President Infinity – Version Ericson – 2.1.5

President Infinity v. Ericson – 2.1.5 for Windows and Mac has been released!

If you are a President Infinity (President Forever 2016) owner, you are eligible for this upgrade.

What’s new in this upgrade

  • 2016 > new Republican ordering > Trump, Carson, Fiorina, Rubio, Bush, Cruz, Kasich, Huckabee, Christie, Paul, Jindal, Santorum, Graham
  • 2016 > Primaries > Republicans > updated %s
  • 2016 > Primaries > Democrats > updated %s
  • 2016 > Walker, Perry > ‘on’ -> ‘off’ by default
  • 2016 > Debates > Republicans > Oct. 28th, 2015 > Percentage to qualify 1% -> 2%
  • 2016 > Trump > changed color
  • 2016 > start dates > Oct. 15th, 2015 -> Oct. 1st, 2015

This is a comprehensive update.

You can download this release by requesting a download e-mail at the link below.

Important: when you receive the e-mail, you will want to download the file from the “windows president infinity” or “mac president infinity” link.

If for some reason there is no “windows president infinity” or “mac president infinity” link in your e-mail and you are a President Infinity (President Forever 2016) owner, please notify us and we will fix that for you.

To update:

http://270soft.com/updates-redownloads/

Version information:

http://270soft.com/updates-redownloads/president-forever-2016-version-information/

157 thoughts on “President Infinity – Version Ericson – 2.1.5

  1. For Kentucky, you forgot to set it to proportional instead of winner-take-all.
    The threshold is 5% as well(which also needs to be set).

  2. Question – I’m curious, why does the Republican nominee always have basically an insurmountable edge in the General? Is it how I’m playing it? (I’m addressing this not only to Anthony but other players). With no effort in the General, Kasich (who won the nomination after a deadlocked convention) won 47% of CA and the state (to 37% for Clinton).

    I’m beginning to think that allowing primaries to influence the General is a bad idea. There should be a hard divide until favorables are introduced. Is this possible? (That’s directed to Anthony).

  3. One more thing – it seems the GE numbers are determined by the number of Republicans and Democrats campaigning in the state added up or some such. With such a large GOP primary field, this doesn’t make very much sense. The formula for primaries affecting the General election should be tweaked.

  4. @Longtime PF
    As I can figure it, much of the problem stems from two points.
    First, the Democrat starts out 0.5% behind the Republican in the general election polls. Realistically speaking, if you look at all the general election polls (not just Hillary vs. X), the Democrats have an edge of a couple percentage points.
    Second, Hillary starts out as the undisputed frontrunner, which means she takes a lot of negative momentum for a long time before someone else takes the lead. The persistent negative momentum wears on the Democrats’ in-game general election numbers. Further, even after someone else takes over the lead in the Democratic primary, there’s still a campaign ongoing, so it’s hard for that lost momentum to be made up. Unless the human is playing as the Democrat, the Republican is likely to keep the lead.
    I base this on the following observation: The general election polls give the Republican about 42% at the start and 45% or so a few months in, while the Democrats fall from 41% to 37%. I figured it’s not so much the Republicans gaining as the Democrats losing, which I attribute to Hillary. A way to test this would be to run a simulation without a clear Democratic frontrunner at the start (only setup I can think of is O’Malley vs Webb; without Hillary, Biden vs Sanders starts with a 20-something point lead for Biden).

  5. Now that I think about it, the Democrat typically falls to about 33%. I don’t know why I said 37%. The point is, the Democrat takes a huge hit and the Republican gains comparatively little.

  6. Yeah, Democrats always fall in the game, Republicans seem to always lock up at least 50% in the polls relatively early in the game. Democrats are generally at 45% to 35% with the rest undecided. Blue states, such as WI and MI, routinely go red.

  7. @Anthony
    This was one of the best updates so far. It makes the game so much more realistically, as Trump had become the Republican frontrunner. Thanks for your work.

  8. @Anthony
    I’ve noticed, that when you click next in a primary result page to see the 2nd page of candidates, you can’t spacebar the ‘ok’, perhaps that’s bug, idk.
    In Addition I saw that on some islands, like NMI, VI or Guam the candidates ranked 1st, 3rd and 4th get a delegate and the 2nd for instance not…
    Could be a bug too…

  9. @Anthony,
    Great update!
    You should include the possibility to have Trump run as an independent… just in case.

  10. @Anthony

    I agree with Alfredo. I think he does this if he’s 2nd or 3rd in the polls going into the convention.

  11. @Alfredo,

    Thanks for the feedback!

    Re Trump as independent, we’ll see. It would be fun to have it as an option either way.

  12. @Luki re spacebarring, it’s because the focus on the window goes to the button that’s been clicked. So, when you press spacebar the program interprets it as clicking the button that was just clicked. I can change this, but it’s standard behavior for a window.

  13. @Luki re delegates, yes, it looks like the algorithm to assign delegates in PR regions with relatively few delegates has a glitch in it. I’ve noted this – thanks.

  14. @Longtime PF,

    “I’m beginning to think that allowing primaries to influence the General is a bad idea. There should be a hard divide until favorables are introduced. Is this possible?”

    There might be a bug allowing voters to be moved from one party to another. Currently, the rate at which they will change parties is very low in the primaries. My first guess would be there’s an algorithm somewhere that is allowing them to move through at a higher rate than they should be.

  15. Has the save issue been fixed? I refuse to play and update until it has. I get halfway through and it freezes up because it says out of memory and the save file becomes corrupted. I have all the updates except this one

  16. I reported the 270soft splash screen appearing in the middle of a two-monitor setup (half on each), now the game itself appears there except for the newspaper and new game dialogs which still appear in the center of the primary monitor.

    Also still getting this error, which locks up the game, when certain third parties hold their conventions:
    TGameEngine::ProcessEndOfRoundServer () Code=66 Access violation at address 0047D4DD in module ‘PI.exe’. Write of address 00000048.

    Then if you hit okay and spacebar again you get:
    TGameEngine::ProcessEndOfRoundServer () Code=0 List index out of bounds (0)

    As before quickest way to trigger it is use the 1936 scenario because the conventions are only a few turns in. Though it appears in other scenarios, that’s just the fewest turns to trigger it off the top of my head.

    2.0.4 was the last without that error. I don’t remember which was the last version to place the game properly on the primary monitor, 2.0.9 maybe?

  17. @Benji,

    Thanks for this feedback. I attempted to recreate the error you are describing with the 1936 campaign, and so far haven’t been able to. I’ve noted this, and will attempt to recreate the error.

  18. @Jonathan Beadle,

    I recommend starting a new game in 2.1.5, and seeing if you get the save error. If so, please let me know what operating system you are using.

  19. @anthony_270admin

    I overload the game though. I put in every candidate as undecided and edited the campaign to start in July 2015. Don’t know if this affects anything. The last game I played, the error occurred in Dec. 2015

  20. @anthony_270admin

    Ok I’ll do that. It just gets frustrating when all my hard work is ruined.

  21. @Jonathan Beadles,

    In theory, if it saves after 2 weeks, it should save for the rest of the campaign. If you continue to get a problem, you can let me know the setup you are using and I will attempt to recreate the problem.

  22. I’m not sure if anyone else has brought this up, but it is almost impossible to win any of the very early states (Iowa, NH, SC, sometimes a few others) if you hold a lead early in the game. Often times I will lead Iowa for instance in late november, and by primary day I will have so much unexplained negative momentum that i finish dead last.

    I do believe that it has been said that this will be addressed with the favorability feature, but I still just wanted to mention it just in case.

  23. @Jonathan Beadle,

    Targeting increases your Org. Strength by 1, and decreases time to do other regional things (start Polling, increase Org. Strength, increase Footsoldiers).

  24. @Toby

    That’s because the AI gangs up on you with negative ads. Even after you have 0.0% in the polls and further ads are useless, the AI has trouble figuring out it should attack the regional leader.
    It could be related to the fact that all the ad creations that appear in the recap are nationwide. Maybe the AI isn’t creating regional ads, so it focuses on the nationwide leader.
    It’s OK: if you get a lead, you can use the momentum to get all the endorsements. Then you just have to wait for March; there will be too many simultaneous primaries for the AI to attack you everywhere, and you’ll win.

  25. @Anthony270 – “There might be a bug allowing voters to be moved from one party to another. Currently, the rate at which they will change parties is very low in the primaries. My first guess would be there’s an algorithm somewhere that is allowing them to move through at a higher rate than they should be.”

    I think so. In my game during the general election did nothing but won California (might have been related to me campaigning in California in the primary). I think fixing that bug should hold the tide for now until you introduce favorables. But it seems a serious glitch. It makes the general election unplayable in a sense.

    FWIW related to this you should bring back the economy as a variable in the general election. Or at least make it an option for it to influence the general election. Ditto international events. It should be hard to win as a Republican in 2008 or Democrat in 1980.

    It’s a great product and I’m happy to be past of the community. 🙂

  26. @anthony_270admin

    I have been playing the new version without any problems since yesterday. Then, I just got the same error: Unable to write to specified saved game file. It’s Aug. 1st 2016 game time. So it’s a lot longer than it has but this is how it goes. In a few turns I’ll get a out of memory error and my game will be ruined. Can you fix this error?

  27. @Jonathan,

    I believe you said this occurs when you turn all (or almost all) the possible players on.

    Can you tell me what the setup was for this game – when the game started, which players were on, and who you were playing as?

  28. I took the new 2016 version and modified to start on June 1st 2015. I turned all the players in Republican and Democrats on to Undecided EXCEPT for the last two of each party. I played as ted Cruz. There were no third part or independent candidates.

  29. Ok – I’ve noted this and will attempt to recreate it. Can you tell me what operating system you are using, and how much RAM you have?

  30. Windows 8.1 and 4 G of Ram. I’ve played some significantly heavy memory games and never had problems.

  31. On tax rates in-game, Huckabee is currently center-right: “Reduce corporate and individual rates modestly.” In light of his support for the FairTax (abolishing the income tax and replacing it with a sales tax), shouldn’t he be far-right?

  32. Not a big issue, but I feel Sanders should have at least as much starting funds as Biden, especially with the last quarter showing him just behind Clinton and way above anyone else

  33. Also, Trump should not be far-right on tax rates. His tax plan matches the game description for center-right.

  34. To echo Jacob, where can we find the code? I could manually edit it and see if it works, saving you time. (If you’re allowed to tell us).

  35. The early primaries are too early:
    IA is 01/18 in game. Should be 02/01.
    NH is 01/26 in game. Should be 02/09.
    NV is 02/13 in game. Should be 02/23.

  36. Hey Anthony – really great game. Just one thought: the death penalty is playing an increasingly large role in political campaigns, including at the presidential level. It would be good I think if candidates were able to include this issue in their platform, and run ads on the issue as you can any other. Just a thought, and I understand there may be a reason for its initial non-inclusion.

  37. I was thinking about a game that I ran once on President Forever 2004, where I created my own candidate and ran against Colin Powell. The election came down to one state – Arizona – which I lost by an extraordinarily small amount of votes – less than 900 of about 2.5 million cast. I was wondering if there has ever been any thought given to an option to have a recount of votes if an election hinges on such a small outcome like that. I know little about computer programming, so I don’t know how you’d create such an option that wouldn’t result in a result *always* being overturned or upheld, but I figured that it would be an interesting wrinkle to think about.

  38. @Anthony

    Could you make it so that we can see the result of the game, even if we withdraw? I just created myself, starting with no support and 1 in experience. I managed to get 3rd place. I lost win second place Clinton endorsed Biden. I couldn’t win, so I withdrew. Naturally, the game exits out.

  39. @Nick,

    Hypothetically, no, but in reality? My guess is she’d say yes if she lost the nomination.

  40. @Jacob,

    Universal shift just moves all the %s of a candidates up or down by the specified %. For example, if a candidate has 20% in a state, and you set the universal shift to 10, that will move that candidate’s %s up 10% of 20%, so 2 percentage points.

  41. @Longtime PF,

    What are you referring to? The universal shift is accessible in the Editor, if that’s what you’re referencing.

  42. @Anthony_270admin,

    I mean the universal shift in the general election. Relating to this prior post of mine:

    @Anthony270 – “There might be a bug allowing voters to be moved from one party to another. Currently, the rate at which they will change parties is very low in the primaries. My first guess would be there’s an algorithm somewhere that is allowing them to move through at a higher rate than they should be.”

    Is that in the editor and can I manually adjust?

  43. @Longtime PF,

    scenario.xml > inter_party_coefficient

    I can’t say to what extent this number is being used in the game, but it is being used in at least a couple of functions, so it might work. You can set it to a decimal number, such as 0.1 .

  44. Ran a test with that..It was a little better than last time but some glaring issues remained.

    Problems: Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, New York, Pennsylvania. Doesn’t get screwy until after May 2016 actually. The electoral results are as follows – the GOP won New York with 47% of the vote to 15.8% for Secretary Clinton. In Ohio it was 57-33%. In California it was 49-44% Democratic, North Carolina 41-28% Republican, and bizarrely, despite spacebarring the election, it was a 317-221 election for Kasich. This is with the interparty stuff set to .1%.

    I think there’s a bug somewhere else in your general election formula.

  45. I have a game as Cruz. So far, everyone but Rubio has dropped out. Thing is, they’re still registering in the polls. For example, Fiorina is at 4% in Wisconsin (not voted yet) despite having dropped out a month ago.
    I have noticed that quitters (for lack of a better word, even though they are) drop substantially after they withdraw, but not to 0. Is the residual support supposed to represent the die-hards who will remain wild-cards until the vote? Or is this just a bug?

  46. right now i have 2.1.1, and i havent updated yet because im mid game and dont wish to lose progress. is there a way to create an update that would load saves from old versions?

  47. @anthony

    I second what Longtime says about the %. Also, when Clinton takes a hit it seems like the entire Dem party falls in the voters eyes in the game. The same doesn’t happen when Trump collapses. Dems lose any lead they might get at the beginning of the game almost instantly. Trump collapses eventually but Rep still maintain a 5% or higher lead with 300+ estimated EVs. I can’t ever seem to simulate a democratic victory.

  48. Saved game version is not same as current game
    version. If you load saved game, you may experience
    instability playing the loaded game. Do you wish to
    continue?

  49. I keep losing 7 CP points that are classed under ‘endorser and regional spin’ No Idea where they’re going or coming from. Had them for the last 3 months in game

  50. Small suggestion for the campaign editor. Not sure if it would be possible to allow co-ordinate editing directly in the editor, it would save going in to the XMLs and may be easier than having a fully fledged map editor.

    Also when creating a new region and changing the id I still get an error message meaning I have to directly edit the political units.xml for the id also.

  51. Hey everyone I just bought the game and paid for it on 270soft.com but can’t find anywhere to download it how do I do it?

  52. @Anthony

    I don’t know, if you already read my post, but I could provide the pictures of Pataki, Gilmore and Chafee. If you’re intending to add them soon, it could perhaps help you. 🙂

  53. @Luki,

    Pataki and Chafee are on the list of candidates to add. Pictures are not a problem, it’s just getting to them on the to-do list.

  54. @Paul,

    Coordinate editing will be added to the Editor – thanks for this.

    I’ve noted you are getting an error when editing new region ID’s, and will attempt to recreate the error.

  55. @Lucas,

    Yes, it should be able to load. The warning message is given any time the save game version is different from the installed version.

  56. @Eric,

    “Several weeks after dropping out, Trump is advertising in New York.”

    Noted – thanks for this.

  57. Anthony –

    Is there anything else I can do to try to contain the General election bug or should we sit tight, and maybe you can address things on your end to see if you can figure out why the General election is so wonky?

  58. Just some general comments. First of all great release. Second of all the polls leading up to the general election are generally completely backwards and unreliable, I was playing as Cruz going up against Clinton, won all the debates, and had all the momentum leading into election night, Polls showed I had 57% of the vote compared to her 40% and 3% undecided, polls also showed i was well ahead in the delegate count, when election night ended, I had won 50.1% of the vote. But lost the delegates by a large margin. It seemed totally out of the blue considering Clinton had hardly any momentum, and I had tons of momentum. Also it seems that Ted Cruz is a much better fundraiser, has better super PAC strength, and has better organization than is represented in the game. Several articles recently show that he already has county by county leadership for every county in IA, NH, NV, and SC. As well as many counties in GA, TX, NC, OK. He also has raised the most hard cash, upwards of 25 million dollars, than any other candidate in the race and his super has raised the second highest amount of money. Upwards of 50 million, behind Bush’s super PAC.

  59. Kevin is probably right to an extent on the fundraising numbers. Right now, it would be more like Clinton & Sanders 4 or 5. Bush would be a 3 or 4. Rubio would probably be a 1. (His Fundraising has gone from poor to just horrible) Trump is hard because he isn’t really fundraising. But I guess he needs to have a number of some sort because a player could decide to play as Trump and fundraise as Trump and I imagine he would be at least as good as Rubio. Carson would be a 3 or 4. Paul would be a 1. Cruz should probably be a 3.

  60. Request: Can you add Bill Richardson as a potential Democratic candidate? I just like him personally, I have no justification for my request otherwise.

  61. @Kevin

    How do know about the county polls?
    Do you assume that, or can we find out that with a simple trick, which I haven’t discovered yet?

  62. Minor thing- Once we are in the General Election, I feel that Democrats and Republicans should be changed to the name of the Candidate. So, it would then say “Trump Takes Lead in the Polls” rather than “Republicans Take Lead in the Polls.”

  63. I’m absolutely loving this, I just wanted to work out if fundraising had been changed. Before you could Fundraise 3 times in CA and raise about 4 million-now you raise about 1.2 million

  64. Based off the first dem debate.

    O’Malley should have a charisma of 2 or 3. Don’t know what it’s at. Chafee charisma of 2. Webb 2 or 3. Sanders might be a 4.

    Clinton debate could be 4. The rest 3. Webb could be argued a 2.

  65. I don’t know if that’s true, but it seems that most candidates who withdraw, eventually endorse the party’s frontrunner…
    I think it could be more fun, if some may decide to endorse the 2nd or 3rd to make the race even more thrilling.
    What are you opinions on that?

  66. Yeah, I think it should be based 50% on relations and 50% on ideological similarity. Maybe also an added bonus if they are from the same state.

    Another thing I thought of, is that we allow the nominee to select a VP. It would also be fun if candidates in the general election can promise cabinet positions to endorsers for instant endorsement or free surrogate campaigning (if they are already an endorser). Just an idea.

  67. @Jacob,

    Yes. With the latest version, a designer can make new states, but the position of the state can’t be edited, so corresponding changes have to be made directly to the campaign files (with an XML editor). Soon, the ability to modify the location of a state on the map will be added. After that, the ability to import new maps.

  68. @Jonathan “It would also be fun if candidates in the general election can promise cabinet positions to endorsers for instant endorsement or free surrogate campaigning (if they are already an endorser)”

    This is the sort of idea of what PIPs are supposed to represent (an implicit promise to help the endorser in the future) among other things. I believe it’s illegal to do actually offer a cabinet position in an campaign, however. More feedback welcome.

  69. @Luki,

    Might make sense to tweak the endorsement algorithm similar to what you’re talking about – we’ll see.

  70. Hi,

    I am very new to this game so my question may come off as stupid to you guys.

    I am wondering whether if it’s possible to get a scandal research against the candidate of the opposing party? I typically get hit by scandals while being unable to get anything from the scandal research even though I started the research process during the primaries.

  71. @Alistair, fundraising is based on various factors – your local campaign org., momentum, state %s, and so on. If you fundraise in a state, it will take a few days for the fundraising potential to go back up.

  72. @Aaron “Once we are in the General Election, I feel that Democrats and Republicans should be changed to the name of the Candidate. So, it would then say “Trump Takes Lead in the Polls” rather than “Republicans Take Lead in the Polls.””

    Got it.

  73. @CJ

    At the bottom of the screen, there should be a little beaker symbol like something from a chemistry lab. Click it. That’s your scandal screen. The blue button on the left (I forget the icon) will let you research scandals. Then you just have to pick integrity/corruption and the target.

  74. @Eric

    I know how to do research for scandal. What I meant was that it seems to take very long for the research on scandal to yield any outcome.

    I started the research around midway point of the primaries and keep it going until election day and still no scandal came out from the research. I increase my research attribute to 5 also increase the percentage to about 16% and yet no scandal obtained. I am curious if that is normal?

  75. hello,
    i am french, excuse for my english

    i have the same problem , i have message Unable to write to specified game file and I have tested and when this happens is when the backup c exceeds 156 000 KB

    my version is PI 2.1.5 and window 8.1

  76. In the primaries, when you spin the “Republicans and Democrats are tied in the polls” story, does it only effect the pictured candidate or does it effect the entire party of that candidate? I guess what I am asking is: the General election right now is moving based upon the momentum of the two leading candidates presumably. So if (for example) Trump is leading the GOP and the GOP is leading the Dems, would the spin effect just that candidate in the primary or does it effect the party’s General Election numbers?

  77. The General Election % should probably be updated. If you do a conglomeration of recent polls for every state, Clinton still leads Republicans 278-260. This is just pre-debate. So in her harshest hour she’s still winning. She’s winning even without OH and PA in these polls. She has FL, and strangely GA.

  78. @CJ

    Oh, that’s what you meant. Sorry for misunderstanding. It seems to be pretty slow for me, too, but then again, everyone’s corruption attribute is a 2, which I interpret to mean “not very corrupt”. Also, there are so few people with integrity of 2 (and none with 1). That said, yeah, research does seem like a CP sink.

  79. @Eric, @CJ,

    There was a bug in scandal research that wasn’t increasing the chance of a scandal completing correctly. This is now fixed in the latest internal, and will be included in the next release.

  80. I started a campaign with a few AI candidates as “undecided” or “not seeking”. Will they change their stance as I get closer to the primaries?

  81. @Jean

    They should, and the characters with a higher “Ideologue” rating should come in faster. In a previous version, there was a problem that those candidates would not try to get ballot access (if they do not start out “active”, they don’t have it anywhere), so they couldn’t get any votes.

    @Jonathan

    I think that could be handled in-game by overall ratings. You are right, though, that there’s no way to run/barnstorm on those overall ratings or attack your opponent as an extremist in general.

  82. Time to turn Biden OFF. I also suggest improving Warren’s #s even though she’s off. If she had run, she probably would have taken most of Sanders votes and some of Clintons. Just an idea.

  83. @Jonathan re general election %s,

    The plan is to set all %s to a date (using polling data). Then, the GE %s will vary based on when in the game a player starts.

  84. As it is, we don’t know what the %s will be like in Sep. 2016, so my best guess is to use historical %s as the basis. Things tend to tighten up going into the general election, so if history’s a guide then the %s should be pretty close.

  85. @Girchil,

    Thanks for this feedback – I’ve noted this. Are you playing with large numbers of candidates?

  86. Ok, the game doesn’t seem to be able to save with a very large number of candidates turned on. In the meantime, I recommend only starting games with significantly fewer candidates.

  87. I have no issue editing the 2016 scenario, but I am getting errors when editing the 2008 scenario, such as when I change the id of candidates, or delete existing candidates (I am trying to make a scenario where John Kerry was elected president in 2004 in case you are wondering).

  88. @Edgar,

    I’ve noted this an will attempt to recreate it. Can you tell me exactly where you get the error, what exactly it says, and whether you’ve edited other things before getting that error?

  89. @anthony_270admin,

    For example, if I delete Barack Obama or try to change the Id, I get the following error message.

    “Access violation at address 004C25C0 in module ‘PI.exe’. Read of address 00000018.”

  90. @Edgar,

    Recreated and fixed it. This was caused by an error in the 2008 XML file. Any 2008 descended campaigns will have to be recreated with the new version, unless you manually edit the XML – see next comment.

  91. Note that 2008 descended campaigns can be fixed, but it has to be done manually. Open events.xml in an XML editor, then add the line

    <conditions/>

    just after the line

    <name>Sarah Palin at convention</name>

  92. I have found another issue while editing the 2008 scenario.

    I had encountered no issues when I was changing the names of endorsers, adding new candidates, and changing their ids, stances, surrogates, etc. However, when I try to test run my edited scenario, I got the following error message:

    “Access violation at address 004C25C0 in module ‘PI.exe’. Read of address 00000018.”

  93. Just curious, I have found that when I play (as either a created or regular player for either party) that I cannot ever win in the early states, then I do extremely well until the later primaries. Once this happens, other players begin to drop out and the percentages in each state look as though they stay the same, but in reality I have kept the same percentage and one of the other candidates has surged ahead. This happens with or without polling on. Am I terrible at playing the game, is there some setting I can change, or is this a glitch?
    To explain my point further, I was playing as Kasich in my most recent game. I received 0% in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina. Then I won every primary through Wisconsin (something like 20 primaries in a row, typically with between 30 – 40% of the vote), then candidates began to drop out and despite receiving their endorsements, Rubio won every primary from New York through California and clinched the nomination. The entire time the game showed me in the lead in every one of those states because it did not show the change in percentages from once the candidates started dropping out, it just made their name from white to gray, but did not change their polling numbers until election day when all of sudden Rubio routinely had over 50% of the vote.

  94. I played all the way through the primaries and when it flipped to the general election my speeches did not replenish. I also did not receive the option to accept the democrats block grant.

  95. @Eddy,

    Are you talking about a user-designed campaign? (There is no official 1976 campaign.) If so, I recommend commenting on campaigns.270soft.com or in the forum.

  96. Also, for some reason it never lets me import a picture. It always says it has to be 87 width or something.

  97. Go to ms paint, and click the resize button. Click the pixels button and type in the amount needed and save it as a bmp.

    Feel free to ask for me help if you’re still confused. ANd hopefully this helped!

Leave a Comment