Jump to content
270soft Forum

Version 1.6.0.6 of President Forever 2008 + Primaries Released!


admin_270

Recommended Posts

Palin at 5 charisma?!

Cause of course she was just great during that interview with Katie Couric!

And the way that, that was one of like two interviews she has done and refuses to talk to the media 99.8% of the time, oh, ya! Cause of course she wants to show off her skills.

Seriously theoryspark. SERIOUSLY.

And then you have Biden at three all, when he has over a decade more experience than MCCAIN! And has just as much leadership, and is arguably just as charasmatic as Palin.

Link to post
Share on other sites

True, her debating skill should also be low. Her charisma is about a 4 I think. Integrity should be at a 1, she's clueless, and whatever McCain tells her to say, she says, but most of the accusations are lies...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Except in this case, integrity, like charisma, leadership, etc. is generally how a person is seen by voters. An honest candidate could of got involved in a horrible scandal unwillingly, but their integrity would still suffer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Palin's Issue Familiarity is at 2, in both the default and Wonk Edition 2008 scenarios.

I think that doesn't fall under charisma, it falls under issue knowledge. She's decently charismatic I guess (should get a 3), but issue familiarity should be at 2.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that the problems she had in her interviews weren't related to her charisma, but to her issue familiarity and the training she had been given by McCain's campaign. Her Charisma rating is meant to reflect the incredible popularity she has while campaigning (drawing crowds much larger than McCain could), as well as her "folksy" appeal - in particular in the debates.

Biden's longer time spent in the Senate does not automatically translate into a higher experience rating. By that argument, a Senator Byrd or Thurmond should have an Experience rating of 5 or something. Arguably, the marginal benefits of experience in the Senate or Congress diminish at some point. A President who has served a term and been in the Senate, for example, should have a higher Experience rating than almost any Senator, regardless of how long the Senator has been serving. Someone who has run large companies should have a higher Experience rating than someone who has not, all other things equal. McCain's experience leading a fighter squadron, for example, fits into this sort of category, as well as his almost successful challenge to Bush in 2000. 'Experience' doesn't refer simply to time doing things related to politics, but what they did during that time and other related things.

Palin at 5 charisma?!

Cause of course she was just great during that interview with Katie Couric!

And the way that, that was one of like two interviews she has done and refuses to talk to the media 99.8% of the time, oh, ya! Cause of course she wants to show off her skills.

Seriously theoryspark. SERIOUSLY.

And then you have Biden at three all, when he has over a decade more experience than MCCAIN! And has just as much leadership, and is arguably just as charasmatic as Palin.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nixon with charisma? I could rule the universe!

I think, perhaps, we need to define Integrity more tightly. If 1 means you slept with a live boy or dead girl, 2 is Watergate, and 3 is unethical abuse of power it feels a little off. It would certainly mean a lot more 4 and 5 ratings for other candidates.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Futurama's the bomb :D

But the whole troopergate thing hasn't been proven. Also in response I could argue that Obama should get a two as well. After all right after he became a senator his wife's was given a pay raise from about 100 to 300 thousand dollars. Soon after Obama requested earmarks for that same hospital that just gave his wife a pay raise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would interpret a 1 in Integrity as either

a ) currently involved in a major scandal (e.g. if Watergate was live in October '72); or

b ) candidate is linked to terrorism (e.g. Gerry Adams).

If 3 is the average politician, then you have to allow one or two big scandals that worked out badly for them. I mean, McCain would still be about 4, right?

Link to post
Share on other sites
If 3 is the average politician, then you have to allow one or two big scandals that worked out badly for them. I mean, McCain would still be about 4, right?

Keating Five, of course, although to be fair it was partially because they needed a Republican to hang with some Democrats.

If we're using that scale, though, where 1 is basically embroiled in Watergate is there any candidate in any of the official scenarios that deserves a 1? Is there anybody that deserves a 5? Does it cover just the politician, or does it cover the campaign as well? George HW Bush was a pretty good guy, but Atwater sure ran a nasty campaign for him in '88 (which he signed off on, obviously, but nonetheless). Or Kennedy. Ran an above-the-board campaign in '80, but had Chappaquiddick hanging over his head. And on and on, for both sides of the aisle.

Shrug. Who knows. It doesn't matter hugely in-game (effects mostly % chance of researching & % chance of a good scandal, if I recall correctly) so I don't consider that important an issue and—frankly—it's one of those things partisans are never going to agree on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You should get an email with a link to both the latest Campaigns Forever and the latest President Forever looking like this:

campaigns forever:

Link: http://dl.filekicker.com/pd/blanked/campaigns4E.exe

Keycode: 000000-000000-000000-000000-000000

president forever 2008:

Link: http://dl.filekicker.com/pd/blanked/p4e8_full.exe

Keycode: 000000-000000-000000-000000-000000

If you didn't get President Forever are you sure you used the right email address on the update form?

This game seems kind of unbalanced. I spacebared through a campaign as the constitution guy and it ended up with Obama defeating Gullini 59%-39%

For starters, what states did Obama win? Anything outside of the 400 ish upper limit he has against McCain in real life (assuming that all toss-ups go to Obama, and he also flips both Georgia and W.V.) I would be a little concerned about.

To be fair I could see Guiliani getting 39% of the vote (although 59% is high for Obama), after all McCain is currently hovering in the low to mid 40s (with a top peak of 46) and Guiliani isn't liked by the base, and failed to win independents in the primaries.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...