Jump to content
270soft Forum

United States - 1996


Recommended Posts

Great job, but one glaring factual error. Robert Casey was not banned from speaking at the Democratic National Convention in 1992 because of his pro-life views. He wasn't allowed to speak because he hadn't endorsed the ticket. Many pro-life Democrats did speak at the convention, including Mayor Daley of Chicago and Zell Miller.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to submit that there's a lot of disagreement on why he was blocked. Casey says it was because of his views, but the Clinton campaign said it was because he hadn't endorsed the ticket. If I had to guess, both factors played a role: I suspect that Clinton didn't want the issue debated at the convention too vigorously, and the not-endorsing-the-ticket matter probably also swayed things, but if Clinton wanted him to speak, he would have spoken, regardless of any endorsement of the ticket or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Minor goof: I think California was at the end of March in '96 (like the 28th or some date around then); it didn't move forward until 2000.

Scratch that. Major goof: You simply transplanted the 2000 primary schedule on the Democratic side. The two schedules didn't even look too much alike, as I recall; '96 looked like '92 more than 2000, IIRC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, but Casey didn't endorse Clinton because he was pro-choice. Also, by this time Daley was pro-choice. And Zell Miller is insane.

Senator John Breaux, Senator Howell Heffin, and five pro-life Governors spoke. I'll grant you that Zell Miller is insane. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Minor goof: I think California was at the end of March in '96 (like the 28th or some date around then); it didn't move forward until 2000.

Scratch that. Major goof: You simply transplanted the 2000 primary schedule on the Democratic side. The two schedules didn't even look too much alike, as I recall; '96 looked like '92 more than 2000, IIRC.

Delegates and Dates (courtesy of CNN) are over here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope there's no policy, official or unofficial, against more than one scenario for the same election being out there, as I've been working on a '96 scenario for several weeks now and am close to being done.

There is not, but the naming system is going to get messed up bad fast.

Everybody insists on copying TheorySpark's "United States - xxxx" as my guess is both you and Mitt/Ruy08 did so clearly we're going to need a duel to settle the naming issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll put my user handle (Patine) beside the '1996' on the default folder's name.

Or you could adopt a new naming scheme as I did: Campaign '68 for instance.

Stealing book titles (Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail, '72) also works: The Choice — 1996 or some other '96 book could work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or you could adopt a new naming scheme as I did: Campaign '68 for instance.

Stealing book titles (Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail, '72) also works: The Choice — 1996 or some other '96 book could work.

Primary Colors wasn't 1996, but it was about Bill Clinton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope. Dan Quayle ran in 2000. In 1996 he decided against running.

The wikopedia article's on Dan Quayle, the 1996 Presidential Election, and the 1996 Republican Primary, all say he was a candidate in 96. He dropped out of the race because of health problems.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Quayle#Post-vice_presidency

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._presiden...arty_nomination

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Pa...arty_nomination

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How nice for the Wiki. In reality Quayle considered running, but ultimately decided against it after talking it over with his wife and concluding that he was still young enough to make a bid later.

He should be off by default, but certainly there if someone wanted to play him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How nice for the Wiki. In reality Quayle considered running, but ultimately decided against it after talking it over with his wife and concluding that he was still young enough to make a bid later.

He should be off by default, but certainly there if someone wanted to play him.

That was a dumb decision by him. Although it's extremely unlikely that they would ever nominate an intellectual punching bag such as himself.

Tried the scenario, seemed like Clinton had too big of an advantage. He ended up winning all but 4 states when I spacebarred and Kansas and Oklahoma were within 4 percent. I guess this is the Demo's version of 1984.

Link to comment
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...