Upcoming President Infinity – Version Ericson – 2.2.7

by

Hi everyone,

This post will keep track of changes to the upcoming version of President Infinity v. Ericson – 2.2.7.

Changes so far (this list will be updated as changes are implemented on this side, these changes will not be available until the version is released):

  • New spin system
  • Ground Ops > if more than 3 months before an election, the Power is multiplied by 0 (so, it’s 0 regardless of Org. Strength and Footsoldiers), if 3 months before, it’s multiplied by 1/3, if 2 months before, it’s 2/3, if 1 month before, it’s full power
  • % research scandal increases half as quickly, starts at 0.5% instead of 1%
  • Relations now have greater impact on chance NA pact
  • Relations improve automatically by 1 per week (used to be approx. 1 every day and half), and only if relations < 50
  • added United States – 1980
  • added United States – 1972
  • 2016 > Primaries > Reps > MA > FPP -> PR
  • 2016 > Sanders > Command 1 -> 2
  • 2016 > Sanders > Spin 1 -> 2
  • 2016 > new Trump image
  • 2016 > Carson > Stamina 3 -> 2
  • 2016 > Jeb Bush > Charisma 3 -> 2
  • 2016 > Cruz > Stamina 3 -> 4
  • 2016 > Cruz > Strategic 1 -> 2
  • 2016 > Clinton > Stamina 4 -> 3
  • 2016 > Warren > Leadership 3 -> 4
  • 2016 > Sanders > Strategic 1 -> 2
  • 2016 > Huckabee > Debating 3 -> 4
  • 2016 > Relations > Trump-Christie > Normal -> Good
  • 2016 > Veeps > Republicans > added Sen. Jeff Sessions, Spkr. Newt Gingrich, Sen. Scott Brown, Sen. Bob Corker
  • 2016 > Trump > Research 1 -> 3
  • 2016 > Trump > Ads 1 -> 2
  • 2016 > Trump > Command 2 -> 3
  • 2016 > updated Huckabee image
  • 2016 > updated Jeb Bush image
  • 2016 > updated Christie image
  • 2016 > Events > March 14, 2016 > added “Russians Begin Withdrawal from Syria”
  • 2016 > Events > March 22, 2016 > added “Brussels Terrorist Attacks”
  • fixed bug where message on election night occurred calling election for player who didn’t actually win
  • Editor > fixed bug where deleting leader would cause error due to not being on all ballots (ex., official 1968 campaign)
  • Editor > fixed bug where error if no debates for a party or in general election
  • Editor > Regions > general election > no longer have PR option
  • 1968 > Endorsers > fixed bug that would occur when viewing all endorsers
  • Select Campaign Screen > fixed bug where blurb didn’t update when switched between primaries and general election

207 thoughts on “Upcoming President Infinity – Version Ericson – 2.2.7”

  1. @Anthony_270admin, when do you expect the favorability rating feature to be ready and placed in the game, I am not asking a specific date or anything, just a general time frame.

  4. Using version 2.2.6, I attempted to play the 2008 scenario as Democrat Mark Warner, got a violation message and said the game tried starting in 1899..also, will you finish the 2012 election at some point? Besides 2016 election, that is my favorite, and I feel like it’s lacking compared to the other scenarios.

  5. Ground Ops > if more than 3 months before an election, the Power is multiplied by 0 (so, it’s 0 regardless of Org. Strength and Footsoldiers), if 3 months before, it’s multiplied by 1/3, if 2 months before, it’s 2/3, if 1 month before, it’s full power.

  7. Is there a way that the forums and undercard debates that have happened during this election season could be included?

  8. I’m wondering if there is any update on the bug (or whatever it is) where saving messes up and says ‘Unable to write to specified save game file.’ While I’ve mostly gotten around this issue by leaving PI running in the background until I’m done with the current campaign, a) it means I can’t restart the computer for any reason, b) if I’m in a situation where restarting is necessary, I lose my information, and c) it means I can’t cross test (recently what I’ve been doing is mess around with the campaign editor so I can learn the individual features, such as the full extent of polls, while setting myself fun challenges such as: can I beat Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton as a horse.). The fact that I can’t jump across saves to compare makes it a bit harder task.

    Anyway, any update on that?

  9. @Dallas re 2008,

    Are you able to consistently create this error with Warner? If so, where does the error occur?

  10. 2016 > Sanders > Primaries > Command 1 -> 2.
    2016 > Sanders > Primaries > Spin 1 -> 2.

  11. @Jesse re forums and undercard debates,

    It’s possible – feedback noted, we’ll see.

  12. @Dylan K.,

    Are you consistently experiencing this bug? If so, are you using large numbers of candidates when starting (more than by default)? Also, what operating system are you using?

  13. I’m playing on Windows. And it’s odd; usually when I start a campaign I can save fine, but at a seemingly random point later (or at least a point that I haven’t been able to find consistently) it comes up with that error. Has affected four campaigns so far (which total my number of campaigns I’ve played on 2.2.5 and 2.2.6).

    And yes, I am definitely playing with a lot more candidates than by default. Does that cause problems?

  14. @Dylan K.,

    Yes, having large numbers of candidates is a known problem. Basically, the main save file increases in size as a game goes on, and at some point (if enough candidates are active) it can be too large to save.

  15. @anthony
    Ah. Okay. I’ll keep that in mind, and until it’s fixed use a sensible (if less fun) number of candidates.

  17. Also, I noticed in version 2.2.6 playing as Bernie Sanders in the 2016 scenario primaries, when I got endorsed by Martin O’ Malley, it seems like most of the momentum went to Hillary Clinton and not me. After the endorsement, her points went through the roof, while mine went up just a little, making it harder to defeat her. That happened again when I was endorsed by Jim Webb. Not sure if this is a bug or not. And the Democrats general election numbers go do really easily, making it easy to defeat them as Republicans and helps third parties gain a lot of point, which makes it harder to make a comeback as the Democrats.

  18. @Dallas I haven’t come across that in the primaries, but I know it has to do with momentum and not just a factor of being endorsed. So if Bernie as +0.5 momentum and Hillary has +1.5. Theoretically, she would then get more of the drop out’s %’s.

    I absolutely agree that the GE should be change somehow. I find it MUCH easier to win as a Republican than as a Democrat. It seems like the states like MI & M go Red much easier as a Republican than states like IN as a Democrat.

  19. I was thinking about potentially setting thresholds for candidates to meet, and if they don’t meet them, have them drop out. It is frustrating to have the 15 candidates in the race through the middle of March. Also, I’d like it to be easier to get an endorsement or withdrawal from a candidate who is almost mathematically eliminated (one game, I couldn’t get Rick Santorum of all people to endorse me!) Are any of those things possible?

  21. He said he would have entered if Sanders looked stronger, but he had already made it clear he would not run against Clinton. Is there a way for game mechanics to replicate this? If not, you could have a difference of average ratings: (Lead Democrat – Bloomberg) and (Lead Republican – Bloomberg), and if they both exceed a certain level, he joins.

  22. I think Romney’s polls should be changed in Utah, Michigan, New Hampshire and Massachusetts. He is actually stronger in these states. I would put him at 60% in Utah, 50% in Massachusetts, and 30% in New Hampshire and Michigan.

  24. @Kyle,

    Yes, the algorithm for deciding how computer players drop out is on the to-do list to be modified. Basically, it seems people drop out when they either a) have no money to continue operations (built up, then can’t sustain, such as Walker, Perry, say), and so have to, or b) see no realistic path to the nomination (Huckabee and Santorum after Iowa, say).

  27. @Rophil,

    I agree with your intuition that he would be higher in those states, but it’s pretty difficult to say exactly what %s without polling data. I’ve noted this, though.

  28. @Anthony
    This isn’t that big of a deal, but I think the “what if” candidates for the 2016 election should probably have about 5 to 10% in their home states. For example, I turned on Julian Castro and realized he had 0% in Texas despite having gained 3% in several other states after a month of campaigning.

  29. @Jonathan,

    Yes – I believe most of the what-if candidates have home state %s > 0, but some might be missed. Noted.

  30. @Anthony

    Do you think you should add a negative momentum event for when someone loses their home state in a primary? Maybe even one for polling behind as well.

  31. @Jonathan
    I think that I a great idea. There has been a lot of media coverage talking about if a candidate looses their home state, they should drop out(Ted Cruz before Super Tuesday and now Rubio). Also, it should make more of an impact on a candidate dropping out.

  32. Hi,
    I recently switched computers, and noticed an issue that arises with trying to move my President Infinity custom scenarios and associated saves over. The saves look for the exact filepath that the custom scenario was previously located at to load information from, and have become unplayable for me as my username on this computer is not identical to that of my old computer. In other words, the saves are looking for files from:
    C:\Users\[old name]\Documents\President Infinity
    While the files in question are now located at:
    C:\Users\[new name]\Documents\President Infinity
    There’s no way that I can see for me to change this. I’ve given up and just started new games, but this struck me as something I should probably report, since I’m sure there must be a better way to handle this. (Perhaps assigning scenarios unique IDs, and having the save file search the user’s scenario path for the ID rather than searching for a specific filepath?)

  33. Maybe also add incumbent president’s approval rating and an economic meter, since those influence elections. Clinton/Sanders chances of victory will hinge upon these factors.

  35. @Ashley,

    Yes, this could be modified so porting save games works, but this seems like a pretty rare case.

    To load your save games, open them up in a pure text editor (Notepad might work, I haven’t tested it) and search for the old path. Then replace it with the new path. Repeat until no more instances. Also check each sub-save file (the same start with a different extension).

  36. I’d say it’s less rare than you’d think. :p I understand if it’s work you don’t think is worth it, but it’s just a bit frustrating as a user. (I’d imagine this will keep me from being able to hotseat a multiplayer game with people via email.)

    Thanks for the response, though!

  38. I’m attempting to make my own scenario with a proportional electoral college. The problem is, when I set all the states to proportional, they still come out as winner take all in the projections and election result. I’m assuming that this is a bug?

  40. @Ashley – Don’t know if this would solve the problem but if you save the file on Google Drive or Dropbox it might solve it (everyone accesses the file in the same place each time).

  42. @Brendan,

    It’s a bug with the Editor – it shouldn’t allow that option. It’s on the to-do list.

  43. @Ashley,

    It’s impossible to know, automatically, where those campaign files will be on a new system. It’s possible to add an import save game option, which automatically resets the path. We’ll see.

  44. Is there any plan to change how people drop out, they all blindly endorse the number candidate right now, and the convention goes to whomever has the most delegates regardless of any other qualifiers.

  47. I posted about this on a previous thread but when I play the game from the primaries with Hillary Clinton… I’m not receiving the option to accept/decline the block grant and my speeches are not being replenished.

  48. Recently, the US Virgin Islands voted to have all its delegates uncommitted until the convention. Is there a way where this could be modeled in the game?

  49. I can see rallies being cancelled due to protest once Anthony figures how to implement favourability.

  50. @Jesse,

    Thanks for this – at this point, it’s not a top priority, but I suppose it could be modeled in some way.

  51. @Lordbeckett re changing how candidates drop out,

    Yes, changing this is on the to-do list.

  52. @Marcus,

    I have not been able to recreate that bug. Do you have a save game you can load to just before the general election that can consistently recreate this?

  55. To be specific whenever you double click on a state from the “Strategy” menu, it opens two windows instead of one. When you close the second window, the entire program crashes.

    Thank you!

  57. @Rophil
    I agree. Rubio dominated in Puerto Rico, and I doubt that he was ever low in the polls there. I also doubt that Trump was ahead in Puerto Rico.

  58. @Kevin re Mac version opening two windows,

    I’ve noted this. Note you don’t need to double-click on states in the Strategy Screen. I will attempt to replicate this.

  60. @Marcus,

    For now, hold off on this. If it still happens with the next update, please let me know.

  63. I was thinking just earlier how Trump or Cruz could secure an endorsement from someone like Rubio who has a decent amount of delegates and I was thinking why not have a cabinet position being available to be offered. I mean you can’t offer vp slot till you secure a majority of delegates but if you don’t reach enough delegates and need a candidates delegates why not a cabinet position. Just a thought.

  65. Are we getting any closer to getting the favorability feature? I don’t mean to be a pain but it seems like it was announced months ago.

  68. @William,

    The general idea of Cabinet slots and so on is an interesting one. Basically, the PIP system will be modified to reflect these sorts of considerations, although probably not with specific positions.

  69. On the old engine, there was an option to fast forward to the convention once you had secured the nomination. Would it be possible to implement this for the new engine? Even with 7 days a turn (which I don’t use personally) I think that in most cases it is a few months between securing the nomination and the convention, especially in the scenarios pre-2016 and I think it would be better to have the ability to skip this gameplay where nothing of much importance can be done due to still being in the primaries stage.

  70. I’d like to see the election fast-forwarded if you happen to lose the nomination. This way you can see the end result. Otherwise, it’s like the candidate is executed, because he/she never gets to see the future.

  71. @anthony well maybe the pip can regenerate based on how well you are doing because if you are a lower tier candidate you use them all up before the votes just to stay alive. Maybe a regeneration based on if your standing improves. Because you definitely would have more political influence if you are the leading contender for your party’s nomination. Sorry about lack of punctuation writing this on break real quick lol

  72. Would it be possible for if-then events to be added? For example, in my 1824 scenario, it would be nice to be able to model the so-called “Corrupt Bargain”. So, if Henry Clay is not in the top 3 and if John Quincy Adams is in the top 3 and if the election goes to the House of Representatives, then John Quincy Adams wins the election. Another example would be if Henry Clay is in the top 3 and if the election goes to the House, then Henry Clay wins the election. Henry Clay most likely would have won the election if he was still in when it went to the House.

  73. @Jesse,

    There’s already an if-then ability for events, but this specific functionality (if in top 3) isn’t there. Maybe in the future.

  74. @William re PIPs,

    Yes – I want to modify the PIPs system to allow more for someone who’s chances at winning the nomination have increased.

  75. @Jonathan re fast-forwarding if lose nomination,

    Playing as whoever wins the nomination is on to-do list.

  76. @Will re fast-forward,

    No, fast-forward was a stop-gap measure, and I don’t plan to re-implement it. 3 months, say, = 15 turns.

  78. @anthony yeah that sounds great I love the game ya’ll have done such a great job on the many games ya’ll have created. Keep up the good work!!!

  81. Found an error: Playing as Rockefeller in the 1968 version after the first 3 states, I would go into a state leading by like 15-20 points, plus 15 momentum and then lose all my vote to the second place challenger and this kept repeating itself over and over again. Don’t know why this happening. It seems improbable to have 70% of the vote in West Virginia the day off and then drop down to zero.

  82. Any plans to have endorsers reopen after the candidate that they endorsed drops out? I know it has been discussed before. As well as making all former candidates endorsers.

  87. @AJ,

    I’ve noted this and will attempt to recreate. Can you tell me what operating system you are using and your game version number (right-side of Start Screen)?

  91. You could consider adding town halls. They could start out weak but eventually help slowing big dips in momentum ice you do enough town halls in that state.

  93. Another idea is to do different types of funding, Clinton and Bush obviously has different fundraising than Carson and Sanders. Where Carson and Sanders use internet funds and Clinton and Bush get giant superpac funding.

  94. @Sean,

    Yes – to an extent, this is modeled by different Super PAC strengths for the candidates.

  95. Select Campaign Screen > fixed bug where blurb didn’t update when switched between primaries and general election.

  97. In response to Gary Johnson getting 11%. He’s being tightly challenged by Austin Petersen, and McAfee was also invited to the first Libertarian televised primary debate. They both deserve to be added as candidates.

  98. @Brendan

    I don’t think Johnson is being challenged seriously, he is the only with experience and name recognition within the party.

  99. Will there be a tweak with general election polling? If I have a certain amount of candidates or certain candidates on/off it massively flips the entire country D or R

  100. @AJ,

    Windows or Mac? Which operating system number? (Windows 10? Mac OS X Yosemite? and so on)

  101. @Chad,

    I’ve noted this – yes, this should be fixed when Favorability is implemented (next major feature on to-do list, but not ETA for it).

  103. With all the protestors going after Trump, is there a mechanism for having certain candidates more likely to have “Protestors disrupt [CANDIDATE] event”? Obviously, not Trump-specific. Maybe a candidate with certain prominence who has a Right or Far-Right position on an issue with High or Very High relevance? Particularly if it’s a social issue; most of the protests have been about “hate”, i.e. immigration and BLM, and not so much about “favoring the rich” or military policy.

  104. For the 1980 scenario. You should add Donald Rumsfeld as a running mate option for the Republicans, since he was heavily considered to be Ronald Reagan’s running mate in 1980 until he picked George H.W. Bush instead.

  105. @Dylan

    If you think that you didn’t watch the Libertarian debate… Petersen and McAfee both beat him in polls in winner of the debate. There is a serious challenge. It’s not hard to add a candidate like Petersen and McAfee, especially when Ventura isn’t even running and he’s a candidate.

  109. I think Ted Cruz’s Strategy Attribute should be upgraded to a 3 if not then at least a 2, he has proven to be a great strategist over and over and even now he is showing how good he is by running a great campaign.

  110. I think Trump’s ground rating should be reduced to 1. He has constantly been out-maneuvered in these caucuses and state/county/congressional district conventions which rely on ground game. I think there is an argument for improving Sanders and Cruz’s ground rating to 3 as they have relied on a grass-roots campaign and both have done well in caucus state. Plus, going back to the Trump part, Cruz has outmaneuvered Trump in these state convention where delegates are elected getting his supporter in which will help past the second round in a contested convention. It also helped in North Dakota where he got 18 delegates on his slate elected. In Colorado, Cruz got all of the delegates at the district and state conventions. In Wyoming, Cruz dominated in the county conventions(with the state convention still to come). Also, Cruz could get more delegates than Trump in Louisiana despite Trump winning. He also got many favorable delegates elected in Arizona for the 2nd ballot at the convention. So, I think Sanders and Cruz should have their ground score increase to 3.

    @William
    I agree that his should at least be a 2.

  111. Yeah, Sanders ground game should definitely be high. I don’t know if Trump’s should be 1. I think until recently, his ground game was what helped him defeat establishment people who were getting all the endorsements.

  112. Trump really has not been winning with the ground game. He has been winning because of his spin and the $2 billion dollars of free news coverage. Every time he says or does something, it is breaking news. He has also benefitted from a split anti-Trump field. My argument for Trump being a 1 is because Cruz has been running circles around him in these conventions that choose delegates. Colorado was just a recent example but others include Louisiana, Arizona, North Dakota, Wyoming(county conventions; We will see what happens at the state convention) and Iowa. And, these conventions rely on a ground game. Also, during the Iowa caucus, the media was talking about how Cruz had a great ground game while Trump had a very weak ground game. It also lead to a shakeup in the Trump campaign recently.

  114. @Eric,

    Good idea re protestors. Perhaps a simply link between how extreme a candidate’s views are on an issue and how high that candidate’s %s are. We’ll see.

  119. @Wilson,

    I don’t know when the next version will be released, but probably pretty soon. It will feature a revamped news system.

  121. I know this is not the place but can anyone help fix my campaign I can’t do it and Anthony recommends asking you all, it would mean a great deal if you could.

  124. all I can say is that I cannot wait til this new 2.2.7 update comes out..I just recently purchased this game, along with Congress Infinity, and they both are fantastic!!

    Excellent work and keep’s getting better!!

  127. A thought: if at all possible, it’d be neat to go from state to county levels, as well as have state conventions factor in, as those will often influence the delegates a person walks away with.

  128. @Lucas,

    Yes, it would be nice, but county level adds a big layer of complexity. I think the game is complex enough as it is.

  130. I started a game with all the actual candidates off and only those with 0% on as well as Gary Johnson and Jill Stein. I played until the first polls came out, at which point I closed the experiment.
    What I found:
    1) even the undecideds start at 0% in the primaries when I figure they should be 100%
    2) the first general election poll has the Libertarians winning everywhere with 60% of the vote; i.e. the Republican/Democrat ticket in the general election starts at 0%
    3) as soon as any positive momentum is achieved in a state primary, that candidate leaps to 100% in that state, almost as if turnout is set to 1 voter in each state

    I believe if each of the “not running historically” candidates were set to 0.1% instead of 0%, the game wouldn’t get confused and try to divide by 0. Also, this way if I amended this experiment by including a candidate with 1% (O’Malley, Jindal), that candidate would not automatically start with 80%
    This may indicate an engine flaw: apparently, if a candidate with 13% (example) is excluded from a particular run of the game, that candidate’s voters are erased from the voter pool instead of becoming undecided.
    I tested this by turning off Clinton, Sanders, and Biden for the October start. Webb and O’Malley start at 50% and 30%, respectively. The Democrats start the general election at 1.9%.
    To test what happens when only one candidate with a non-zero percentage starts, I started another October game with O’Malley, Schweitzer, and Warner. O’Malley starts at 80% nationally, but only 15 states have percentages at all. All the rest start with everyone at 0%, including the undecideds. All the states with percentages have O’Malley at 80%, leading me to conclude that the other 35 states have no voters at all.

  131. When I try to make every region in a GENERAL election have proportional representation via the campaign editor, they still calculate electoral votes as if it was first-past-the-post. Is there a way I can fix that?

  137. Something I have noticed I hope to see addressed in the update:
    Many of the histroical scenarios have issues where the candidates are able to fundraise significantly smaller amounts (For example, I upgrade George Bush’s fundraising to “5” in the 1980 scenario and yet he raises a max of 150,000 during the primaries) and yet the cost of ads is the same as it would be in the 2016 race. This seems to be an issue.

  138. I think the answer to the fundraising this is to lower the cost of everything. (Not just ad creation) but running the ads & the cost of polling. There is also a running cost of the campaign built in to some extent I am thinking. That could be adjusted somehow probably. Best option: make the $ coefficient affect all costs as well as the rate of fundraising.

  139. It would be nice to choose a VP candidate before the nomination is locked up(like Cruz did today with Fiorina).

  140. @Jesse,

    Ya, it could be opened up so you can choose a (potential) VP nominee at any point. I’m not sure how this kind of move will effect the race, though.

  142. It might not reflect the race directly, but it would give you more options for campaigning which is a positive.

  144. @Jeff,

    I have been working on updating the Spin system, in light of Trump’s success. Work on Favorability will be started again once that’s done.

  147. @Eric re turning everyone with %s off,

    Yes, that probably reflects a game engine flaw. Should be fixed with Favorability.

  148. Hi,

    Will there be an update to Congress Infinity where I can add a new map in the campaign editor?

    Thanks!

  149. @Cazador,

    Yes, CI will see an update, probably in the summer, which will include an upgraded Campaign Editor including the ability to import maps.

  150. @Anthony

    Newt Gingrich has been mentionned as potential VP candidate for Trump. Could you add him as a candidate? It would be fun to imagine he lunches his second campaign.

  151. Yeah that could be fun.
    I have an idea too: How about including Former Ambassador John R. Bolton? 🙂 I’d love to play as him in an official campaign and he was even a potential candidate but eventually declined after months of speculations in May 2015..

  152. @Rophil,

    There will probably be several Veep possibilities added – thanks for this.

    @Luki,

    Maybe – we’ll see.

  153. Since we are talking about adding possible Vice Presidents for 2016, what about Governor Paul LePage and former Senator Scott Brown?

  154. Very Likley VP possibilities that should be considered being added:

    GOP:
    Gov. LePage
    Gov. Scott
    Fmr. Spkr. Gingrich

    Dem:
    Sen. Franken
    Sec. Perez
    Fmr. Gov. Bayh
    Gen. Clark

  155. @Anthony

    I believe Romney’s profile should be upgraded. In 2008 and 2012 campaigns his integrity is at 3, and in the 2016 one it is at 2.

    I also would enjoy seeing him running as a third party candidate. He has recieved some speculation for that. Could you create that?

  156. When are they ever going to fix the glitch with the convention where you don’t even have to get a majority to win it, and the candidates do not share their delegates at all? Major game breaker to me. Also, I could be running scenario with the Republican candidate, the Dem candidate, the Green Party and Bloomberg, and it crashes on me almost every time at 40 days to go. If I don’t have Bloomberg in the race, or I selected at least 4 candidates on each side for the primaries, it doesn’t happen.

  157. @Jonathan,

    Convention will be reworked as a major update, probably after Favorability.

    Thank you for this bug report – I’ve noted it.

  158. @Rophil,

    No intention to create a Romney third-party option at this point. We’ll see.

    As for his Integrity, I think it’s possible for a candidate’s Integrity to change over time. If I were to modify it one way or another, it would be to set them all to 2’s.

  163. @Anthony

    Well they are more serious than a couple that are already in there. But as far as Franken goes, there was a very widely circulated artcile on Politico: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/03/2016-elections-al-franken-vice-president-213756

    Franken also balances Clinton out with a populist style white man from a light blue midwestern state that can be her attack dog to go after Trump and let her sit above it. He could help keep some of the white blue collar voters in MN, WI, MI, OH & PA. And unlike Sherrod Brown, he wouldn’t cost the party a Senate seat.

    LePage is one of the few Trump VP possibilities from states he would even have a remote chance of winning. Christie’s New Jersey would never go for Trump in the general. Sessions doesn’t help since it would take some sort of collapse of historical proportion for Trump to have a chance of losing Alabama. Perry doesn’t help with Texas much since if Texas is in play: the election is then already lost. Rick Scott makes sense because of Florida and Ernst makes sense with Iowa. Palin already said she would say no and Cruz, Rubio & Kasich are already a no. LePage is basically Trump without the money, business experience, name recognition. Yet, he does have electoral experience in a competitive Gubernatorial race & has executive experience.

  164. Would it be possible to add an option for you to continue into the general election with the computer player that beats you in the primaries?

  165. I just noticed that Texas has its proportion level set at 15% on the Republican side. That should be set at 20%

  166. Would it be possible, in the future, to make it so that partys don’t hold primaries? They just go right to the convention and the nominee is chosen there.

  169. – 2016 > new Trump images
    – 2016 > Carson > Stamina 3 -> 2
    – 2016 > Jeb Bush > Charisma 3 -> 2
    – 2016 > Cruz > Stamina 3 -> 4
    – 2016 > Cruz > Strategic 1 -> 2
    – 2016 > Clinton > Stamina 4 -> 3
    – 2016 > Warren > Leadership 3 -> 4
    – 2016 > Sanders > Strategic 1 -> 2
    – 2016 > Relations > Trump-Christie > Normal -> Good
    – 2016 > Veeps > Republicans > added Sen. Jeff Sessions, Spkr. Newt Gingrich, Sen. Scott Brown
    – added 1972

  173. @DJH,

    If what you mean is that there are no state-by-state results, but just convention results, yes – I would like to implement this. That way parties without the primaries process won’t have 50 pop-ups (or what have you).

  174. @Marcus re option to continue as computer player beaten by in primaries,

    Yes, this is on the to-do list.

  175. @Aaron re veep choicies,

    I agree that LePage has been floated as a possibility, and it might be fun for some players to have that choice. We’ll see. Franken noted.

  180. As much as I’d hate to say it, I would probably make the Libertarian Party a little stronger in the general election. It seems like they may exceed 1% of the vote this time.

  183. @Anthony

    I think Mike Huckabee’s debate ability should be set at 4. I found he actually did well in the debates.

  184. I agree with Rophil on this. Huckabee did much better this time around when he had time. He just got snubbed on the time.

  185. – 2016 > Events > March 14, 2016 > added “Russians Begin Withdrawal from Syria”
    – 2016 > Events > March 22, 2016 > added “Brussels Terrorist Attacks”
    – fixed bug where message on election night occurred calling election for player who didn’t actually win

  189. @Wilson,

    It’s looking good – the new spin system is more-or-less done. Mostly just getting the AI up to a playable state. Then release.

  190. @Kevin,

    We’ll see – President Infinity, Congress Infinity, and PM Infinity updates all probably coming this year. We then have a possible ‘be President’ game that would be released after those. Can we fit in a French game? Possibly, but the language barrier is a big problem (the major market is France, most French people don’t speak English well).

  191. @Chris,

    Yes, we’ll see if those numbers hold, but it very well may be a good year for the Libertarian party – noted.

  194. @Nolesfan2011 re Corker,

    Yes, noted.

    @Wilson,

    I don’t believe I will have time to make an Australia 2016 campaign. Focus is on American games right now.

  195. – 2016 > Trump > Research 1 -> 3
    – 2016 > Trump > Ads 1 -> 2
    – 2016 > Trump > Command 2 -> 3
    – 2016 > Veeps > added Sen. Bob Corker
    – Editor > fixed bug where deleting leader would cause error due to not being on all ballots (ex., official 1968 campaign)

  197. – Editor > fixed bug where error if no debates for a party or in general election
    – Editor > Regions > general election > no longer have PR option

  199. – 2016 > updated Huckabee image
    – 2016 > updated Jeb Bush image
    – 2016 > updated Christie image
    – Relations now have greater impact on chance NA pact

  202. – relations improve automatically by 1 per week (used to be approx. 1 every day and half), and only if relations < 50

  205. Pingback: President Infinity next release sneak-peek, Windows only | 270soft.com

  206. I think that Cruz’s position on corruption should be center. He really went after both parties and branded the establishment as the Washington Cartel.

  207. @Jesse

    He did, but not as much as Trump. He also definitely attacked Clinton more than he did Republicans, so I don’t think center would be the most accurate.

Leave a Comment