Jump to content
270soft Forum
mahaadoxyz

All-Time United States

Recommended Posts

So, what with the advent of the 2012 game engine I thought I'd start working on the plans for an updated version of my all-time Presidential election. As a first step I went through and compiled a list of what ended up being 65 American political figures of national prominence who I think would be in the conversation, or try to insert themselves into the conversation, for All-Time President--importantly, not limiting myself to all or only those people who have been President. Then I made a rough go at assigning a political party to each name on the list, where the parties are Democratic (egalitarian, non-traditionalist), Republican (non-egalitarian, traditionalist), Whig (non-egalitarian, non-traditionalist), and Populist (egalitarian, traditionalist). I'm using these concepts for the parties because if you actually take people's actual partisan labels you end up putting Andrew Jackson and Barack Obama in the same party, which doesn't really make sense. Also, it's tough even to assign the standard economic/social axis to issues across time. So, I'm using the "egalitarian" and "traditionalist" axes to sort people. Anyway, the list:

Democrats

Adlai Stevenson, IL

Al Gore, TN

Al Smith, NY

Barack Obama, IL

Bill Clinton, AR

Eugene McCarthy, MN

Franklin Roosevelt, NY

George McGovern, SD

George Mitchell, ME

Hillary Clinton, NY

Hubert Humphrey, MN

Jimmy Carter, GA

John Kennedy, MA

Lyndon Johnson, TX

Martin Luther King, Jr., AL

Nancy Pelosi, CA

Pat Moynihan, NY

Robert Kennedy, NY

Russ Feingold, WI

Ted Kennedy, MA

Republicans

Barry Goldwater, AZ

Bob Dole, KS

Calvin Coolidge, MA

Dwight Eisenhower, KS

George W. Bush, TX

George Wallace, AL

James Byrnes, SC

Jefferson Davis, MS

John Breckinridge, KY

John Calhoun, SC

Joseph McCarthy, WI

Newt Gingrich, GA

Richard Nixon, CA

Robert Taft, OH

Ronald Reagan, CA

Strom Thurmond, SC

William McKinley, OH

Whigs

Abraham Lincoln, IL

Alexander Hamilton, NY

Daniel Webster, MA

George Romney, MI

Henry Clay, KY

James Blaine, ME

John Adams, MA

John Q. Adams, MA

Nelson Rockefeller, NY

Patrick Henry, VA

Robert La Follette, Sr., WI

Theodore Roosevelt, NY

Ulysses Grant, IL

William H. Taft, OH

Populists

Andrew Jackson, TN

Harry Truman, MO

Huey Long, LA

James Madison, VA

James Monroe, VA

James Polk, TN

Lewis Cass, MI

Stephen Douglas, IL

Thomas Jefferson, VA

William Jennings Bryan, NE

Woodrow Wilson, NJ

Independents

George Washington, VA

Ben Franklin, PA

People I Have No Idea Where To Put Them

Grover Cleveland, NY

Now, this list does not include everyone I'd plan on having in the game. I think what I want to do, ideally, is sort people into "not in the game," "off by default," and "on by default" categories. I'd say that the following are people I'm pretty sure I want in the game and on by default: for the Democrats, one or both Clintons, Roosevelt, John Kennedy, and Johnson; for the Republicans, Goldwater, Eisenhower, G.W. Bush, Calhoun, Reagan, and Thurmond; for the Whigs, Lincoln, Hamilton, Webster, Clay, Rockefeller, and Roosevelt; and for the Populists, Jackson, Truman, Long, Douglas, Jefferson, and Bryan. Oh, and Washington, as an Independent, of course. I would say that the other Clinton, perhaps, and both other Kennedys should be available but off by default.

So, do people have suggestions for others to include, either on or off by default? Or people on my list who shouldn't be included? Or people I've wrongfully overlooked? People I've misassigned to a party, or something more interesting I could do with the party scheme?

In terms of the general-election landscape, the basic set-up is that what we currently think of as "blue states" tend to be Democrats vs. Whigs, and what we currently think of as "red states" tend to be Republicans vs. Populists. Overall, the Democrats and Republicans are a little stronger than the other two parties, but all parties have a viable chance of capturing a majority of the electoral votes. Washington, when he's included, is strongest in the eastern states that were, well, part of the Union when he was President. Each state has a number of Electoral Votes that's determined by an all-time apportionment algorithm I designed that basically involves adding up the number of Congressional districts each state has received after each census, and then treating that total as the "population" on the basis of which to apportion. So we've got NY - 46, PA - 36, OH - 26, CA - 25, IL - 23, TX - 20, MA/VA - 19, NC - 16, MI/NJ - 15, GA/IN/MO - 14, TN/KY - 13, FL/WI/AL/MD/SC - 11, MN/LA/IA/CT - 9, MS - 8, WA/KS/AR - 7, OK/WV/ME/NH - 6, CO/OR/NE/RI/VT - 5, AZ/UT - 4, and NM/ID/SD/NV/MT/DC/ND/DE/HI/WY/AK - 3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, what with the advent of the 2012 game engine I thought I'd start working on the plans for an updated version of my all-time Presidential election. As a first step I went through and compiled a list of what ended up being 65 American political figures of national prominence who I think would be in the conversation, or try to insert themselves into the conversation, for All-Time President--importantly, not limiting myself to all or only those people who have been President. Then I made a rough go at assigning a political party to each name on the list, where the parties are Democratic (egalitarian, non-traditionalist), Republican (non-egalitarian, traditionalist), Whig (non-egalitarian, non-traditionalist), and Populist (egalitarian, traditionalist). I'm using these concepts for the parties because if you actually take people's actual partisan labels you end up putting Andrew Jackson and Barack Obama in the same party, which doesn't really make sense. Also, it's tough even to assign the standard economic/social axis to issues across time. So, I'm using the "egalitarian" and "traditionalist" axes to sort people. Anyway, the list:

Democrats

Adlai Stevenson, IL

Al Gore, TN

Al Smith, NY

Barack Obama, IL

Bill Clinton, AR

Eugene McCarthy, MN

Franklin Roosevelt, NY

George McGovern, SD

George Mitchell, ME

Hillary Clinton, NY

Hubert Humphrey, MN

Jimmy Carter, GA

John Kennedy, MA

Lyndon Johnson, TX

Martin Luther King, Jr., AL

Nancy Pelosi, CA

Pat Moynihan, NY

Robert Kennedy, NY

Russ Feingold, WI

Ted Kennedy, MA

Republicans

Barry Goldwater, AZ

Bob Dole, KS

Calvin Coolidge, MA

Dwight Eisenhower, KS

George W. Bush, TX

George Wallace, AL

James Byrnes, SC

Jefferson Davis, MS

John Breckinridge, KY

John Calhoun, SC

Joseph McCarthy, WI

Newt Gingrich, GA

Richard Nixon, CA

Robert Taft, OH

Ronald Reagan, CA

Strom Thurmond, SC

William McKinley, OH

Whigs

Abraham Lincoln, IL

Alexander Hamilton, NY

Daniel Webster, MA

George Romney, MI

Henry Clay, KY

James Blaine, ME

John Adams, MA

John Q. Adams, MA

Nelson Rockefeller, NY

Patrick Henry, VA

Robert La Follette, Sr., WI

Theodore Roosevelt, NY

Ulysses Grant, IL

William H. Taft, OH

Populists

Andrew Jackson, TN

Harry Truman, MO

Huey Long, LA

James Madison, VA

James Monroe, VA

James Polk, TN

Lewis Cass, MI

Stephen Douglas, IL

Thomas Jefferson, VA

William Jennings Bryan, NE

Woodrow Wilson, NJ

Independents

George Washington, VA

Ben Franklin, PA

People I Have No Idea Where To Put Them

Grover Cleveland, NY

Now, this list does not include everyone I'd plan on having in the game. I think what I want to do, ideally, is sort people into "not in the game," "off by default," and "on by default" categories. I'd say that the following are people I'm pretty sure I want in the game and on by default: for the Democrats, one or both Clintons, Roosevelt, John Kennedy, and Johnson; for the Republicans, Goldwater, Eisenhower, G.W. Bush, Calhoun, Reagan, and Thurmond; for the Whigs, Lincoln, Hamilton, Webster, Clay, Rockefeller, and Roosevelt; and for the Populists, Jackson, Truman, Long, Douglas, Jefferson, and Bryan. Oh, and Washington, as an Independent, of course. I would say that the other Clinton, perhaps, and both other Kennedys should be available but off by default.

So, do people have suggestions for others to include, either on or off by default? Or people on my list who shouldn't be included? Or people I've wrongfully overlooked? People I've misassigned to a party, or something more interesting I could do with the party scheme?

In terms of the general-election landscape, the basic set-up is that what we currently think of as "blue states" tend to be Democrats vs. Whigs, and what we currently think of as "red states" tend to be Republicans vs. Populists. Overall, the Democrats and Republicans are a little stronger than the other two parties, but all parties have a viable chance of capturing a majority of the electoral votes. Washington, when he's included, is strongest in the eastern states that were, well, part of the Union when he was President. Each state has a number of Electoral Votes that's determined by an all-time apportionment algorithm I designed that basically involves adding up the number of Congressional districts each state has received after each census, and then treating that total as the "population" on the basis of which to apportion. So we've got NY - 46, PA - 36, OH - 26, CA - 25, IL - 23, TX - 20, MA/VA - 19, NC - 16, MI/NJ - 15, GA/IN/MO - 14, TN/KY - 13, FL/WI/AL/MD/SC - 11, MN/LA/IA/CT - 9, MS - 8, WA/KS/AR - 7, OK/WV/ME/NH - 6, CO/OR/NE/RI/VT - 5, AZ/UT - 4, and NM/ID/SD/NV/MT/DC/ND/DE/HI/WY/AK - 3.

Looks Awesome! Will there be a test party?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks Awesome! Will there be a test party?

By "test party" do you mean an extra party that's just there for people to spacebar through? I dunno, it goes against my instincts to include something like that but I suppose I'm willing to if people want it.

Note that I don't really plan on working on constructing this scenario until a scenario design program is released for the 2012 version; it's just too much work until then. But I would like to do as much of the work of planning it as possible between now and then, and am therefore soliciting feedback.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And, in terms of issues:

Budget and Economy

Far-Left: Massive federal spending on social programs! Promote inflation to ease the burden on debtors.

Left: High levels of spending are okay. Use fiscal, monetary tools to manage the economy.

Center-Left: Significant federal spending is okay. Keep deficits to a minimum except in war or recession. Avoid excessive inflation.

Centrist: Modest federal spending is okay. No deficits except in war or recession. Avoid inflation.

Center-Right: Keep federal spending low. No deficits except in war. Vigorously combat inflation.

Right: Minimal federal spending, and always balance the budget. Avoid interfering with the economy; use the gold standard.

Far-Right: Cut all federal spending not vital for national security. No economic management; stick to gold standard.

Civil Liberties

Far-Left: Vigorous enforcement of Bill of Rights against federal & state governments. Protect Constitutional right to privacy.

Left: Strictly enforce the Bill of Rights against federal & state governments.

Center-Left: Enforce all Bill of Rights provisions against federal government; protect free speech from state intrusion.

Centrist: Enforce the Bill of Rights against the federal government. Minimal intrusion on the states.

Center-Right: Enforce the Bill of Rights against federal government, but narrowly construed. No intrusions against state power.

Right: Protect freedom of speech and the right to bear arms against federal intrusion. Due process only protect criminals.

Far-Right: No protection of civil liberties against state or federal governments.

Civil Rights

Far-Left: Outlaw segregation and all state discrimination. Aggressive government programs to aid oppressed minorities!

Left: Outlaw segregation. Vigorous federal protection of minorities against state discrimination.

Center-Left: Protect certain basic rights for blacks, like voting rights, but allow “separate but equal” segregation.

Centrist: Prohibit slavery, but no federal protection for blacks. Leave civil rights to the states.

Center-Right: Allow slavery, but only in certain parts of the nation. No slavery in the territories.

Right: Allow slavery in any state that wants it. Federal protections of slavery, like the Fugitive Slave Act.

Far-Right: Extend slavery nationwide! Enslave “free” blacks! Total subjugation of the Negro race!

Education

Far-Left: Comprehensive federal funding and supervision of public education. Free education for all!

Left: Large-scale federal funding of public education. Set national basic curriculum standards, promote public higher education.

Center-Left: Substantial federal funding for state public education. Support liberal higher education.

Centrist: Some federal support for state-run public education, particularly agricultural colleges.

Center-Right: No federal involvement in education. Encourage states to run public schools.

Right: No federal involvement in education. States can run public schools if they desire.

Far-Right: No government involvement in education. It's a private family concern.

Environment

Far-Left: Preserve the natural world at all costs! Punish polluters, limit development, tax fossil fuels.

Left: Favor conservation. Harsh punishment for pollution. Strong support for clean energy.

Center-Left: Balance conservation and development. Strictly regulate pollution and promote clean energy sources.

Centrist: Balance development and conservation. Regulate pollution and contamination. Encourage energy conservatioin.

Center-Right: Favor development over conservation. Some regulation of pollution that threatens human health.

Right: Favor development over conservation. No regulation of energy or pollution.

Far-Right: The environment is there to be exploited!

Executive Power

Far-Left: The President should be a nearly ceremonial figure, merely doing the bidding of Congress.

Left: The President's job is to enforce the laws that Congress has enacted, nothing more.

Center-Left: Congress is the dominant branch of the federal government. Protect against a runaway executive.

Centrist: Strike a balance between Presidential and Congressional power.

Center-Right: The Executive is the dominant branch of the federal government. We need a strong President.

Right: The President should have vast unilateral policy-making power, and expansive emergency powers.

Far-Right: The President should be able to do as he likes, without meddling interference from Congress.

Foreign Affairs

Far-Left: Work toward unified world government!

Left: Promote human rights and democracy globally. Support international organizations like the UN.

Center-Left: Promote American interests and democracy around the world. Seek a leading role in international politics and institutions.

Centrist: Get involved in foreign affairs only where America's interests are concerned. Protect our national sovereignty.

Center-Right: Avoid foreign entanglement if possible. Keep out of international issues unless our vital interests are directly involved.

Right: Keep out of foreign alliance or entanglement. Only get involved in the affairs of our own hemisphere.

Far-Right: Total isolationism! Foreign affairs are no concern of ours.

Free Trade

Far-Left: Use fair trade policies to promote worker's rights worldwide.

Left: Free trade, except with countries that violate human rights.

Center-Left: No tariffs. Support regional free trade initiatives and global trade organizations.

Centrist: Keep tariffs to a minimum. Support regional free trade initiatives.

Center-Right: Use tariffs to protect key domestic industries. Consider reciprocal trade agreements.

Right: Substantial tariffs to protect key domestic industries.

Far-Right: Massive tariffs to protect all domestic industries.

Immigration

Far-Left: Totally open borders! Encourage immigrants from around the world to come to our shores!

Left: Few restrictions on immigration. Celebrate and preserve immigrant cultures; oppose assimilation.

Center-Left: Allow immigration in general, with no regional allocations. Encourage immigrants to assimilate into society.

Centrist: Allow immigration in general, but favor immigrants from Western Europe. Preserve America's ethnic identity.

Center-Right: Allow European immigration. Strict quotas for ethnic Europeans and all other immigrants.

Right: Oppose most immigration. Allow some immigration from certain parts of Europe.

Far-Right: Oppose all immigration. Keep foreigners out!

Labor

Far-Left: Workers of the world, unite! Make the working-class the ruling class!

Left: Encourage all workers to organize. Vigorously protect worker's rights against infringement by management.

Center-Left: Allow unions universally. Protect comprehensive worker's rights, including right to strike.

Centrist: Allow unions in certain industries. Protect basic worker's rights like minimum wage, decent working conditions.

Center-Right: Favor management and oppose unions. Protect some worker's rights, but without hurting profits!

Right: Outlaw unions and favor management, but protect some basic human rights for workers.

Far-Right: No rights for workers. Corporations can do as they please with their workers.

Morals and Religion

Far-Left: Federal protection of alternative lifestyles from state persecution!

Left: Promote state tolerance of unusual behaviors. Federal protection of religious liberty.

Center-Left: Protect religious dissidents. Promote state tolerance, but allow drug laws and protection of the family.

Centrist: Protect freedom of religion. Allow states to enforce public morality, but no federal involvement.

Center-Right: Protect freedom of religion, but allow states to enforce standards of morality. National alcohol prohibition.

Right: Allow and encourage states to promote public morals and religion. National prohibition on alcohol.

Far-Right: We are a Christian nation! Active state role in promoting religion and suppressing sin in all its forms!

Native Americans

Far-Left: Give the land back to the Native Americans! They were here first!

Left: Offer Native Americans citizenship. Treat them as allies and friends, protect their sovereignty, and celebrate their culture.

Center-Left: Respect the rights and sovereignty of Native Americans. Consider granting citizenship.

Centrist: Encourage Native American resettlement and assimilation into mainstream society.

Center-Right: Relocate Indians to the West. Encourage them to adopt modern lifestyles and assimilate into society.

Right: Relocate the Indians to the West, and confine them to reservations once there.

Far-Right: Exterminate the Indians! This land is ours!

Taxation

Far-Left: Progressive income tax with top rates >70% to control inequality. Tax estates and corporate profits.

Left: Progressive income tax with top rates around 50%. Tax corporate income, large estates.

Center-Left: Progressive income tax with modest top rates. Supplement with payroll, excise taxes.

Centrist: Keep tax rates low. Balance between income, payroll, excise, and perhaps sales taxes.

Center-Right: Minimal, flat income tax, plus payroll and excise taxes. Consider national sales tax.

Right: No income tax. Raise modest revenue, aside from tariffs, through excise and sales taxes.

Far-Right: No federal revenues aside from tariffs.

Regulation and Corporations

Far-Left: Nationalize many corporations, break up all monopolies and trusts, and heavily tax and regulate all industries.

Left: Break up all monopolies and trusts. Tax corporate profits and thoroughly regulate all major industries to promote the public good.

Center-Left: Break up monopolies and trusts. Regulate most major industries when the public well-being requires.

Centrist: Break up the largest monopolies. Regulate food production and other major interstate industries like shipping.

Center-Right: Allow monopolies and trusts to form naturally. Modest public health regulation of food & drug industries.

Right: Enforce contracts. Let business consolidation happen naturally—big business is good for America!

Far-Right: Enforce contracts and support business consolidation.

Urbanization

Far-Left: Only cities represent American greatness. Rural areas are backward and unproductive.

Left: Our cities are what make America great. Focus on urban interests.

Center-Left: Cities drive America's economy. Favor urban interests, but don't neglect rural areas.

Centrist: Cities and rural areas equally represent America. Balance between urban and rural interests.

Center-Right: Rural areas are the heart of America. Favor rural interests, but cities are important as well.

Right: America should be an agrarian nation. Focus on rural interests.

Far-Right: Only rural communities represent the real America. Cities are nothing but places of depravity and squalor.

War and Military

Far-Left: No standing army. Allow state militia units. No war except in immediate self-defense.

Left: No standing army; use national guard instead. Only go to war to defend our homeland.

Center-Left: Small standing army with strong national reserve system. Go to war if we are attacked, or to prevent atrocities.

Centrist: Modest standing army. Quickly mobilize for war if our security, or that of our allies, is threatened.

Center-Right: Large standing army. Use military force when our interests are threatened.

Right: Large standing army with maximum firepower. Use our military to promote America's interests.

Far-Right: Maintain massive standing army and military arsenal. Use our military power to achieve global hegemony.

Welfare

Far-Left: Massive redistribution of wealth! Completely eradicate poverty!

Left: Provide public pensions and health care for all, plus disability and unemployment insurance. Strong national anti-poverty efforts.

Center-Left: Public pensions, disability insurance, public health care for the elderly and poor. Modest unemployment benefits. Support state anti-poverty programs.

Centrist: Support public pensions and disability insurance. Some federal funding for state anti-poverty programs.

Center-Right: Modest anti-poverty programs, particularly in rural areas. No redistribution or social safety net.

Right: No welfare programs. Encourage charity for the deserving poor.

Far-Right: The poor are lazy and deserve their fate. No welfare. Imprison beggars and vagabonds!

Women's Rights

Far-Left: Pass Equal Rights Amendment to guarantee total equality of the sexes!

Left: Guarantee women's suffrage. Encourage women's education and protect women's rights in the workplace.

Center-Left: National women's suffrage Amendment. Encourage women's education and allow women to work.

Centrist: Let states decide on women's suffrage. Promote property rights for women and favor women's education.

Center-Right: Allow women to own property, but oppose women's suffrage. Let states decide on women's education, careers.

Right: No women's suffrage or property ownership. Oppose women's education or women in the workplace.

Far-Right: No rights for women. Women belong to their fathers or husbands.

I think I've done a good job with these issues of making them nice and general, so that the various more specific issues that crop up during a given Presidential cycle can be pretty easily related to one (or more) of these issues. I'm not sure the Native American issue really needs to be in there, but I'm also not sure it isn't, and I can't think of anything else that particularly deserves to steal its spot.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

two things-

why don't add mitt romney and rudy giuliani to rebublican?

i think that if gringrich got a place there, romney should too and giuliani can just help that.

oh, and please make a test party, it can realy help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

two things-

why don't add mitt romney and rudy giuliani to rebublican?

i think that if gringrich got a place there, romney should too and giuliani can just help that.

oh, and please make a test party, it can realy help.

the secnario sounds awesome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

two things-

why don't add mitt romney and rudy giuliani to rebublican?

i think that if gringrich got a place there, romney should too and giuliani can just help that.

oh, and please make a test party, it can realy help.

Gingrich is one of the most important politicians of the past 30 years. He led the Republicans to their biggest congressional triumph in decades, he oversaw significant legislation such as welfare reform and he was essentially the public face of conservatism throughout most of the 1990s.

Giuliani will only be remembered as having been the Mayor of New York City during 9/11. Romney could become an important and historical figure if he wins this year's election, but for now he's just a presidential candidate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, I'm not sure about including Gingrich. But I think he's clearly a more likely candidate for inclusion than Giuliani, and as for the younger Romney, if he becomes President I could see swapping him in for his father.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Debs, definitely, although I'll probably need to put him in as a third party. Powell and Perot, perhaps. I dunno, would Perot be a Whig? I can always use more Whigs. Maybe Powell is also a Whig, actually?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, getting started on some candidates with their attributes:

George Washington

Party: Independent

Home State: Virginia

Leadership: 5

Integrity: 5

Experience: 5

Issue Knowledge: 3

Charisma: 5

Stamina: 4

Debating Skill: 3

Budget & Economy: Centrist

Civil Liberties: Centrist

Civil Rights: Center-Right

Education: Center-Right

Environment: Center-Left

Executive Power: Left

Foreign Affairs: Right

Free Trade: Center-Right

Immigration: Center-Left

Labor: Centrist

Morals & Religion: Centrist

Native Americans: Right

Taxation: Right

Regulation & Corporations: Center-Left

Urbanization: Centrist

War & Military: Far-Left

Welfare: Center-Right

Women's Rights: Centrist

Franklin Roosevelt

Party: Democratic

Home State: New York

Leadership: 5

Integrity: 3

Experience: 5

Issue Knowledge: 4

Charisma: 5

Stamina: 2

Debating Skill: 4

Budget & Economy: Left

Civil Liberties: Center-Left

Civil Rights: Center-Left

Education: Center-Left

Environment: Centrist

Executive Power: Right

Foreign Affairs: Left

Free Trade: Center-Left

Immigration: Centrist

Labor: Left

Morals & Religion: Center-Left

Native Americans: Left

Taxation: Far-Left

Regulation & Corporations: Left

Urbanization: Centrist

War & Military: Centrist

Welfare: Left

Women's Rights: Left

Thomas Jefferson

Party: Populist

Home State: Virginia

Leadership: 4

Integrity: 5

Experience: 5

Issue Knowledge: 5

Charisma: 5

Stamina: 3

Debating Skill: 3

Budget & Economy: Right

Civil Liberties: Center-Left

Civil Rights: Center-Right

Education: Center-Right

Environment: Center-Left

Executive Power: Center-Left

Foreign Affairs: Center-Right

Free Trade: Centrist

Immigration: Center-Left

Labor: Center-Left

Morals & Religion: Center-Left

Native Americans: Center-Right

Taxation: Right

Regulation & Corporations: Center-Left

Urbanization: Right

War & Military: Far-Left

Welfare: Center-Right

Women's Rights: Centrist

Ronald Reagan

Party: Republican

Home State: California

Leadership: 5

Integrity: 3

Experience: 4

Issue Knowledge: 2

Charisma: 5

Stamina: 3

Debating Skill: 4

Budget & Economy: Center-Right

Civil Liberties: Center-Right

Civil Rights: Center-Left

Education: Center-Right

Environment: Center-Right

Executive Power: Center-Right

Foreign Affairs: Centrist

Free Trade: Center-Left

Immigration: Center-Left

Labor: Center-Right

Morals & Religion: Centrist

Native Americans: Center-Left

Taxation: Centrist

Regulation & Corporations: Center-Right

Urbanization: Center-Right

War & Military: Right

Welfare: Center-Right

Women's Rights: Center-Left

Abraham Lincoln

Party: Whig

Home State: Illinois

Leadership: 5

Integrity: 4

Experience: 3

Issue Knowledge: 4

Charisma: 5

Stamina: 3

Debating Skill: 5

Budget & Economy: Center-Left

Civil Liberties: Left

Civil Rights: Left

Education: Centrist

Environment: Centrist

Executive Power: Right

Foreign Affairs: Center-Right

Free Trade: Center-Right

Immigration: Centrist

Labor: Center-Right

Morals & Religion: Centrist

Native Americans: Centrist

Taxation: Centrist

Regulation & Corporations: Centrist

Urbanization: Centrist

War & Military: Centrist

Welfare: Centrist

Women's Rights: Center-Left

These are pretty much supposed to be the strongest candidate from each party/Washington.

One interesting thing to note, while if you simply treat each issue position as a number on a 1 to 7 scale and take each candidate's average, you get everyone except Roosevelt clustered around the middle (from 3.9 for Lincoln to 4.3 to Reagan), they're all very different ways of ending up at the center. That happens pretty routinely in these all-time scenarios I make, because issues get scrambled over time. There are a bunch of things on which Reagan is to the left of Jefferson, for instance, basically just because the times had changed over those 180 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, but we can have some idea from historical accounts of people how quick-witted etc. they were. And, well, we know how good Abraham Lincoln was at debating; it's not like these things didn't happen, especially in more local contests. But yeah, when there isn't any neatly on-point evidence I'll probably just have to avoid extremes, which, especially given that debate skill and issue knowledge change a lot during the course of playing the game, should be sufficient.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple of thoughts regarding party alignments. First of all, I'm wondering if I shouldn't put MLK in as an off-by-default independent candidate, rather than as an off-by-default participant in the Democratic primary. He feels very much a non-partisan type, though obviously not a non-ideological type and he's clearly ideologically aligned with the Democrats in this scenario. I sort of just feel like it would be interesting to have him as an independent, as an interesting challenge. He'd probably have a shot at many of the Deep Southern states, given that it's a five-way race we're talking about and there are lots of his natural constituents there, as well as the more liberal Northeastern states, particularly the racially diverse ones.

Second, I continue to be a bit confused regarding the Bourbon Democrats. I'm working on drawing up an All-Time Parliament, where each state gets a number of MPs equal to its electoral votes, with the intent of having these people be endorsers and potential surrogates. In considering potential MP's for Delaware, it's pretty readily apparent that Thomas F. Bayard, Sr., deserves to be one of the three, except I don't know which party I should attach him to. On the one hand, antebellum conservative Democrats are pretty clearly Republicans in my scheme. On the other hand, people like Grover Cleveland and Thomas Bayard were mainly concerned with the pro-business, i.e. non-egalitarian, side of things, rather than the anti-civil rights, i.e. traditionalist, side of things, which would suggest they might be Whigs. Or maybe, since Cleveland is really the only Bourbon Democrat of sufficient note to be an actual candidate, I can just have them listed as endorsers who aren't particularly attached to a party? That still leaves me with the problem of Cleveland himself, though... Anyone have any thoughts about this dilemma?

Also, it would be really, really helpful for that All-Time Parliament-as-endorsers thing if they added a way to identify endorsers with candidates, since most of the candidates are probably going to be found among the ranks of the Parliament.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i can see that the USA presedential race now is realy close.

so i suggest you to put mitt romney in the place of his father or put them both and have fun in a father-son fight. yes, this will be fun- just like hilary-bill fight.

and i suggest that ronald ragen and abraham lincoln will be rebpublicans- i mean, they was, and the republicans got pretty poor candidates while the democrats got great ones.

and mitt romney and his father could be a good republicans- or george as a whig and mitt as a republican.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i can see that the USA presedential race now is realy close.

so i suggest you to put mitt romney in the place of his father or put them both and have fun in a father-son fight. yes, this will be fun- just like hilary-bill fight.

and i suggest that ronald ragen and abraham lincoln will be rebpublicans- i mean, they was, and the republicans got pretty poor candidates while the democrats got great ones.

and mitt romney and his father could be a good republicans- or george as a whig and mitt as a republican.

The Presidential race is really close?!!?

According to http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/ President Obama has over an 80% of winning. That is not really close.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Presidential race is really close?!!?

According to http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/ President Obama has over an 80% of winning. That is not really close.

are you kidding?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html

a one country will decide it OO

and what you've bring was only one of the polls, there are many that saiying romney will win virginia, and even colorado, iowa and ohio.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

are you kidding?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html

a one country will decide it OO

and what you've bring was only one of the polls, there are many that saiying romney will win virginia, and even colorado, iowa and ohio.

The site you mentioned Real Clear Politics has President Obama at 290 EV. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map_no_toss_ups.html Nate Silver uses all of the polls and uses economic indicators. He is also more favorable to Romney than other people

Nate Silver:

Colorado 65% chance of Obama win Leans Obama

Iowa 79% chance of Obama win Likely Obama

Nevada 88% chance of Obama win Likely Obama

New Hampshire 88% chance of Obama win Likely Obama

Ohio 80% chance of Obama win Likely Obama

Virginia 66% chance of Obama win Leans Obama

Florida 55% of Romney win Tossup Romney

Obama (without any tossups) 303 EV Romney (without any tossups) 235 EV

Obama (with tossups) 303 EV Romney (with tossups) 206 EV Tossups: 29

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The site you mentioned Real Clear Politics has President Obama at 290 EV. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map_no_toss_ups.html Nate Silver uses all of the polls and uses economic indicators. He is also more favorable to Romney than other people

Nate Silver:

Colorado 65% chance of Obama win Leans Obama

Iowa 79% chance of Obama win Likely Obama

Nevada 88% chance of Obama win Likely Obama

New Hampshire 88% chance of Obama win Likely Obama

Ohio 80% chance of Obama win Likely Obama

Virginia 66% chance of Obama win Leans Obama

Florida 55% of Romney win Tossup Romney

Obama (without any tossups) 303 EV Romney (without any tossups) 235 EV

Obama (with tossups) 303 EV Romney (with tossups) 206 EV Tossups: 29

this is all polls and thoughs.

we can't know for sure, and no one can't say it isn't realy close.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is all polls and thoughs.

we can't know for sure, and no one can't say it isn't realy close.

An OVER 80% chance of winning close???!!! That is news to me. Polling is highly accurate. We can't ignore facts and math. The facts and math (state by state polls) says that Obama is the favorite and is likey to win. In four or five days I will probably proven right.

Republican War on Math

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Romney wins on Tuesday, I'll consider adding him, or swapping him in for his father. If Obama wins, I'll adjust his strength as a candidate upwards.

i still think that romney is much more importent than his father, even if he will loose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

George Romney was Governor of Michigan, which at the time had 21 electoral votes, for six years, and Secretary of Housing and Urban Development for four years after that. Mitt Romney was Governor of Massachusetts, which at the time had 12 electoral votes, for four years, retiring not to take a Cabinet position but because he'd lose re-election, and has never had any other government position. And I'd say that George Romney was in a very real sense one of the champions of a pretty major movement in American political history, the moderate mid-20th century Republicans, along with Nelson Rockefeller and a few others, while Mitt Romney has been the champion of... well, um, Mitt Romney? I'm not even sure how I'd set about trying to give Mitt issue positions, if he doesn't win (in which case the positions he's taken while running for/being President would trump). It's easy to overstate the importance of the most recent thing to occur. What is it about American political history that Mitt Romney would represent as a candidate in this election, if he loses on Tuesday?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

George Romney was Governor of Michigan, which at the time had 21 electoral votes, for six years, and Secretary of Housing and Urban Development for four years after that. Mitt Romney was Governor of Massachusetts, which at the time had 12 electoral votes, for four years, retiring not to take a Cabinet position but because he'd lose re-election, and has never had any other government position. And I'd say that George Romney was in a very real sense one of the champions of a pretty major movement in American political history, the moderate mid-20th century Republicans, along with Nelson Rockefeller and a few others, while Mitt Romney has been the champion of... well, um, Mitt Romney? I'm not even sure how I'd set about trying to give Mitt issue positions, if he doesn't win (in which case the positions he's taken while running for/being President would trump). It's easy to overstate the importance of the most recent thing to occur. What is it about American political history that Mitt Romney would represent as a candidate in this election, if he loses on Tuesday?

I think someone more likely to be included is Senator John McCain, who many be considered to be the Republican Party's expert on foreign policy and co-author of Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act. The BCRA is a significant piece of legislation.The repeal of BCRA in the Citizens United case created SuperPACs which have had a major impact during 2010 and 2012 elections.

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...

×
×
  • Create New...