Jump to content
270soft Forum

RI Democrat

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


RI Democrat last won the day on May 21

RI Democrat had the most liked content!

Recent Profile Visitors

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

RI Democrat's Achievements


Newbie (1/14)

  • First Post Rare
  • Collaborator Rare
  • Posting Machine Rare
  • Week One Done Rare
  • One Month Later Rare

Recent Badges



  1. If you feel like doing some research on 1987, I'd be happy to collaborate and share credit for it. I have my own plans for 1993, which I'm working on next, but I might come back to others after that.
  2. Thanks! Any further info you find would be much appreciated. Are you referring to the "Joh for Canberra" thing? I think that was actually in the lead-up to the 1987 election. I agree that it would be interesting though I'm not sure how exactly to translate it into a PMI scenario. I suppose I could make "Joh for Canberra" one of the issues and set the regional issue centers closer to Labor's position than to the Liberals' or Nationals' positions. Maybe Labor's position would be something like, "It's an unworkable idea and it shows that the Coalition is too divided to govern."
  3. I think I've heard the "low social trust" theory before as to why a certain segment of Trump supporters may have been less likely to respond to polling. I suppose one test will be to see if the pollsters manage to get the 2022 midterms mostly right, or at least avoid a consistent error in one direction or the other. If they do, it might point to an effect that manifests itself primarily when Trump is on the ballot. In which case, if he's the GOP nominee again in 2024, it might be wise for everyone to just assume that the public polling will underestimate his support.
  4. Thanks. I've already done 1975, which I posted about in the thread just below this one and added to the campaign site. I suppose I could try to reverse-engineer 1969 from the 1972 one, though I'm not clear on whether the platform Whitlam ran with in 1972 was fully developed back then, so I'm not sure how many changes I would need to make to the issue centers and descriptions. I've already had to do a fair amount of guesswork on issues as things stand - I don't know that much about Australian politics in the '60s and '70s beyond what I've read online. I am thinking of trying 1993 (the supposedly "unwinnable" election for Labor that they ended up winning) and 1996 (when Paul Keating lost to John Howard) if I have time.
  5. This is the 1972 federal election that brought Labor under Gough Whitlam to power after 23 years of conservative government under the Liberal-Country coalition. I'm waiting on uploading it to the regular 270soft campaigns site, because I'm wondering if anyone could help me out on a couple of points: Did they actually have leaders' debates back in 1972? If not, I'm thinking I should delete the debate from the scenario. Who was leader of the Australia Party in 1972? I know that Reg Turnbull briefly held the post up to January 1970, but I haven't been able to find any information on his successor. For now I have Alan Fitzgerald, who did hold some sort of local office in the ACT at the time, as leader, but I don't know if he ever actually held the role. Obviously, feedback on other issues is welcome as well. I tried to make it competitive by programming in a small shift in the Liberal/Country coalition's favor so that it doesn't start out with the percentages that Labor actually achieved in the RL election, but I'm not sure if I got the balance of the issue stances quite right. 1972 - Australia - It's Time.zip
  6. I decided to dig up my files for a 1975 Australia scenario that I put together for an older engine and update it for PMI. I've also posted it on the campaigns page at: http://campaigns.270soft.com/2021/05/11/australia-1975-the-dismissal/. It remains very difficult to win this election as Labor, who were facing a serious headwind over the national economy at the time despite Gough Whitlam's controversial "dismissal" as Prime Minister (read more about this here if you're interested). I did adjust the numbers a little rather than simply copying the actual results as the starting percentages to try to give Labor at least a somewhat competitive standing. Here is the download, along with the official scenario blurb. http://campaigns.270soft.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/1975-Australia-The-Dismissal.zip "A series of controversial decisions has culminated in Governor-General John Kerr’s dismissal of Prime Minister Gough Whitlam and his appointment of Malcolm Fraser, who did not have a lower house majority, in his place. Whitlam’s supporters are furious at Kerr’s actions, but many voters are more concerned about his turbulent handling of the economy." Feedback and suggestions are welcome. I'm planning on tackling the 1972 election, which initially brought Whitlam to power, next.
  7. I've finished creating all the regions and percentages, based roughly on the RL results of the 2019 EU election. I did have to take some liberties with the parties, since some countries had multiple parties/lists running under the same EU affiliate, and obviously the PMI system can't accommodate that. The main problem I'm running into is that the RL formulas used to apportion seats are actually pretty complicated and not the sort of thing that I can easily convert into an Excel formula. If I use a simpler formula, such as just multiplying the percentage that each party wins by the number of seats contested and rounding to the nearest, the total number of seats awarded often does not add up to the RL totals because of rounding. I can minimize - but not entirely eliminate - this problem by simply doing one calculation awarding seats based on the EU-wide percentages of the vote instead of a separate calculation for each country, thus keeping the total number of seats at or near the real-life total of 750. But this removes the principle of "degressive proportionality" whereby the smaller nations get a slightly disproportionate number of seats, which is how it works IRL. (I'm also not sure if players would have the patience to enter separate totals for each country or region into the Excel sheet - it would be something like 30+ rows of data to be entered when you take into account the splitting of certain larger countries - specifically Germany, France, the UK, Spain, and Poland - into subregions in the existing map.) As for simply sticking with K4E, that would take a *lot* of guesswork when it comes to individual constituencies, percentages, and population figures. That sort of information is extremely difficult to find for EU elections, where often the only available results are in other languages and either (1) reported nationwide or (2) reported by regions that are not even close to being equal in size. Would people be OK with a somewhat alternate-universe scenario where the seats are simply determined by multiplying each party's percentage by 750 and rounding to the nearest? I don't want to just throw away the work I've done, but I'm not sure what else to do with it at this point.
  8. I've been thinking about redoing this scenario, this time using PM4I with the popular vote feature turned on and an Excel sheet to calculate seats based on the number of votes in each region. It wouldn't perfectly duplicate the EU's actual system for electing MEPs, but it would be closer, and I would also update the leadership candidates and background so that the UK is still participating at the time of the vote (as indeed they did IRL). Would people be interested in giving it a shot if I do that?
  9. How are those numbers showing Trump flipping Minnesota? It looks to me like Democrats have a 1-point advantage in the early vote with a sizeable percentage of independents.
  10. I don't quite get it either - even the R-leaning Trafalgar Group poll from today has Biden up by three in Minnesota - but perhaps it's just an abundance of caution given how unexpectedly close the state was last time around. I suppose we're about to find out whether there is in fact an ongoing problem with the polls in effectively measuring Trump's support or if 2016 was kind of a fluke in that regard.
  11. Hillary's campaign made the mistake of thinking the Blue Wall was solid, so I suspect that Biden's people are determined not to repeat that mistake. I don't believe that Biden is ahead by double digits in Blue Wall states, but I'm also skeptical of the notion that the polls are almost *all* wrong and that Trump is actually ahead in those states. Winning Florida would give him some insurance in case one of the Blue Wall states were to slip away, plus it gives him a positive election night storyline. My understanding is that they expect FL to finish almost all of its counting on election night, whereas MI, WI, and PA are likely to (a) take longer to count all the absentee/mail-in ballots, and (b) display a "red mirage" on election night whereby the initial numbers will reflect Election Day voting totals that may skew towards Trump. If he's already won Florida - a state that leans a bit more Republican - it will be harder for anyone to claim credibly that a later "blue shift" in the counting in MI, WI, and PA is reflective of vote fraud (which Trump and/or his allies may well try to do).
  12. Honestly, I'm mostly concerned now that we're going to get screwed over by postal delays and biased court rulings regarding any recounts or challenges that emerge. I think that a small but stable majority wants Trump gone, but I'm less confident that this will actually be reflected in the outcome.
  13. Both my elementary and secondary schools drew primarily from very conservative families - I was in a small minority supporting the Democrat in each of our mock elections (1984, 1988, and 1992). Though a few of the alums from my high school that I follow on Facebook seem to be a little more liberal now than they were back then.
  • Create New...