33 Responses to Crowdsourcing: Sarah Palin 2016

  1. Dallas April 1, 2013 at 1:49 pm #

    Sarah Palin’s Platform Suggestions:
    Same Sex Marriage: (Far Right)
    Gun Control: (Far Right)
    Taxes Rates: (Right to Far Right)
    Government Spending: (Right to Far Right)
    This is all that I can think of at the moment.

  2. Dallas April 1, 2013 at 1:51 pm #

    On her platforms, I would make most stances right, if not, far right.

  3. Dallas April 1, 2013 at 1:55 pm #

    Never mind the last reply.

  4. Jonathan April 1, 2013 at 2:41 pm #

    Could you please add Santorum and Hunstman before Palin? They are more likely to run than she is. Although, I’m not totally complaining because I like having the most amount of candidates to choose from.

    As far as what Dallas suggests for her traits, I’d agree with them all except Same Sex Marriage would probably only be Right (she isn’t Bachman), and Gov Spending and Tax Rates would both be Far Right. I’d also suggest that her poll% would be under 10% in every state, possibly even in Alaska.

    If you make Santorum or Hunstman, I’d suggest that they;d both surpass their early poll% from 2012, especially Santorum. Huntsman is kind of emerging as the “new” kind of Republican and will probably become attractive to the Republicans who are tired of voting Democrat every election.

  5. Lucas April 1, 2013 at 2:45 pm #

    Abortion, far right.
    same sex marriage, right
    health care, far right
    social security, center
    education, right
    gun control, far right
    Tax rates, right
    immigration, center
    free trade, center right
    energy and environment, right
    role of government and government spending, right
    anything involving the military, right

    based off of this site: http://www.ontheissues.org/sarah_palin.htm

    once scored is factored in on the left to right scale, she’d be around 5.7.

  6. Dallas April 1, 2013 at 4:07 pm #

    For Sarah’s poll numbers, I think they should be around 8-11 percent (nationally).

  7. anthony_270admin April 1, 2013 at 5:00 pm #

    @Dallas, Jonathan, and Lucas,

    Thanks for Palin platform suggestions – incorporated in to the latest internal version.

  8. anthony_270admin April 1, 2013 at 5:05 pm #

    @Jonathan,

    Thanks for this feedback – Santorum, Huntsman, and Palin have all been added.

    Santorum’s numbers are a big question mark to me – he consolidated support in 2012, but with a new field, I wonder what the numbers would be like … Suggestions welcome!

  9. Josh April 1, 2013 at 6:27 pm #

    I found this wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statewide_opinion_polling_for_the_Republican_Party_presidential_primaries,_2016.

    Santorum doesn’t seem to be gathering a large percentage in the early polls.

  10. Jonathan April 2, 2013 at 1:14 am #

    I think Santorum would still hold large numbers in all the tornado states. He’d average out to about 10% per state, is my guess.

  11. Dallas April 2, 2013 at 6:47 am #

    Nationally, I think Sarah should be polling in the top 3, if not, 4. She has allot of support/influence and it would make sense to see her polling in the top 3-4. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjPZl18_pio

  12. Jonathan April 2, 2013 at 9:16 am #

    @Dallas. I think she’d be #5 at the most, behind Rubio, Ryan, Bush, Christie.

    @Anthony. After Palin, Huntsman, Santorum, I think these would be possible candidates worth making: Booker, Gillibrand, Condoleeza Rice, John Kerry.

  13. Jonathan April 2, 2013 at 9:17 am #

    Also, Obama should be an endorsement/surrogate. George W Bush should be a surrogate for his brother. I think he’d emerge out of retirement to help him out.

  14. Dallas April 2, 2013 at 2:01 pm #

    Suggestions for future additions on adding more contenders.
    After Palin, Huntesman, and Santorum are added, Martinez, Haley, Bachmann, and West should be next. and Along with Jonathan’s suggestions of Booker, Gilibrand, and John Kerry. I think Condoleeza Rice should be added much later.

  15. Dallas April 2, 2013 at 2:08 pm #

    Feedback on contenders added so far:
    I think the choices so far are great. Keep up the good work, and i’m always excited to see what is added next.

  16. Jonathan April 2, 2013 at 2:39 pm #

    Then there is also Rahm Emanuel. I would expect him to be 5 in stamina but about a 1 in integrity or corruption. 2016 is a good election for a game, because the possibilities for candidates is so large.

  17. Matt April 3, 2013 at 10:29 am #

    I want to make sure I understand correctly – you are going to expand the Candidate Editor into a full Scenario Editor?

    I am specifically looking for the ability to create new maps, issues, and etc. for a new scenario.

    Thanks

    Matt

  18. anthony_270admin April 3, 2013 at 4:52 pm #

    @Matt,

    The Candidate Editor is currently being expanded beyond just a candidate editor. I would like to see it become a full-fledged Scenario Editor, but I can’t say at this point whether that will happen or not.

  19. anthony_270admin April 3, 2013 at 4:54 pm #

    @Jonathan re: Rahm Emanuel,

    Noted.

  20. anthony_270admin April 3, 2013 at 4:54 pm #

    @Dallas,

    Thanks for the feedback and suggestions – noted.

  21. anthony_270admin April 3, 2013 at 4:56 pm #

    @Jonathan re: Obama surrogate,

    Good point – I’ve added it to the list.

    For W. Bush, though, I wonder whether Jeb would want him helping …

  22. anthony_270admin April 3, 2013 at 5:08 pm #

    @Josh,

    Thanks for that link – to makes things even more difficult, compare Santorum’s percentages in Iowa with the PPP Feb 1 and Harper Jan 29 – not mentioned in one, 13.5% in the other.

  23. Dallas April 3, 2013 at 8:25 pm #

    When will we see the next update released?

  24. anthony_270admin April 4, 2013 at 12:51 pm #

    Probably Friday.

  25. Dallas April 4, 2013 at 5:06 pm #

    When exactly will Sarah Palin be added? Will she be included in the upcoming update?

  26. anthony_270admin April 4, 2013 at 5:16 pm #

    Yes, she’ll be in the next update.

  27. Dallas April 4, 2013 at 5:28 pm #

    I have noticed the change of look in some buttons/icons and I am impressed with the new look. Are their any plans of changing the rest of the buttons/icons?

  28. Jonathan April 4, 2013 at 11:00 pm #

    When you create Huntsman, I think you need to make him more centrist than you have him in the 2008 election. Also, he supports gay marriage: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/21/jon-huntsman-gay-marriage_n_2734444.html

    Here is Huntsman’s issues, according to a website: http://www.ontheissues.org/Jon_Huntsman.htm

    I think Huntsman should start out with better numbers than he had in 2008, but should be behind Rubio, Ryan, Christie, Bush, Santorum; however, he should have some upside to him this time around.

    I’d give him high marks in debate and issue knowledge, possibly experience. His weakest area might be charisma, he’s kinda dweebie, even though he’s likable.

    Also, I think you should include something that makes certain people never endorse anyone, or never drop out. For instance, I can’t picture Rand Paul endorsing anyone, or dropping out until the end, much like his father.

    I also hope you one day include a more dramatic convention, for when it is contested. Also, allowing for a contested convention, if someone wraps up the nomination, but has a lower % in the polls.

    Lastly, I notice that if I lose in the primaries, it offers me to take over for the person highest in the polls, even if that person didn’t win the nomination. For instance, I’ve had Cuomo or O’Malley win often, with Clinton having ended up with a high poll%. I am playing as Biden. The game asks if I want to play as Clinton. The game ends because she didn’t win the nomination. This has happened to me often. In fact, I’ve had a lot of games in which the higher polling candidate did not win the nomination. Anyway, a fun contested nomination process would make the game more gripping.

    Good work so far!

  29. Josh April 5, 2013 at 1:20 am #

    One other suggestion – and this usually does not happen in real life, if ever (the only time I can think of it happening is back when Lincoln was running) – but can we have the option for all political parties to draw from the same pool of VP candidates? Going with that, I think it would be great if third party Presidential candidates could drop their party (thus turning them) to come on to one of the major party’s tickets (ex. Paul-Johnson 2016).

    Also, I’ve been thinking — let’s say Candidate A drops out to support Candidate B, shouldn’t Candidate A now be available as a surrogate for Candidate B? I know that the game allows for this – kinda – given that the Senators and Governors drop their self-endorsement and can now be persuaded to join one’s own camp, but they seem awfully weak – and in many cases, they have turned around and endorsed my primary rival after pledging their delegates and support to me.

  30. JP April 30, 2013 at 9:20 pm #

    Hi,

    I bought the game, just two comments:

    1. I think there is not enough momentum from winning the early states
    2. Web Ads are way too powerful for their insignificant cost (~$1,000 for running them in all 56 states).

    Otherwise great game, I’ve bought 2008 and 2016 from you and think you’ve done a great job.

  31. Kafka Kim April 30, 2013 at 10:47 pm #

    @JP

    While I agree with you that Web Ads are too powerful, I think that winning the early primary gives you the sufficient momentum.
    Maybe you didn’t spin it. After winning primary, you need to spin the news that you won the primary so that other candidates can’t stop your potential momentum.

  32. anthony_270admin May 2, 2013 at 10:57 am #

    @JP,

    Thanks for the feedback!

    In the latest internal, Web Ads have been reduced to only lasting 1 turn. Feedback once it’s released on whether this balances the ads welcome.

  33. anthony_270admin May 7, 2013 at 6:22 pm #

    @Josh re: candidate endorsements,

    Good point – noted.

Leave a Reply

Powered by WordPress. Designed by WooThemes