Jump to content
270soft Forum

1996 US Presidential Election


Recommended Posts

The problem with distortions and pictures looking 'fuzzy' and such is because in order to have clear pictures (like mine and yours) most people don't recognize that you need to re-size said images using a program like Paint.NET so said images look good, rather than having PF automatically re-size them in a shoddy fashion which makes them look bad. Your picture does look a bit better.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 183
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I indeed started working from '92 (great minds think alike ). I have tentative statistics for Dole based on my research, but I'm putting them up for input (note, not every candidate will get this tre

Since this election doesn't seem to exist in scenario form, I'll take a crack at it. This is my first P4E+P scenario, so I may need some help. Democratic Candidates will be: -Bill Clinton (far ahead

I'm going to mail it to TheorySpark and see what they make of it. Anyone know the appropriate e-mail address for that?

I really think the RNC endorsement simply needs to be removed. It is far to powerful and whoever gets it wins to primaries no matter what.

I suppose you're right, Abe. I've nerfed it twice already, and playtesters still complain it unbalances the GOP primaries. I'll get rid of it before the final version.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Something I found that may add to some realism. Dick Lamm the Reform Candidate apparently had a VP pick if he won, "Zschau briefly re-entered the political arena as the vice presidential running mate to former Colorado Governor Dick Lamm, a Democrat, who waged a quixotic challenge to Ross Perot for the Reform Party presidential nomination in 1996."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_Zschau

Link to post
Share on other sites

Something I found that may add to some realism. Phil Lamm the Reform Candidate apparently had a VP pick if he won, "Zschau briefly re-entered the political arena as the vice presidential running mate to former Colorado Governor Dick Lamm, a Democrat, who waged a quixotic challenge to Ross Perot for the Reform Party presidential nomination in 1996."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_Zschau

Thanks for that one, dwkulcsar!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Oh, another thing. A few questions to anyone who knows so I can update interviews. What stance and contentesness would the Arsenio Hall Show have been (left, centre-left, maybe; I recall he seemed quite liberal)? Had Johnny Carson packed it in by then, and, if not, what would his stance and contenciousness have been? I think Letterman and Oprah were running their shows in '96; correct me if I'm wrong. Who else were major interviewers back then?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would not put those in there. These talk shows are seldom where Candidates go, Obama is the rare few who went on Oprah; and Letterman, Conan, Leno, were all center-left. I would throw in Arsenio as a liberal show but it had a smaller audience compared to those other three.

As for more interviews, try doing Magazines and large circulation Newspapers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

I'm having trouble. I created an event to give Clinton a -20 000 penalty to momentum three days before the GE begins, so that the GOP candidate stands a chance in Hell of beating him. However, this massive penalty, even though I gave it a 100% chance of happening and have the 'event will occur' box checked, has absolutely no noticeable effect. In fact, nothing the GOP candidate or Perot do has any meaningful impact on the polls in the GE; it just stays static as a tremendously massive lead for Clinton. It's like the other two main players were spacebarring. What could be wrong and how can I fix this?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 5 months later...

Okay, I may have this now. Could someone please give me a playtest to see if they can beat Clinton on this new version starting in the primaries as a Republican other than Dole? I'll start my own playtest tomorrow. Here's the link.

http://drop.io/pxakbhf#

It is impossible. Even after getting through a difficult primary campaign as DuPont, the polls had me at 30-60 with Clinton. However, the problem I believe lies with funding. You gave Clinton such a large sum of money, he uses it all and gets most of the endorsements, thus allowing him to get an insurmontable lead. At the same time, that amount is impossible to counter as any of the other Democratic Party candidates. You should reduce it to a relatively low number, as he is going to raise a LOT of money anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is impossible. Even after getting through a difficult primary campaign as DuPont, the polls had me at 30-60 with Clinton. However, the problem I believe lies with funding. You gave Clinton such a large sum of money, he uses it all and gets most of the endorsements, thus allowing him to get an insurmontable lead. At the same time, that amount is impossible to counter as any of the other Democratic Party candidates. You should reduce it to a relatively low number, as he is going to raise a LOT of money anyway.

I experienced similar as Gov. Pete Wilson. It is very difficult. I ended up losing bigger than Dole/Kemp did in real life. On the first day of the Fall Campaign I was at 38 points. Think I topped out at about 42-3.

It does in a way I guess reflect the fact that none of the Republican candidates are out of the top drawer.

Reece

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, I may have this now. Could someone please give me a playtest to see if they can beat Clinton on this new version starting in the primaries as a Republican other than Dole? I'll start my own playtest tomorrow. Here's the link.

http://drop.io/pxakbhf#

I can't even download it. I click on the link, and it's stuck at "Loading...". The page never loads.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It works for me. Don't know why it wouldn't work for you.

Finally got it working. I think the page was down earlier.

But no, I've had no luck winning as a Republican. Clinton's numbers skyrocket to well above 50% during the primaries as the Republicans are fighting amongst themselves, even when I dig up scandals on him every turn.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dropped Clinton's funds to eight million, and he is still way to strong. The major problem is that he soaks up all the undecided vote early on. What I think should be done is have the Democratic Party's numbers in the primaries lowered to be on par or under that of the Republicans. I am going to try that now to see if it works.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright, I ended up chiseling away about 15% of the primary vote away from the Democrats in every state, and it came out beautiful. The only difference from the historical race was that for some reason 5%-6% of the Republican voting bloc moved over to Perot, thereby giving Clinton a landslide, though he himself had close to the historical vote.

Now, there are some other issues

- None of the third parties have their own funds, thereby forcing their general election candidates to start with no funds. At the same time, the have consistently gone into the negative while campaigning.

- The Reform Party was not able to recieve matching goverment funds, but Ross Perot was, since it was HE that got the vote, not the party. I am not sure how you want to model this, but I just gave the party matching funds since I have NEVER seen Lamm win outside of player intervention.

- The Republican Primaries are confusing to me. I dropped Dole down to $12 million so that it would be more fair to Clinton. However, then all hell breaks loose when they all start winning primaries. Not sure what to make of it, as Dole should be able to normally sweep it, as he did historically. Maybe I should raise it again.

Edit: An odd problem. When it comes to the general election, the percentages become quite rigid. This is in comparison to the 2008 Wonk Edition, where they are very fluid, despite having higher committed rates on both sides. Don't know what to make of it. At least, this problem is only really expressed when played from the primaries.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright, I ended up chiseling away about 15% of the primary vote away from the Democrats in every state, and it came out beautiful. The only difference from the historical race was that for some reason 5%-6% of the Republican voting bloc moved over to Perot, thereby giving Clinton a landslide, though he himself had close to the historical vote.

Now, there are some other issues

- None of the third parties have their own funds, thereby forcing their general election candidates to start with no funds. At the same time, the have consistently gone into the negative while campaigning.

- The Reform Party was not able to recieve matching goverment funds, but Ross Perot was, since it was HE that got the vote, not the party. I am not sure how you want to model this, but I just gave the party matching funds since I have NEVER seen Lamm win outside of player intervention.

- The Republican Primaries are confusing to me. I dropped Dole down to $12 million so that it would be more fair to Clinton. However, then all hell breaks loose when they all start winning primaries. Not sure what to make of it, as Dole should be able to normally sweep it, as he did historically. Maybe I should raise it again.

Edit: An odd problem. When it comes to the general election, the percentages become quite rigid. This is in comparison to the 2008 Wonk Edition, where they are very fluid, despite having higher committed rates on both sides. Don't know what to make of it. At least, this problem is only really expressed when played from the primaries.

Thanks for the input. I was sure I had just given the minor parties their own GE funds. As for Perot, I was told he wasn't eligible for Federal Block Funds in '96, despite the fact he got them in '92, but his initial funds (assuming they're actually still there; I'll check that out) are quite hefty. I'll try chiselling down the Dems' initial percentages on the GE map in the primaries, as you suggested. As for rigid GE percentages, I did notice that too, and am unsure of what to do about them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 11 months later...

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...