President Forever 2016 v. 1.5.9 has been released! This fixes a couple of bugs to do with primaries seats and conventions, makes issue positions matter more for endorsers, adds 5 new endorsers to 2016 (including Sarah Palin, George Soros, and Mitt Romney), makes a large number of minor modifications to the 2016, 2012, and 2008 campaigns, adds a few more minor features to the Campaign Editor, and removes the ‘Governors’ section seen when in the Electoral Vote Info Screen.
Note: the 2008 campaign is a Beta, and will continue to be fine-tuned. Feedback welcome!
Connect with us on Facebook and Twitter!To update:
http://270soft.com/updates-redownloads/
Version information:
http://270soft.com/updates-redownloads/president-forever-2016-version-information/
Thanks for the update. Everything mostly look great.
I get an error message when clicking on George Soros in the endorsers GUI
Also, the Republican bias is still there when I space-bar through scenarios as a 3rd party. Something needs to be tweaked. 2016 almost never simulates a Democratic victory. It’s usually a landslide Republican victory. While this isn’t impossible for 2016, it isn’t certain.
My best assumption is that
2016 should be 50% win for either party
2012 should be a 60% chance of a simulated win for Obama
2008 should be a 70 to 80% chance of a simulated win for Democrats
Using this scale, to give a comparison.
Reagan would win 90% or more of 1984 simulations
Bush would be 50% in 2000 and 60% in 2004
Nixon would be 90% in 1972
JFK 50% in 1960
George Washington 100% in 1788 and 1792.
Abraham Lincoln 70 or 80% in 1864, 50% if Atlanta was never captured.
But using my past simulations that I’ve posted,
Republicans win 70 to 80% of 2016 simulations
Republicans win 60 to 70% of 2012 simulations
It’s about tied or 60% Democrat in the 2008 simulation
Note: I know most people aren’t going to just simulate through, but i think it’s important that it does simulate accurately.
Here are my results for the three scenarios below. Democrats do win 2008, but somehow lose the popular vote in an election that was perceived as a huge Democratic win across the country:
In the 2016 election:
Rubio 392EV 52.3%
Clinton 146EV 45.1%
Economist endorses Rubio 100 to Clinton’s 17. (even though it hasn’t endorsed a Republican in 16 years as of this election). Clinton hammered with scandals, you’d think she murdered someone during a campaign speech and refused to drop out.
In the 2012 election:
Democrats were up 41% to 33%, but then Obama picked Clinton as his VP, the next day General Election was declared and the Republicans leap-frogged the Democrats with a 38% to 36% lead.
End results are:
Gingrich 354EV 49.2
Obama 184 48%
California decisively for Gingrich. Santorum is still not a strong enough candidate. Ron Paul dropped out too early.
2008 election:
This election, which was seen by most American’s as a shoe in for whomever the Democratic nominee was, should be a scenario that is challenging for any player wishing to play as a Republican. A similar example, although even more lopsided, is the 1984 election, in which 9 of 10 simulations should go to Reagan. I’d say in this one, 7 or 8 simulations should go to Democrats. In 2012, 6 of 10 should go Obama. In 2016, it should be 50/50.
On August 19, Republicans take a 10% lead over Democrats. I could see something like this happening in the late Bush administration. Obama did receive a boost near the election and wins.
Obama 283 EV 48.4%
Romney 255 EV 48.5%
Republicans win the popular vote despite a disastrous Bush presidency in a roundly perceived Democratic landslide.
Despite this unintentional bias in the system, I really like the update.
@Jonathan re: balancing for 2016-2008, I’ve noted these things. Thanks for this.
Re: clicking George Soros in Endorsers Screen, fixed in the latest internal.
Ok, cool.
Warner is still Governor and not Gov.! Also, there is sometimes an error message before the debates, especially but not uniquely when only one candidate qualifies for it.
@Tayya, thanks, Warner 2008 Governor -> Gov. in latest internal.
I’ve noted the error message in debates – will look into it.
@Anthony
I’m going to add the 1912 Governors and congress people soon to that excel spreadsheet. How long until you think you’d add them to the 1912 beta? If there’s a way I could do it for you, I would.
@Jonathan re: 1912, if you wanted to help, you could take the latest 1912 scenario, use the Campaign Editor to add them, and then send the new version to me. It would then happen as soon as I’m able to review them and then release a new version.
@Anthony
ok sounds great
@Anthony
I get an access violation when trying to create an endorser in the 1912 scenario. It happens when I click “endorsers” on the main editor screen.
at “004A2C35” with read address of “00000018”
Note: I didn’t edit anything in this scenario. All I did was hit “endorsers” so I could begin adding Governors and Senators.
@Jonathan,
Thanks for this – I get the error as well. I’ll look into it, a fix should be forthcoming shortly.
Ok, awesome.
Ok, the problem was that an endorser had an issue that was not in the scenario (“unions”). I have changed this in the latest internal. In the meantime, simply open the endorsers.xml file and change the issue id=”unions” to issue id=”labor”. You should then be able to edit and add endorsers.
@Anthony
When I do this and then try to save endorsers.xml, I get “access denied” when trying to save it. How can I go around this?
@Anthony
I edited a 1912 scenario and then changed the endorsers.xml in the edited 1912 scenario. That allowed me to bypass the “access denied”. I created the Gov and Sens of Alabama, but once I saved the scenario, I got an error message and then another message that terminated the program.
However, when I play the game, there doesn’t seem to be any problem.
I spoke too soon. If I click on Alabama to look at the endorsers, the game pops up several error messages and I had to exit the game.
I think it might be because the endorsers are showing up as national endorsers, because they’re copied and edited from William Jennings Bryan. I then edited them to suit them and then gave them unique ids. When I run the game, they show up nationally, instead of in Alabama. Then when I click on Alabama, I get the error. How do I lock them into showing only as Alabama endorsers? Their home and their bonus is listed as Alabama.
You do this by setting them as Alabama endorsers in the Campaign Editor. If for some reason that isn’t working, then I recommend waiting until the next update, and then taking the latest 1912 scenario where you should be able to do everything in the Editor.
If you’d like me to test adding an endorser, you can e-mail me the data.
Ok. I’m an idiot. Didn’t see that drop down menu. I think this fixed everything. Thanks!
Awesome. I’m slowly creating the endorsers for 1912. I also added the Tammany Hall boss, Charles Francis Murphy, as a surrogate for whomever Tammany Hall endorses.
I found a new error in the 1912 scenario. If I click on any candidate and go to the page that has endorsers/PAC/Issues, I get a message and none of the information has been imputed in that area. I was going to add endorsers specific to each candidate. Also, Underwood should probably have his platform lean slightly more Southern even though he was anti-Klan and supportive of Wilson when Wilson began his progressive presidency.
@Jonathan,
I have recreated this bug. It occurs because there are no surrogates for the leaders, and the Editor expects there to be at least one. I’ll fix this for the next release.
@Anthony
I added surrogates in mine and it fixed it.
I’m almost done with all the endorsers.
I can send you my file when I’m done if you want to check it out.
Good to hear – sounds good, looking forward to taking a look at it.
The only remaining error is the percentages screen. However, I went into the html file and edited the primary start map based off of the differences between the Democratic vote in 1908 and 1912 by each state, it was roughly the same as when Bryan ran in 1908, meaning the Republican split is the only thing that allowed Wilson to win, it seems. I also made Debs percentages based off off the difference between 1908 and 1912, giving him 2% going in.
However, it would be nice if the percentage page was fixed so people can edit these in the editor.
@Jonathan, Thanks for this – see comment on other thread re percentages screen and 1912 scenario.