Jump to content
270soft Forum

RFK/JFKfan

Members
  • Content Count

    292
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Everything posted by RFK/JFKfan

  1. Santorum - his poll numbers are identical to what they were at this point in 2011. He's in until Iowa at least, which, let's remember, he won out of nowhere last time. Pataki - probably in until Iowa/New Hampshire too, just for the 'let's see what happens' factor. I can't see why someone as obscure as he now is would even enter if he didn't intend to compete in a primary/caucus or two. Huckabee - has a slim (no pun intended) path to victory in Iowa and he is also a past winner of it, so he'll likely be in until then. Jindal - The likely next dropout. Unlike the likes of Pataki and Gilmore
  2. President Jed Bartlet from The West Wing: Lead - 5 Exp - 5 Issue Familiarity - 5 (received a Nobel Prize for Economics) Charisma - 5 Debate - 5 Stamina - 2 Integrity - 3 (based on the MS cover-up) Arnold Vinick: Lead - 4 Exp - 4 Issue Familiarity - 4 Charisma - 4 Debate - 4 Stamina - 3 Integrity - 5 (refused to take the opportunity to release the contents of Santos' suitcase to the public, plus an honest moderate) Matt Santos: Lead - 3 Exp - 3 (did have some decent committee experience in the House) Issue Familiarity - 3 Charisma - 4 Debate - 3 Stamina - 4
  3. Religion is a private matter. By opening a business you are choosing to provide a service to the public. Therefore you should provide that service to the public and your religious beliefs should be kept private.
  4. The likes of Kasich, Rubio and Bush may do well in a two-way debate with Hillary but they are too bland to win a debate of this kind. One of the red meat throwers will win - Trump, Cruz, Huckabee, Christie etc, just as the likes of Gingrich tended to win the 2012 debates.
  5. With a poll out tonight showing Jeremy Corbyn in the lead this is looking like the most interesting leadership race in possibly decades. A scenario would be worth doing. Candidates Andy Burnham Yvette Cooper Jeremy Corbyn Liz Kendall Chuka Umunna (off) Tristham Hunt (off) Mary Creagh (off) Issues Direction of Labour Austerity Party Reforms (regular leadership elections, etc) Along with the usual PM4E issues. Suggestions welcome.
  6. For Labour/Liberal/Sinn Fein you should put "fiscally socialist/left-wing" rather than "fiscally liberal". In a British context "fiscally/economically liberal" would, I believe, best apply to Thatcherism.
  7. Try the links on here: http://web.archive.org/web/20090715000000*/http://scenarios.theoryspark.com Not sure if downloading will work or not.
  8. Oh I see, well that is certainly a good idea. Hopefully we'll finally get vote counts in individual constituencies.
  9. This looks good. I can't wait to put every candidate on in the 76 Dem primaries. Who would win would be anyone's guess.
  10. I would be extremely grateful if you could send your scenarios to w.smith405@btinternet.com
  11. http://scenarios.270soft.com/2011/12/30/weimar-republic-1933/
  12. http://scenarios.270soft.com/2011/03/07/united-states-1996/
  13. I'd be interested in a copy of that too. w.smith405@btinternet.com
  14. Glad to see this being done. The '04 primaries were very interesting but unfortunately they weren't realistically represented in the '08 version; most of the candidates were within a couple of percent of each other. In fact, I think it was perfectly possible to win the nomination as Braun, Sharpton or Kucinich.
  15. So , during an attempt to create a very different scenario, I deleted all of the candidates in the Democratic, Republican and Libertarian parties in the 2016 scenario and changed the parties' names, and also added a new party. Then I added one new candidate for each party (along with VPs, etc). On the editor itself I got errors on the endorsers page (whenever I click on any indvidual endorser) but other than that it seemed to be okay. But then I tried to open the scenario in game and I got two errors - one related to a .dll file and another one about "p4e16.exe". Any ideas?
  16. Doesn't necessarily have to be though. I recall someone attempting a Harry Potter scenario some years back. As for The West Wing, I did create a 2002 scenario for 08 a long time ago but unfortunately I never got around to completing it. 2006 is course already on the scenarios page but it could I suppose be updated as a scenario for the new engine.
  17. Post potential scenarios for P4E16 that you think would be neat. Here are a few from me. 1968 US Presidential election (the most interesting historical election in my view) UK direct Prime Ministerial elections (would be fun to have Cameron and Boris or Gaitskell and Bevan running against each other in primaries) President-by-President series (by this I mean a series of scenarios for each election that each President has contested; for Barack Obama it would include the Illinois Senate and congressional races he contested, for George W. Bush the Texas gubernatorial races etc) Fictional ch
  18. Try this: http://www.270soft.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6254
  19. Good scenario. The percentages and leaders need some editing though. Percentages should be something like Lab 38, Con 32, LD 14, UKIP 8 (assuming their bubble bursts somewhat in the next two years). Labour - Ed Miliband's charisma should be no higher than 3, perhaps 2. While intelligent, he doesn't connect with the voters in the same way than Blair or Wilson did. His experience should be 3 and probably leadership and debating too. Harman probably shouldn't be there; she's probably approaching the end of her career (she turns 63 this year). David Miliband would make a good "what-if?" alternat
  20. Please send to me too - w.smith405@btinternet.com
  21. Yeah, the UK version tends to be the most erratic in terms of party support. The Lib Dems often get the most seats in 2005 for example. But I'm glad you're attempting this. The recent UKIP surge has presumably complicated matters somewhat.
  22. In terms of future scenarios, I think a 1950s-1960s hybrid scenario would be neat as there were so many high-profile and historically significant politicians during that period who never actually ran for President. Sam Rayburn, Joseph McCarthy, Mike Mansfield, Carl Hayden and Ross Barnett are a few I can think of off the top of my head.
  23. What third-party candidates will be in the 2000s scenario? I assume all the ones who actually ran (Nader, Barr, Badnarik etc), plus maybe Bloomberg and Trump? Oh, and what about Stephen Colbert as both an optional Democratic and Republican candidate?
×
×
  • Create New...