Jump to content
270soft Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Patine

United State 1936

Recommended Posts

It's fine for me, I'm worried about the lack of events. :P

Did I forget events? I'll have some up in a bit. Any suggestions for possible hypothetical events depending on Long existing?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The potential success of his book "1936:My First Days in the White House," Militarization of the Rhineland, maybe some of Huey's alcohol related escapades. The economy was starting to improve in 1936, just before the recession of 1937.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just played through this a couple of times, and I really like it. Played as FDR vs. Republicans and Long, and just barely managed to win. It was FDR 40.9%, Landon 23.3%, Long 28.8%, Lemke 2%, Thomas 3.9%, Browder 1.1%, Pelley 601 votes; FDR 282, Long 223, Landon 26. I carried MA, CT, NY, NJ, PA, MD, VA, WI, IA, ND, NE, KS, OK, TX, CO, NM, AZ, UT, NV, ID, MT, WA, OR, and CA; Long took MN, MI, IL, IN, OH, WV, KY, TN, MO, AR, LA, MS, AL, GA, FL, SC, and NC; Landon carried ME, NH, VT, RI, DE, SD, and WY. The only real swing state that I won was Pennsylvania, but obviously that's an important one and it was enough.

Then I played as FDR vs. Republicans and no Long, with the goal, obviously, of winning every state. I did it, too, but it wasn't easy.

It'd be interesting to see if Landon can win, either in a two- or a three-way matchup. And, is it remotely possible for any of the other Republicans to win the primary?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I played as Huey Long and won.

All the states I won were competitive from the beginning. I tried to win North Dakota and Iowa as well, just in case I lost one state.

I did win the election but not North Dakota or Iowa. I came really close in Iowa though.

HueyLongwins1936-closeststate.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did I forget events? I'll have some up in a bit. Any suggestions for possible hypothetical events depending on Long existing?

I'll think of some events that can include Long, but in the meantime, here are some real-world events that could be included, some of which can influence the race.

March 1 - Hoover Dam completed.

March 7 - Nazi Germany occupies Rhineland.

March 17 - St. Patrick's Day flood in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

April 5 - Tornado hits Tupelo, Mississippi, killing 216.

April 6 - Two tornadoes hit Gainesville, Georgia, killing 203.

April 19 - Arab revolt in Palestine begins.

May 7 - Italy annexes Ethiopia.

May 25 - Remington Rand strike takes place.

July 13 - Heat wave affects Wisconsin, Michigan and Indiana.

July 17 - Spanish Civil War begins.

August 1 - Summer Olympics begin in Berlin, first televised Olympics.

August 3 - Jesse Owens wins 100-meter dash.

October 25 - Rome-Berlin axis formed, creating alliance between Italy and Germany.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These events look awesome. I notice I forgot to do regional issue centres; I'll add those in the next iteration with the events.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just played through this a couple of times, and I really like it. Played as FDR vs. Republicans and Long, and just barely managed to win. It was FDR 40.9%, Landon 23.3%, Long 28.8%, Lemke 2%, Thomas 3.9%, Browder 1.1%, Pelley 601 votes; FDR 282, Long 223, Landon 26. I carried MA, CT, NY, NJ, PA, MD, VA, WI, IA, ND, NE, KS, OK, TX, CO, NM, AZ, UT, NV, ID, MT, WA, OR, and CA; Long took MN, MI, IL, IN, OH, WV, KY, TN, MO, AR, LA, MS, AL, GA, FL, SC, and NC; Landon carried ME, NH, VT, RI, DE, SD, and WY. The only real swing state that I won was Pennsylvania, but obviously that's an important one and it was enough.

Then I played as FDR vs. Republicans and no Long, with the goal, obviously, of winning every state. I did it, too, but it wasn't easy.

It'd be interesting to see if Landon can win, either in a two- or a three-way matchup. And, is it remotely possible for any of the other Republicans to win the primary?

As to whether other Republican candidates in the primaries can win or not, Green, Warren, and Day are definitely not meant to; they're just favourite sons. I imagine a determined and skillful player MAY be able to get the nomination with Knox or Borah, but I haven't actually tried myself.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As to whether other Republican candidates in the primaries can win or not, Green, Warren, and Day are definitely not meant to; they're just favourite sons. I imagine a determined and skillful player MAY be able to get the nomination with Knox or Borah, but I haven't actually tried myself.

I tried as Borah and almost did it. Lost by about a hundred delegates to Landon. Anyway, I am confused as to several factors. The Democratic Party does not have any primaries at all last I checked, but I remember there being at least a couple. Also, it is strange that the Share Our Wealth Party is already carrying most of the states it is aimed at winning, but is not able to expand outside of those states.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried as Borah and almost did it. Lost by about a hundred delegates to Landon. Anyway, I am confused as to several factors. The Democratic Party does not have any primaries at all last I checked, but I remember there being at least a couple. Also, it is strange that the Share Our Wealth Party is already carrying most of the states it is aimed at winning, but is not able to expand outside of those states.

I'll try to win in the primaries against Landon this weekend and see if I can do it.

As for Share Our Wealth, I agree with you - it's too strong in the states I won (nailing them down was easy), and too weak in the rest of the country. The west had a strong populist streak and Texas would be more receptive to Long.

I will look up the Democrats and see what primary dates they had.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll try to win in the primaries against Landon this weekend and see if I can do it.

As for Share Our Wealth, I agree with you - it's too strong in the states I won (nailing them down was easy), and too weak in the rest of the country. The west had a strong populist streak and Texas would be more receptive to Long.

I will look up the Democrats and see what primary dates they had.

I'll make some changes and try to make more states competitive for the Share Our Wealth Party. Also, actual primary dates would be greatly appreciated.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll make some changes and try to make more states competitive for the Share Our Wealth Party. Also, actual primary dates would be greatly appreciated.

In the primaries, Knox won a narrow victory against Borah in Illinois, Borah won versus Lanson in Nebraska. FDR swept both.

http://www-cgi.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1996/analysis/back.time/9604/26/

The California Republican primary apparently elected unpledged delegates to the convention over Alf Landon. Two favorite son candidates ran against FDR in California, Upton Sinclair, winning 11% of the vote, and John S. McGroarty.

Robert Taft was a favorite son candidate in Ohio. Arthur Vandenberg got some votes on the Republican side.

Breckinridge was on the ballot against FDR in only 4 states - Maryland, New Jersey, Ohio and Pennsylvania. FDR's name wasn't on the ballot in New Jersey, and Breckinridge swept it with 81% of the vote (even though FDR ended up winning the delegates). Breckinridge got 15% in Maryland.

Schedule for both parties:

05/19/1936 NJ

05/15/1936 OR

05/12/1936 OH

05/12/1936 WV

05/05/1936 SD

05/05/1936 CA

05/04/1936 MD

04/28/1936 MA

04/14/1936 IL

03/10/1936 NH

04/07/1936 WI

04/14/1936 IL

04/14/1936 NE

04/28/1936 MA

04/28/1936 PA

04/07/1936 WI

This information, and more, was all found at http://www.ourcampaigns.com/home.html

As for Share Our Wealth, I think the states I won in the scenario should be a bit less likely to go to the party, whereas other states in the South and West should be slightly more likely to go towards the party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After many tries, I managed to win the Republican nomination as William Borah.

BorahwinsRepublicannomination1936.jpg

All of the states I won were in my strategy, with the exception of Arkansas which I narrowly lost.

I dug up scandals on Landon constantly. Green dropped out just before South Dakota's primary, and I won it.

After the California and Ohio primaries were done, I used all my PIPs to get both Warren and Day to endorse me. There was only a 30-some odd percent chance each of them would endorse me, so I really lucked out. I would've barely won without Warren, but if Day had endorsed Landon I would've lost.

Now I'm going to see if I have any chance of defeating FDR. Probably not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I managed to beat FDR as Borah. It is not easy.

The only way I could even make it a race was with Huey Long also running. Even still, it took me several tries.

There were two oddities/glitches in the results.

Lemke got about 26% of the vote in Indiana. Long was projected to win it and still won, so it didn't have a significant impact on the outcome, but it was still strange. Lemke didn't campaign particularly well and didn't win very many votes elsewhere.

Borah somehow won North Carolina, despite the fact that I never once campaigned or advertised there. I would've won the election without North Carolina, but with a razor-thin 267 electoral votes instead of the 280 I won.

The deciding state was Missouri, which I won by 23,000 votes.

Borahwins1936decidingstate.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if it's possible to win as Roosevelt, Long, and Borah in the three-way contest, and therefore presumably also as Landon, it's a good, well-balanced, and interesting scenario, plus or minus concerns about the dynamism of Huey's vote shares across the states.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if it's possible to win as Roosevelt, Long, and Borah in the three-way contest, and therefore presumably also as Landon, it's a good, well-balanced, and interesting scenario, plus or minus concerns about the dynamism of Huey's vote shares across the states.

True. However, for me it was absolutely impossible to win as any Republican unless Long was also in the race. FDR has a lot more money than the Republicans and always destroys my candidate with ads at the very beginning.

With Long starting out as the main challenger to FDR, they essentially tore each other to pieces with scandals and attack ads while I gradually went up in the polls as Borah.

By the way, I noticed Pelley never gets any votes anywhere. His candidacy was of little consequence, but it's something that could be fixed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He gets a handful in Washington, right? I think he's only on the ballot there. And I'm not sure if it's reasonable for FDR to be beatable as a Republican.

On the other hand..... maybe one way to model the wacky nature of the polling would be to just have very low committed percentages? And probably fairly high undecided percentages? That might make it technically easier to compete, or it might just exacerbate FDR's advantage.

But then again, I mean...... he did win almost every state. Part of the point of making the alternate history is that if you did this scenario straight-up you'd have a boring election on your hands.

Speaking of which, next up: 1940! Specifically, the alternate history in which FDR doesn't run (though presumably he'd be in there as an option as well, etc. etc.) I hear Joe Kennedy was mentioned as a candidate of FDR dropped out, by a fairly reliable source (namely Ted Kennedy, in his book.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He gets a handful in Washington, right? I think he's only on the ballot there. And I'm not sure if it's reasonable for FDR to be beatable as a Republican.

On the other hand..... maybe one way to model the wacky nature of the polling would be to just have very low committed percentages? And probably fairly high undecided percentages? That might make it technically easier to compete, or it might just exacerbate FDR's advantage.

But then again, I mean...... he did win almost every state. Part of the point of making the alternate history is that if you did this scenario straight-up you'd have a boring election on your hands.

Speaking of which, next up: 1940! Specifically, the alternate history in which FDR doesn't run (though presumably he'd be in there as an option as well, etc. etc.) I hear Joe Kennedy was mentioned as a candidate of FDR dropped out, by a fairly reliable source (namely Ted Kennedy, in his book.)

In real life, yes, he got a few votes in Washington. Whenever I play the scenario he gets 0 votes everywhere, including Washington.

That's an interesting idea for simulating the flawed polling methods back then, although it could lead to even more bizarre outcomes in the final vote.

I don't know about Joe Kennedy running for president in 1940. He had committed a series of gaffes such as wanting to appease and meet with Adolf Hitler and was viewed as something of a crook, and although I've heard he had presidential ambitions at the time, I would think the events of 1940 would have made him completely unpalatable, both to the Democratic Party and the American public.

I suppose he could be put in there, but if so, FDR, Postmaster James Farley, and Vice President John Nance Garner should all be much stronger candidates.

A 1940 scenario would also need a series of high-profile events to make Hitler the main issue of the campaign. Willkie came out of nowhere to win the nomination almost entirely because he was the only Republican candidate to support an interventionist policy with Europe. As late as May 8, 1940, Willkie got only 3% in the polls, and he went on to win at the convention which started June 24.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm thinking FDR is there, but maybe off by default just to encourage the player to try without him, or he could be the only Dem on by default; it doesn't much matter either way. Maybe Kennedy off by default. And, obviously, major events that launch Willkie to the forefront.

And probably put the election numbers around even, and then give FDR a 10-point boost everywhere?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm thinking FDR is there, but maybe off by default just to encourage the player to try without him, or he could be the only Dem on by default; it doesn't much matter either way. Maybe Kennedy off by default. And, obviously, major events that launch Willkie to the forefront.

And probably put the election numbers around even, and then give FDR a 10-point boost everywhere?

I'd leave FDR on by default. The player can simulate a two-term FDR by turning him off, much like the simulation of Huey Long's candidacy.

Kennedy off by default I agree with.

FDR with a 10-point boost I like - my only concern is it might make him unbeatable, and Willkie didn't get crushed like Hoover or Landon.

Looking forward to 1944 poses another challenge with Willkie. He ran in the primaries but died October 8, a month before Election Day. In addition, FDR considered choosing him as his running-mate on a unity ticket after party bosses told him Henry Wallace was unacceptable. How on earth would that be simulated?

I don't want to veer off topic and hijack this thread, so maybe we can start a 1940 thread. Maybe even one for 1944.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd leave FDR on by default. The player can simulate a two-term FDR by turning him off, much like the simulation of Huey Long's candidacy.

Kennedy off by default I agree with.

FDR with a 10-point boost I like - my only concern is it might make him unbeatable, and Willkie didn't get crushed like Hoover or Landon.

Looking forward to 1944 poses another challenge with Willkie. He ran in the primaries but died October 8, a month before Election Day. In addition, FDR considered choosing him as his running-mate on a unity ticket after party bosses told him Henry Wallace was unacceptable. How on earth would that be simulated?

I don't want to veer off topic and hijack this thread, so maybe we can start a 1940 thread. Maybe even one for 1944.

Just treat Willkie like RFK in 1968.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just treat Willkie like RFK in 1968.

Good idea.

I managed to win every state as FDR, starting in the primaries. No cross-endorsements, but I dug up scandals on Landon every chance I could get.

You'd think it was easy, but Maine and Vermont really want to go Republican - I made something like 40 trips to each state by election night.

FDRwins1936.jpg

Pelley seems to get votes when I'm running a two-way race between FDR and the Republicans, but not in a three-way race with Long included.

Here's the result in Vermont, which I won by the skin of my teeth.

FDRwins1936-closeststate.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll finish this scenario, with events, regional issue centres, more flexibilty on state voting when Long's in play, and accurate primary cycles for the Democrats and Republicans in a little bit.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...