An Eventual Forty Years of Presidential Elections

[ElectricMonk]

Eventually I'd like to put out a scenario for every Presidential election from 1960 onwards but for now:

I currently have out the 1992 & 2000 scenarios for TheorySpark.

Campaign '68 is almost done.

Campaign '76, '88, and '06 are under construction (the first two are based on zion's scenarios for those years, with his permission; '06 is a West Wing election based on Doug325's scenario, again with his permission).

As with Campaign '68 I intend to get as close to possible to a detailed historical election, with all reasonable and plausible "what-if" or alternative history outcomes possible. That entails building on zion/Doug325's work and extending it. Rest assured, any resemblance between mine and their original versions will be minimal by the end. Basing it on theirs basically saves me some groundwork, and I am quite grateful to both of them for it.

After that? Well there's still 1964, 1972, 1984, and 1996 (TheorySpark is doing 1980 & 1960).

(2008 is well covered by TheorySpark and the 2008 Gold scenario and 2004 probably needs an overhaul but it's an uninteresting election to me.)

[Sean]

I'm starting to get back into the swing of P4E as school's finally out for summer. I've actually started on 1972. While the actual election wasn't close, it was a fascinating election.

I disagree about 2004, and would be more than willing to try to correct some of the scenario's errors. It was the closest re-election of an incumbent since 1916, but the scenario often leaves Bush way ahead by the time the Democratic convention comes around.

I look forward to a great summer of P4E.

[VoteGOP]

I always had an idea of creating them one at a time. Having an "offical" space bar through and making the new scenario based on the last ones results.

[Abe Lincoln]

There is someone else doing 1996 that you could help co-make.

[ElectricMonk]

I'm starting to get back into the swing of P4E as school's finally out for summer. I've actually started on 1972. While the actual election wasn't close, it was a fascinating election.

I disagree about 2004, and would be more than willing to try to correct some of the scenario's errors. It was the closest re-election of an incumbent since 1916, but the scenario often leaves Bush way ahead by the time the Democratic convention comes around.

Well, I'd be happy to work on 1972 with you… as long as you can put up with the mild OCD-like level of detail I attempt to add into them (which, of course, is why 1968 is so bloody fragile and took so long… I back it off a little when I do them for TheorySpark).

And I suppose I could talk to TheorySpark, see if they'd let me overhaul the 2004 scenario. I think I started it once, after 2000, and gave up on it because it needed so much work.

[hcallega]

Fantastic! Electric Monk is back on board! Right now I'm doing some of my own scenarios, but I would love to help with platforms for candidates, as well as who should be on candidate lists. I really think that 1972 could be a very fun election, as it features a darkhorse in McGovern who knocks off multiple frontrunners. The race is also exciting from the perspective of what-ifs (Could Muskie have beaten Nixon? and what about Wallace?). Plus, I remember hearing that Nixon was challenged by an anti-war guy, and maybe there were some conservatives who could challenenge him. So once you get started on it, i would love to help out. After all, beating up on Dick Nixon fun for both liberals and conservatives!

[Sean]

I've got a thread up on '72. I agree, a fascinating election. Aren't they all?

[VoteGOP]

Can't wait to play '8i4 when its done. Best election ever.

[hcallega]

84 would be interesting to. How would a candidate like Hart, Glenn, or Jackson fare against Reagan? Who knows, but soon we'll get the chance to try our hand. What I don't like about p4e+p is that the polling (especially state wide) doesn't really change between nominees. For instance, i would be interesting to see if Jackson could carry some southern states or if Hart could carry some southwestern states.

[ElectricMonk]

84 would be interesting to. How would a candidate like Hart, Glenn, or Jackson fare against Reagan? Who knows, but soon we'll get the chance to try our hand. What I don't like about p4e+p is that the polling (especially state wide) doesn't really change between nominees. For instance, i would be interesting to see if Jackson could carry some southern states or if Hart could carry some southwestern states.

Yeah, the event engine isn't detailed enough. However it is possible to key issues to regional concerns, and then given specific candidates boosts on those specific issues.

Like:

Industrial Concerns — high importance in the Great Lakes states, left position.

John Glenn holds a left position on Industrial Concerns

If John Glenn is in.

Then, +100 on Industrial Concerns.

Theoretically that would give Glenn a big boost on that issue, but that issue would only matter in the Great Lakes so his numbers would only go up there. I imagine you could do that with all the candidates… but this is certainly something that would need a test drive.

[VoteGOP]

I don't think the results would be much different with another Demo candiate. Reagan was just too damn good.

[hcallega]

I think that would be something to explore down the line, but I don't know how to do it. Also, I wasn't saying that they would beat Reagan, they could just do better.