Jump to content
270soft Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Somberg

  • Rank
    Political Guru

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. So I don't know if this is because I edited the scenario myself and something went wrong (probably the case) but I'm getting a weird glitch in the primaries of an unofficial campaign where four candidates have their polling set to 25% while all of the others have theirs set to 0 and it registers as there only being 1 delegate up for grabs between them. It only happens to certain states and disappears after a few turns but I really want to figure out a way to fix it so if there's anyone who knows what's going I'd appreciate the help.
  2. I'm under the impression that Wagner is as centrist as Trump appeared during the 2016 election, which is to say he only appears centrist because he's populist and not a more standard conservative like Pat Toomey. Toomey also did well there because of his support from gun control groups and figures (Gabby Giffords and Michael Bloomberg both supported him) and the potential for people to have voted for Toomey because of the expectation that Hillary was going to win and that she needed a check on her power. Considering the fact that Chester appears to be shifting toward the Dems long-term and Wagner is aligning himself with Trump I don't imagine he'd do well there. Once again PI can throw up funky results sometimes so if this is one of those cases it's fine but I don't see him doing to well in any of the Philly suburban counties that Hillary won in 2016. Appreciate the work you are doing on this, though! And yeah this is likely the worst case scenario for Wagner but not out of the realm of possibility.
  3. That result at the county level around Philly is very funky. No way is "the Earth is getting warmer because it's moving toward the Sun" Wagner winning Chester, Montgomery, or Bucks counties. Of course PI can be weird with this stuff but those county results are still very strange. Otherwise looks like a solid scenario with the only changes needing to be made regarding turnout numbers since they are too high. Good job!
  4. Don't think I'll be doing 1992. This required too much time and effort and brought out unpleasantness from me that I didn't even realize existed. Don't know if it was from stress, taking this way too seriously, or being drained by the constant effort that had to be put in. Either way I don't think I want to go through that again. Was fun for a time but became tedious by the end of my time participating in the game. Did inspire me to create an alt history timeline on another forum, though. At least that came out of it. Also best of luck to @Sami and @Reagan04 in the 1988 election whenever it comes to its final conclusion.
  5. No problem! Glad to provide suggestions to improve the scenario.
  6. I must respectfully disagree with you as there's just way too many indicators that Dems are in for a very good year to ignore in my opinion. Almost a record number of Republican retirements in the House, consistent Dem over performance in special elections, strong fundraising by Dem candidates that is eclipsing even GOP incumbents, record number of Dems running for office, and poll after poll showing a wide enthusiasm gap between Dems and GOP. Republicans tax message is not resonating and the only thing they have going for them is the economy. They still have a chance of holding on to the House but I would say that Dems are more likely to take the House than not. The Senate is an entirely different story and I would say that GOP is likely to hold the majority after November but it could be an incredibly slim one (50-50 split is very much possible). Likely that 1-2 Dems in red states are going to lose re-election at the most but further gains are likely to be limited for the GOP by the poor national environment for them. Nevada is a toss-up, yeah, but this is a swing state that voted for Hillary and the left is very energized so I'd give them the benefit of the doubt in my opinion. Also the scenario says that the Dems take back the House and Senate so what I said was who would plausibly win if that were the case.
  7. Looked at the scenario and have quite a few suggestions. For candidates, I would suggest adding Jason Kander for the Democrats. He may have only served as Missouri Secretary of State but his Let America Vote group has feet on the ground in several early primary states (Iowa, New Hampshire, and Nevada) and it he seems to be hiring some people you would hire if you're thinking of running for president so he should be a potential candidate. As for endorsers there's plenty of suggestions I'd make for changes if the scenario is supposed to be plausible based on how things are currently shaping up. There don't seem to be many missing but here's who I think would more likely be the endorsers for each state: Governors: Steve Sisolak (D-NV) or Chris Giunchigliani (D-NV) - depends on who you'd rather have but Sisolak would probably be the better choice, find it hard to see Laxalt ending up as governor right now despite polling because of NV being a swing state and the pro-Dem environment Rich Cordray (D-OH) or Mike DeWine (R-OH) - depends on how you want it to go Cary Kennedy (D-CO) Tim Walz (D-MN) Tony Evers (D-WI) Gwen Graham (D-FL) or Philip Levine (D-FL) - depends on who you'd prefer but both would likely be victorious Dems if that's what you're going for Michelle Lujan Grisham (D-NM) Jonathan Harris (D-CT) or Susan Bysiewcz (D-CT) - not an expert on CT politics so just picked two of the candidates based on hunches but should likely be one of the current candidates at very least, also chance of this being a Republican Mike Parson (R-MO) - hard to see Greitens surviving until 2019 so likely will end up leaving office one way or another to be replaced with his Lt. Gov. Senate: Jacky Rosen (D-NV) - hard for me to see Heller being re-elected considering the national environment and the fact that Hillary won the state I'd say Rosen is likely to win Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND) or Kevin Cramer (R-ND) - if you want it to be Republican then pick Cramer but the backstory (if it's still the Dems narrowly retaking the Senate) won't work if you have her lose Phil Bredesen (D-TN) - If you want to have the back story be that Dems narrowly take back the Senate then Bredesen winning in TN is a must, he also has had good polls showing him way ahead and cross-over support so this would be plausible Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) - she's pretty much a shoo-in for re-election at this point I'd say and Becerra isn't in the race at all For additional endorsers I'd suggest adding Fmr. Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI). Other than that if you want to put members of party leadership in the House then I'd add Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD), and Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-SC) although the Dem leadership could end up changing between now and August 2019. I'd also suggest having Cynthia Nixon (D-NY) be a potential endorser from NY de to her high-profile gubernatorial run this year and existing celebrity status. Also you have Cathy McMorris-Rodgers as an Oregon endorser when she should be a Washington one.
  8. OOC: May Ferraro speak at the DNC as the runner-up for the nomination?
  9. OOC: Well that certainly makes Byrd's removal more sensible now.
  10. OOC: I will certainly consider it if I feel like contributing to this again in some limited capacity and reprising my role as Ferraro. All I wanted to say was that Gore making Ted Kennedy Senate Majority Leader is a highly unusual move by a presidential nominee and, really, I don't know how realistic it is to have something like that happen. It certainly would rankle many moderate/conservative southern Dems who could very well see it as a "coup" by the more liberal members of the party and Gore himself. I'm sure there was no malicious intent behind it and Kennedy is a respected figure but forcing someone out as Majority Leader in the middle of a legislative session doesn't happen, really, without a very, very good reason and there are many people who are loyal to Byrd who would be very, very displeased by that move. Really, not even sure how the requisite 51 votes were arrived at to make Kennedy Senate Majority Leader in the first place but it happened and people are responding to it so not much can be done now. I just found this to be a highly unusual move and certainly one that is extremely controversial and likely to cause division within the Democratic Party which is already playing itself out with Byrd switching parties. Certainly wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility that he's not the only southern Dem who might switch parties because of this move.
  11. OOC: Good to know there aren't any hard feelings about how I departed from this RP. It really was unacceptable behavior on my part but I did need the space from this RP going into finals as it was becoming too much of a distraction. Terrible that is how it happened, though, and I do regret how I acted toward Sami as it was not respectful nor polite. I do hope 1992 proves to better because of the experiences from this RP for you and everyone else involved. Hopefully I will have the time to dedicate to it because this certainly became more demanding for me as it progressed and there was more to be expected from me in terms of endorsements and events. I'm also not sure if you'd like any comments from me about something that happened recently in here RP-wise seeing as I'm no longer in this ICly. Don't want to overstep my boundaries and be seen as interfering after I departed.
  12. OOC: You know your assessment of my public conduct in here is probably accurate but it stings to be viewed as extremely hostile, I stayed silent on certain things that didn't need to be spoken and took other things to convos. Never intended to be hostile at all and I worked to change my behavior but clearly still had difficulty meeting the expectations of this RP in terms of conduct. Not gonna lie when I say I lost my cool way too many times in here for my own good, came in with the wrong mindset and then got way more annoyed with how the campaign was being conducted then I should have. Looking back on it a lot of it was just stupid stuff and me getting frustrated and then getting fanciful notions about what was going on that were almost certainly false. I do think there was too much hostility in here from multiple people, though, myself included and not enough communication. Hopefully it will get better for 1992 when there are more people handling the different functions of the RP and some new people in the mix. I also don't think I ever apologized to @Sami for flaming out at him about that ad. Sorry about that, man, lost my temper and got way more frustrated and annoyed than I should have, probably a combo of stress, being too attached to Ferraro, and feeling that the RP was starting to become a burden as finals were approaching. Certainly was not warranted at all and I got ideas about what you were doing that weren't right at all nor fair to you as a player and I apologize for that. I do hope me saying something isn't problematic, I don't know if being kicked out of the RP extended to OOC comments or just being an active participant ICly in the RP. If it means complete silence then I will refrain from posting any further. Just thought I'd say something to clear things up and respond to your point about hostility on here, which really has been more than it should have been for something like this that is just supposed to be for fun.
  13. Ferraro Announces the Suspension of Her Campaign for President “After much discussion with family, friends, and advisors I’m here to announce that I will be suspending my campaign for president to spend more time with my family who have been put under great stress during this campaign. I do not make this decision lightly, nor do I believe this is the end for myself or for women all across this country. This campaign has already made history, it has already inspired women all across this country to dream big. While we have yet to break that glass ceiling we have put more cracks in it and I have no doubt that we have lain the groundwork for future women who wish to seek the highest office in the land. I would also like to wish the best of luck to Sen. Gore in his campaign for president and hope he will not forgot the issues that have been brought up during this campaign, issues that matter to many people within our party and across the country.”
  14. OOC: Ok, I'm sorry if this sounds rude but I'm just getting extremely irritated that you are mocking Ferraro for criticizing your policies once again. Like, ffs she is not even saying you are wrong on crime like before just that they are inadequate which is a much lighter criticism. It drives me nuts when you do this and try to paint her as dividing the party because THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH CRITICIZING YOUR OPPONENTS POLICIES. I'm sorry but this really gets on my nerves every time you do this.
  15. OOC: Was distracted by the Alabama Senate race, will post shorter than usual events. Walter Huddleston Joins Ferraro in Rural Kentucky; Talks Rural Healthcare Huddleston: “The state of healthcare in rural parts of Kentucky is worrying but Gerry Ferraro wants to work to fix it. She’ll increase funding for rural hospitals and clinics and establish a program to bring qualified doctors and nurses to these facilities. It’s time to improve the quality of rural healthcare and only Gerry has promised to do that.” Martha Collins Campaigns with Ferraro in Hopkinsville, Kentucky; Discusses Education Collins: “I did much in my time as Governor to reform Kentucky’s education system, now Gerry Ferraro wants to work to improve education for all Americans which a bold set of policies: universal preschool, higher academic standards for math and English, greater funding for math and science courses, and a more equitable funding system for our schools. She wants to make sure our children get the education they need and wants me to oversee these policies. I hope you’ll join me in supporting Gerry so we can prepare our children for the jobs of the future and in helping me become our next Secretary of Education.” Reubin Askew Joins Ferraro in Miramar, Florida; Speaks About Restoring Faith in Government Ferraro: “Fmr. Gov. Askew fought as governor to clean up Florida’s government and make sure it was working for the people, now I want to do that as president. That’s why I’m going to implement a two-year ban on lobbying after leaving office for members of Congress, require full financial disclosure, and pass campaign finance reform legislation. It’s time to bring back good government and restore public faith in government and as president you bet I will do that.” Lawton Chiles Stumps with Ferraro in Jacksonville, Florida; Discusses Regulations Chiles: “Gerry is committed to removing unnecessary, redundant, or out-of-date regulations to make our government more efficient. She will establish a task force headed by her vice president to do just this because she believes in making our government work more effectively. This doesn’t mean she is against regulations but it means she wants to make sure we have the right regulations and don’t have regulations just for regulations sake.” The Ferraro Campaign Airs a TV Ad in the South *Clips of police officers arresting criminals appears* Narrator: “Our nation is facing a crime epidemic like it’s never seen before. The rate of violent crimes has increased by 30% since 1978 and it shows no signs of slowing down. We need a president who is prepared to take on this issue, who has the experience necessary to get tough on crime and make our streets safer.” *A picture of Al Gore appears* Narrator: “Sen. Gore has put forward policies that are inadequate at solving the problem of violent crimes on the streets. They will only fight crime after the fact, not address the problem at the root. And he believes that governors should be able to send in the National Guard to deal with crime instead of trusting the capabilities of police departments to do their jobs. He wants a short-term solution for a long term problem. We can do better than that.” *Pictures of Ferraro from her days as a prosecutor appears* Narrator: “Gerry Ferraro had first-hand experience locking up criminals as an Assistant DA for Queens and helped put away rapists, child abusers, and spousal abusers. She knows what it means to get tough on crime and how to improve law enforcement tactics that will work to prevent crime, not just lock-up criminals after they commit it.” *Clips of Ferraro meeting with police officers and community leaders are shown* Narrator: “Gerry wants to find local solutions to the problem of crime, that is why she supports a community policing initiative that will work to forge partnerships between law enforcement officials and community members to fight crime in their neighborhoods and make improvements that will keep kids away from a life of crime. She wants to increase the number of police officers on the streets by 100,000 to provide departments with the resources they need to more effectively fight crime, to get tougher on sentencing, and to work to break up drug trafficking rings that contribute to the violent crime on our streets. It’s time to make our streets safer for our children and to end the crime epidemic once-and-for-all. Gerry Ferraro: Finally a tough Democrat.” *A picture of Ferraro smiling appears* Narrator: “Paid for by Ferraro for America.”
  • Create New...