Jump to content
270soft Forum

lizphairphreak

Members
  • Content Count

    94
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by lizphairphreak

  1. lizphairphreak

    Party Needs "Declared" Candidate

    In the past, I was able to play as Not Seeking or Undecided as a third party candidate, but now after updating, it says that a candidate has to be "Declared"-- is this a part of the update or something I can get around? I really enjoyed playing as Not Seeking and seeing how I could build a third party campaign later in a primary season.
  2. lizphairphreak

    Don't Count Out Gillibrand

    Kirsten Gillibrand has officially announced her candidacy, which we all knew was coming in-- I think-- December of 2016? Full disclosure: I'm a big fan. But... She's polling low. She can't tweet anything without an army of trolls attacking it, whether it's because of Franken or because of those against her overtly pro-woman platform and history. She didn't even trend at number 1 on Twitter when she announced-- at best, she trended below Brexit in the United States. It doesn't look promising. And again, I'm a fan. But... don't count her out. Gillibrand has a habit of making things work out, even when it's quiet, or even silent. Gillibrand won a House seat in a Conservative upstate New York district in 2006, being the first Dem in many years to win the seat. Yes, this was a wave year for the Democrats, but then she went on to win by a large margin in 2008 despite her opponent spending massively to take the seat back for the GOP. Also notable, Gillibrand as a first-time candidate in 2006 convinced the Democratic Party to pay attention to her race and invest in it. In 2008, Gillibrand was appointed to replace Hillary Clinton as US Senator for New York. This was notable for many reasons; she was just about to be entering her second term as a congresswoman, she was from upstate, she had absolutely minimal name recognition, and she was up against several heavy-hitters who had potential to be more popular choices. But Gillibrand was able to-- very quietly-- convince the governor to appoint her. Early on, she was insulted (compared to Tracy Flick from the movie Election) and disregarded in many ways. She went on to win a special election, as well as the 2012 election, with ease. Gillibrand was instrumental in repealing Don't Ask Don't Tell-- despite not necessarily getting credit-- and has been one of the leading figures in moving the needle around sexual assault and sexual harassment in congress, in the military, and around the country. She has a handy talking point of being, statistically, the most anti-Trump senator (which can counter call-outs for a semi Conservative record in the House.) She was also the first sitting senator to call to abolish ICE, a leftist talking point, and did so in a way that could also communicate with centrists. What I'm getting at here is: Kirsten Gillibrand is very good at politics. She has a pretty decent-sized campaign war chest because of her fundraising skills, and I think she has the ability to change the narrative around her and that will play out soon. Also, not for nothing, but she won her 2018 electoral campaign by almost 70%-- she's popular in New York. If she is able to win NY during the primaries by a solid margin, that's a good chunk of delegates. Play that into support she's built in Michigan, Wisconsin, Nevada, NH from her 2018 campaigning and I think we're seeing where she has massive potential to make a big dent. Anyway, those are my thoughts right now, and we will see how this plays out!
  3. lizphairphreak

    Don't Count Out Gillibrand

    I think this shows a good example of how maybe she is being under-estimated. You take her advocacy for sexual assault victims as a positive, but a smaller one in consideration of her ideological shift, while for some, her advocacy on that issue is a major positive that outweighs some other criticisms. The reason I say she's under-estimated here is because I think that as culture around sexual assault continues changing, she'll pick up support as she gets to share her record; also, people who have been survivors, I think, may be likely to support her and I think that is a larger group than we realize. Of course, I might be wrong, but I do think that her record on sexual assault is going to be a much bigger pro/draw than necessarily appreciated right now.
  4. lizphairphreak

    Don't Count Out Gillibrand

    "Crushed" is a big word when she was able to fare pretty well in her 2018 election. Not perfect, of course, but she was able to take back some counties that Clinton lost in '16. I also doubt she'd match this margin in a general election because I think some of her success came from campaigning in every county (something she couldn't do if she had to also travel the entire country) but I think this shows she would likely do quite well in a Democratic primary when she doesn't need GOP votes. I saw a tweet that said "for all her positives and negatives, GIllibrand is kind of like Hillary if Hillary had had her own Hillary" which I don't disagree with. However, her going after Bill Clinton will be a great talking point for surrogates if he calls her this.
  5. lizphairphreak

    Don't Count Out Gillibrand

    I think that's a pretty limited and potentially masculinist view of what ideology should be. Sexual assault and harassment is a major issue that's been shoved aside by most people in power (even people that I do really like) but Gillibrand took that on from her early days of being in the senate. Being willing to then make that fight against your own party and the military shows that it's more than just some political opportunism. Everything else surrounding her ideology seems to focus on women and family, which can seem out of place with other political policy agendas, but I don't think that makes it any less worthy (or less politically viable-- elections can be won on local levels by focusing on family issues that may otherwise not be represented by major policy moves) Total sidenote but I wish someone would run on a transportation platform. Amtrak has a monopoly on rail, and Greyhound/Megabus are... so bad. I would love a national politician to take on transit. Gillibrand probably wouldn't be the best because of the MTA falling apart when she was technically in power in NY (though not working within the state gov,) but still... People would listen to that candidate because transit issues are real.
  6. lizphairphreak

    Awards Show (Oscars) Campaign

    I've been thinking a lot about making a custom campaign for the Oscar for Best Picture, now that we're into awards season. I'm not really sure if it would be possible in this game, but thought it could be a cute concept... I don't have Congress Infinity and maybe that engine would be better for this, but. I was thinking that it could be the films themselves as candidates, and then have the stars / directors as surrogates (maybe set the stamina for the "candidates" aka films really low, to cut down on rallies led by the films) who could do the "barnstorming" aka promotion. For the issues, it could be subject matter or different forms of production (sound, costumes, etc) and lock the issues so there wouldn't be any shifting of the platform, since you can't really change what's good about a film after it's done. News stories could be like real-life thinkpieces, so that a film like Green Book might do well on, say, "race issues" for a bit but then as articles come out about it's handling of race issues, that could impact momentum. I also don't think I'd use primaries, instead just making each film its own party and then turning films on or off depending on what the final nominations for the Oscars are. What I'm struggling with is deciding what to do about the other awards leading up to the Oscars and how to weigh them. Like, should I consider each awards show as a "state" and just stagger state votes over time so they count as some votes in the final race? Should I just have them as news stories? In that case, how can I preserve some level of unpredictability-- wouldn't that mean the game would always be the same if they're pre-programmed stories? And then getting even deeper, what about acting and directing categories? How could those play into the game-- and beyond that, what about if someone wins an acting/directing award but the film itself loses (ie, Glenn Close winning for The Wife or Alfonso Cuaron for Roma)? Maybe I'm just writing to myself here, but does anyone have any thoughts on how this kind of a concept could work, or would even be interested in seeing it attempted?
  7. lizphairphreak

    Awards Show (Oscars) Campaign

    Couldn't that enhance the game-- pick an underdog movie and see if you can sway enough Academy voters to see its value? then of course, your favorite movie will become a future template to make future cash cows.......
  8. lizphairphreak

    Awards Show (Oscars) Campaign

    Other thing, I would probably make each "region" one of the branches of membership in the Academy: Actors Casting Directors (created July 31, 2013)[46] Cinematographers Costume Designers (created from former Art Directors Branch)[47] Designers (created from former Art Directors Branch)[47] Directors Documentary Executives Film Editors Make-up Artists and Hairstylists Music Producers Public Relations Short Films and Feature Animation Sound Visual Effects Writers So in this case, I wouldn't make the other awards shows into their own races/elections... maybe I could make those into debates?
  9. lizphairphreak

    Exploratory Committees

    An article from Vox came out that goes into detail about exploratory committees, which was helpful for me (even though I felt I vaguely knew before): https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/1/4/18165576/elizabeth-warren-exploratory-committee-2020-presidential-campaign with all this in mind, I’m wondering if expanding the functions a candidate can use in the game while technically just “exploring” would be better. I like the mechanic of Not Seeking to Undecided to Official though the game is so restricted in the aundecided phase that I’m not sure you’re as able to accomplish what a real life candidate would do while “exploring.” Thoughts?
  10. lizphairphreak

    Exploratory Committees

    I like that idea a lot, though maybe not force to choose between historical and modern (so that we could see a “compromise” candidate for a modern election too)... I was actually thinking about that the other day. What if you played as Not Seeking and used media to boost your relations with all the other candidates and then declared for the last couple of primaries, so you could go into the convention and potentially be able to take delegates because of your positive relations?
  11. lizphairphreak

    Taylor Swift 2020?

    Added Taylor Swift as a potential third party candidate into VCCzar's 2020 scenario, despite her age. Used this map of her popularity to make some (very!) loose percentages by state. Starting a playthrough now, starting at January 1, 2020. Swift has good or very good relationships with most candidates aside from Trump, who she has a "bad" relationship with. The candidates I have on are Trump and Kasich for the GOP, Jill Stein for the Greens, and Biden, Sanders, Harris, Booker, Gillibrand, Warren, and Gabbard for the Dems. Swift is beginning at a 13.6% nationally (the game did some math with the semi-nonsense I gave) and is Not Seeking. Will update if this turns out fun.
  12. lizphairphreak

    Who SHOULD run for Senate in 2020?

    If we're having Manning run, I stand by my Taylor-Swift-Will-Be-Old-Enough idea
  13. lizphairphreak

    Taylor Swift 2020?

    So, after today's news from Tennessee, if anyone has a TN 2020 senatorial campaign in the works... Swift will be 30 next year and therefore old enough to become a senator.. just a thought.......
  14. lizphairphreak

    Taylor Swift 2020?

    The popularity density map came from a New York Times article that measured several musicians' popularity by geography.
  15. lizphairphreak

    VP Disappears

    I was playing a third party candidate last night, who was able to get Elizabeth Warren to accept the VP slot and start campaigning, but then a few weeks later, Warren was gone from the surrogate menu and my candidate also didn't have the option to view-- or pick!-- a VP. Additionally, the VP debates just didn't happen despite the fact the Dem and Rep nominees have candidates. It was odd, does anyone know why that is? Similarly, I was able to get my candidate to get Biden to agree to drop out and become a surrogate (he was 2nd place to Bernie) but then he never became a surrogate, and also kept getting delegates... but my PIPs were gone. Just wanted to see if anyone else had similar issues or knew why this may be happening.
  16. lizphairphreak

    VP Disappears

    I was playing Independent (I think adapted from Bloomberg-- I made my own candidate) and it was vcczar's 2020 scenario.
  17. lizphairphreak

    Taylor Swift 2020?

    Played this scenario again last night, this time having Swift launch an exploratory committee in Fall 2019 and launch a campaign in mid January 2020. I more than doubled her electoral count to 124, carrying all of the same states as before aside from her home state of Tennessee (a painful loss, really.) She was also able to pick up South Dakota, Nebraska, Wyoming, and Oklahoma from the red column, and then swept up some blue states, including Minnesota (which became a base of her support in this round,) Maine, Colorado, Washington, and Michigan. Arkansas also fell to her and tended to be a competition between her and Sanders cause Trump didn't seem to campaign there. She came within striking distance in Wisconsin, Arizona, Texas, and New York (due to last minute major surrogate support from endorsers.) The polls misled me to spend a lot more time in Michigan and Washington as they were constantly tied, but she ended up taking both by a very healthy margin. She was also winning in Texas and Tennessee for a majority of the game but the Trump campaign was able to pull them out of her hands in the last few weeks (not really sure how, frankly.) Wisconsin was also leaning to Swift for most of the second half of the game, but Sanders ended up winning by a few percentage points. The end result is that Trump won 216 electoral votes, Sanders 198, and Swift 124. Because the Dems have the house, Bernie was elected-- he also won the popular vote. Trump narrowly edged out Swift for second place in the popular vote. I learned from my mistakes last time and had Swift avoid TV ads for a long while, but then unleash massive TV ad blitzes during the RNC and DNC conventions. Doing this helped her to avoid seeing eroding polls as a result of convention bumps. This game was also notable because at one point (a few weeks before the first debate) Trump's campaign went into a downward spiral and his polling numbers fell to 16, almost blocking him from the debate; he also saw his support erode entirely in almost every state except for Indiana, Kansas, and a few other Southern states. What was bewildering is that he was able to come back from this and come to win the most electoral votes. Anyway I enjoy this scenario and will play again at some point!
  18. lizphairphreak

    House of Cards

    I really wish Rachel succeeded at the end of season 2, I thought he was such a run-of-the-mill "male psychopath" type character, the only thing interesting was how he would get addicted to things/people... which then didn't make sense by the end because he and Claire had always had a distance that the showrunners suddenly pretended didn't exist by having him kill Frank (and try to kill her.) It was so nonsensical.
  19. lizphairphreak

    House of Cards

    The last season touched on interesting things and then threw them out. It was clear they had a planned showdown between Frank and Claire, and then ultimately gave the Frank role in that conflict to Doug (a character I never liked.) It would've worked so much better if the ending they had was the end of episode 4 and then there were 4 episodes of Claire actually being president.
  20. lizphairphreak

    Unable to load saved games

    I had a similar issue recently. Not exactly the same, but I was able to save a game, load it, but then couldn't save it again (and auto-save glitched every turn)
  21. lizphairphreak

    How'd your state races/local races go (If your involved)

    Agreed with @Patine that I hate the idea of "safe seats." I also loved Cynthia Nixon on a personal level and do genuinely think she would've been a great governor, but man, I wish someone who had experience in office had the guts to take on Cuomo. RE: Carpetbagging... I feel weird saying this but I don't really have a problem with carpetbagging on a conceptual level. I think this is partially because I grew up in a small town with well-entrenched families, but my parents had only moved there a few years before I was born and were able to connect with the "townies" and become public figures in town in an authentic way. I know that carpetbagging isn't always like that, but I think there's something to be said of an outsider who moves into a community and is able to build connections with people around them... Not sure if this is making sense, and kind of a tangent.
  22. lizphairphreak

    How'd your state races/local races go (If your involved)

    I'm in NYC, so most of the elections I was a part of more or less were decided in the primary. I volunteered for Cynthia Nixon, and in turn the Working Families Party, so our results weren't ideal for statewide office: Cuomo beat Nixon, Hochul beat Williams, James beat Teachout... but we were able to boot out most of the IDC, and their challengers all went on to win in the general (despite ballot issues, where the former IDC member stayed on the ballot on certain lines despite having conceded.) I also did phonebanking for Florida's elections, and... lol that's still TBD!
  23. lizphairphreak

    Taylor Swift 2020?

    This has also reinvigorated my interest in this and now I want to play this scenario again, but start it earlier and probably have Swift solidly in the race by the end of January to see if she can pick up any more support..
  24. lizphairphreak

    Taylor Swift 2020?

    You could throw him into a 2020 scenario (like I did here) though I'm not sure there's any data to go by (and the map I used for Swift's percentage was also shaky at best anyway) I doubt he'd challenge Trump at this point tho..
  25. lizphairphreak

    Rank the 2020 Candidates in primary strength

    This is more what I mean, @vcczar but I accidentally hit submit too soon and then got totally sidetracked-- apologies. Before 2016, Hillary was consistently FAR ahead (I believe at least in the 40s) in 2014 and early 2015, compared to Biden in the mid-20s (with a close challenger in Sanders.) The argument could also then be made that Biden has under-performed in past presidential primaries, and that Sanders may have more baggage due to Clinton supporters' annoyance with him (as compared to when he entered in 2015 a relative unknown.) I don't think these polls count for much before people actually start to announce, particularly considering some precedent.
×