Sen. Chris Murphy-CT, age 44 *Rep. Seth Moulton-MA, age 39 Rep. Joe Kennedy III-MA, age 37 *Rep. Tulsi Gabbard-HI, age 36 These are the politicians that I could see have any semblance of success in 2020, if the chose to run. I think Heinrich and Moulton would be the most likely to pick up Trump's demographic of whites with no college education. The others would garner more excitement than Clinton could, even Booker, who has been moving more and more towards the left, which is an obvious clue for a primary run. He's thinking of the general election as well, as he's been less likely to attack Trump than other possible candidates moving to the left.
×