President Forever 2016 v. 1.6.2 Released!

President Forever 2016 v. 1.6.2 has been released! This version makes some changes to the 1968 Beta including changing Robert Kennedy and Nixon’s Experience to 4 and reducing Edward Kennedy’s percentages, modifies all official scenarios so scandals can occur on the Integrity issue, makes minor modifications to the Select Campaign and Select Player GUI, fixes some cursor functionality, and fixes a couple of bugs.

Credits: thanks to Nelson Perras for very significant design contributions on the 1968 campaign.

Note: the installer will say v. 1.6.2. When you start the game, it will say v. 1.6.1 on the Start Screen. This is the latest version.

Connect with us on Facebook and Twitter!

To update:

Version information:

75 thoughts on “President Forever 2016 v. 1.6.2 Released!”

  1. @Anthony

    Did you get my email with the 1912 scenario. I’ve finished with all the endorsers. I’ll work on events for now.

  2. As much as I like Ted Kennedy, I don’t think he’d have an Issue Knowledge of 5 (not in 1968, at least) or a charisma of 5. I think he’d be 4 in both of us. Also, RFK should probably be a charisma of 4. Neither brother was as charismatic as their brother. I would assume a 5, in anything would be rare. As much as I don’t like Reagan, I do think his two 5’s seem accurate.

    Why is VP Humphrey’s Issue Knowledge 5 and Pres. LBJs only 4?

  3. Looks good. Can you give more detail on how this new “enter the race at time of choosing” feature will work? Will the player be able to see hypothetical polling etc?

    Jonathan – If anything, RFK was more charismatic than JFK, at least imo. For several months in 1968 he inspired a sense of confidence and hope in millions of Americans that was greater even than JFK managed. Take his speech in Indianapolis after the death of MLK. That city was the only major city in the country to remain peaceful that night.

  4. @Tc123,

    Human players that start as ‘undecided’ will be able to see everything, but their actions will be limited. They won’t be able to make ads, barnstorm, and so on, but they will be able to fundraise, influence endorsers (but not receive endorsements), and so on. Similarly, any attacks against undeclared candidates are less effective.

    Computer players will have algorithms or certain conditions which cause them to enter the race if they start as ‘undecided’.

  5. When will the %s be updated?

    Warren should probably be as strong as O’Malley and Cuomo.
    Santorum, Palin and Huckabee still start out too strong. I doubt they’d be front-runners, currently, they’re 0.1% below Christie in the game.
    McDonnell should be way lower.
    Also, nationally, the two party’s % might need to be reevaluated for each state.

  6. I had a problem with the Republican Primaries. One day before the convention ended there were only two candidates, Martinez with 1046 delegates (39.9% vote) and Palin 635(19.8% vote). Even thought Martinez lost the convention against Palin. ¿Why was that?

    I would like to suggest having implemented a optional turn per day or week, personally I prefer the week per turn like in P4E8, because the day per turn takes too long and then you have deal with this kind of crashes/bugs/errors.

  7. I don’t know if this will have any impact on the next update, but NBC came out with a poll and Clinton is now 13 pts up on Christie; yet, Christie still leads Republicans. Ryan leads if Christie doesn’t run. I know this is one poll, but it shows that the scandal is big, at least temporarily. I think if Clinton gets hammered with scandals each week in the game (to the detriment to her entire party), then Christie should be a likewise curse. Speaking of which, I made Clinton integrity of 5 and moved the corruption to 5, and she still gets hit as hard as she usually does. I hope the next update improves this defect as it makes it hard to enjoy the game when I know Clinton is going to bring her party 10 pts down every primary.

  8. Warren should probably be stronger than Cuomo and O’Malley, she’s beating them in basically every poll, playing 3rd behind Clinton and Biden. Whereas Clinton gets 60-65%, and Biden gets 10-12%, Warren gets 7-9%. Cuomo and O’Malley have been getting 5% or less. This could change; however, she’s the liberal option of the Democratic party and that will keep her somewhat “relevant” in the primaries.

  9. I apologize if this is already an issue in the game, but after the President’s comments re: marijuana legalization, I think it may end up being an issue in 2016. If it is, it should be a minor one, but it would probably be more important for younger voters if you ever get around to adding demographics.

  10. Can anyone tell me if there is anything in any of the files that I can delete that will prevent Clinton from getting drowned in scandals each time? Honestly, I’d rather scandals be turned off completely than for them to ruin the game. They don’t just ruin Clinton, it brings the whole Democratic party down by more than 10 pts. Republicans win every time. Even Newt Gingrich or Herman Cain weren’t hammered this hard. You’d think they’d have discovered that Hillary Clinton was really Bill Clinton in disguise or something, trying to run for a 3rd term.

    Also, maybe it would be better if there was only one scandal at a time per politician. Clinton generally gets hit with multiple scandals throughout most of the primaries. It floods out the whole news feed.

  11. That’s the thing though, in these games everybody comes after the leader hell for leather while the dudes lagging behind can get under the attack radar, which makes sense. Scandals do pop up a lot though, don’t most campaigns go by without any?

  12. @SANC

    I think it’s more than that. No one ever gets hit as hard as she does, and she doesn’t have to be leading in the polls for it to happen to her. There’s some sort of internal bias against her or a glitch or something. I really just want to turn scandals off, because the 2016 scenario is unplayable if the entire Democratic party always gets knocked down by 10 pts due to Clinton scandals.

    The scandals still happen at the same rate even though I gave her 5 integrity and 5 corruption, to try and dilute them.

  13. “There’s some sort of internal bias against her or a glitch or something.”

    There’s no internal bias in the game – all the relevant variables are there in the XML. There might be a glitch (for example, something related to being the first leader listed in the, in this case, second party).

    My guess is that it has to do with her being far and away in first. This causes all the other leaders to focus on her, and also causes relatively large affects for the Dem party because she holds so much of the support of the party.

  14. “When will the next update be release? Will it include the option to join primaries at variable times?”

    I don’t know when it will happen, but yes, it should include the join at variable times option. I would say it’s 50% implemented currently – maybe another week.

  15. @Anthony

    That may very well be, but I don’t think it seems accurate to have either party fall below 10% in the polls because someone is a major front-runner. For instance, that isn’t going on right now. I’ve also played with Clinton as the only Democrat. She still gets the scandals. In 1984, Reagan was a major front-runner for his party, running virtually unopposed; however, he never fell by 10 pts in the polls. I don’t think Bill Clinton or Obama ever did either in their reelection campaigns. I think the accuracy could be maintained better if politicians only had one scandal at a time hit them. Clinton floods the whole news feeds with her scandals. Other news items can rarely appear because she gets major scandals. Perhaps when we get to the real Sept-Dec 2015, you’ll be able to change it, if the Dems aren’t down by 12 during that time. I would be this bothered if it were happening to a clear Republican front-runner. I can understand Christie (if the scandals persist) to get hit by scandals, but I doubt he’d bring his whole party down by 10pts, even if he had a larger lead. Again, the Reagan example, he was more of a front-runner than Hillary Clinton will ever be, and I don’t think he collapsed his party due to attacks. I’m only frustrated because I love playing this game and the Democrats never recover unless I play as them, and I think the game is prognosticating a very unlikely scenario not only based off of history, but off probability.

    In other news, you may want to diminish McDonnell. He’s been indicted:

  16. @Jonathan,

    Ok, thanks for this – got it. It’s a bug in one of the AI functions that selects the leader to research a scandal on who has the most percent, regardless of party during the primaries.

    Should be fixed with the next release.

  17. Anyway we can eventually add campaign managers or strategists in the game in the future? Perhaps use PIPs to recruit a stronger team pre-primary. This would make the campaign even more realistic.

    I just found out today that one of my cousins (whom I’ve never met, never met my Uncle either) was the Campaign strategist for Terry McAuliffe and worked for Hillary Clinton in 2008. He will do so again, most likely in 2016. Our great-grandfather was the top legal advisor for Newton D. Baker, Mayor of Cleveland and Secretary of War for Woodrow Wilson.

  18. My grandad was on parade in front of the 3 time Taoiseach and 2 time President Eamon de Valera. It was WW2 and he had joined the Irish version of the Home Guard.

  19. That’s cool. My direct ancestors missed World War II and the American Civil War because none of them were the age to fight. I did have a few in the American Revolution.

  20. That’s really cool, Jonathan. The closest someone in my family has come to consulting politicians / political campaigns is Joyce Jillson, an astrologer, who claims she provided the Reagans with horoscopes. I never met her though.

    I definitely agree though — campaign managers / strategists would be a cool addition but they should probably be low on the priority list.

  21. So first the bride thing and now another mayor is accusing Christie of ethics violations. Doesn’t this bring Christie to a 2?

  22. @Lucas,

    We’ll see where the dust settles with Christie – at this point, I think at least an increased Corruption rating.


    McDonnell will probably be removed from the 2016 campaign.

  23. @Anthony

    Looks like you’re going to have to change the Republican primaries:

    “New Hampshire, Iowa, South Carolina and Nevada are expected to host the first four contests in February 2016 under the new schedule, while the remainder of the nation’s 46 states and territories would vote between early March and mid-May. The party’s national convention is expected in late June or early July, roughly two months sooner than has become the norm.”

  24. ^ I am not a fan of he changes. The debates and the campaigning along with voter participation made the primaries interesting. Romney lost in 2012 because he was not Conservative enough, and the GOP’s problem is supporting candidates/rhinos like John McCain, and rejecting true candidates like Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann. The GOP better buckle up or they will loose the next election. I just hope the Tea Party makes the GOP realize this.

  25. @Dallas

    I agree with you on the first part. I think picking a candidate too soon is bad, because it allows the Democrats more time to focus on attacking that ticket. As a progressive, I’m really happy about the changes because I think it benefits the Democrats.

    As for the second part, and I’ve said this before, as valid as your opinion is of the Republican party, it isn’t the opinion of the majority of your party. Unfortunately, creating a 3rd party would allow the politicians you like least (Democrats) to win in landslides. The object of the game is to win the undecided voters. They’re usually going to be closer to the center. Therefore, the McCain’s, Romney’s and Christie’s are going to be selected. Likewise, I’ll never get Bernie Sanders, Kucinich or Warren. I can only hope they influence the party. I’ll have to stick with center-left politicians like Obama, Clinton, Kerry. You have a change of getting a politician, but they’ll have to be a VP choice and somehow gain office through an accident.

  26. @Jonathan True leaders, who are deeply concerned about the future of America, and the disastrous affects caused by the Liberal Agenda, has always prevailed, and I will not falter, and will do whatever it takes to make sure my leaders get re-elected, get elected, and further exploit the GOP for their delusional thought that it is okay to support rhinos. We can only hope..on a side note, I do request a small change. I would like to see the “VP change button upgraded to a different look, like some of the other buttons that were re-designed.

  27. @Dallas
    Luckily, you only have one vote and whatever influence you might have. On a side note, if Clinton wins (and she probably will), and if she gets two terms, you’re seeing 7 liberal judges to 2 conservative judges on the Supreme Court. This will make me and many hardworking patriotic Americans very happy. It will allow more Americans to live the American Dream and fulfill the Founding Fathers goal of “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness”. A “Liberal Agenda” allows the dream of the Founding Fathers to reach the most amount of people, especially those who aren’t rich. This is all Constitutional as well as the heart of the Declaration of Independence. Many, including Jefferson, believed that the Constitution should go through another convention every 20 years (every generation). A liberal agenda doesn’t defy a constitution, it uses it in a Jeffersonian manner that doesn’t straight-jacket the 21st century into a weak misreading of 18th century ideals. I do wish you luck in trying to destroy the GOP, it just makes it easier for the Democrats to win. My prediction is that not a single member of the Tea Party will be in office in 2024. The demographics in 2024 would make such views impossible for election or reelection.

  28. @Jonathan I am not liberal but I agree the constitution was made to be changed modified for changing times and such therefore it needs updating. I consider myself a fiscal conservative even though I believe in higher taxes on the top 5%, decrease in spending on defense, reforming medicaid, medicare, ACA, and social security by means of reducing spending yet continuing the promises made to our country. @Dallas tea party people like you consider me a Rino republican I just consider myself a reasonable republican one determined to balance the budget in a fair and realistic way. If the Party wishes to win in 2016 we will nominate a non radical conservative who is willing to compromise on some of his beliefs because thats what presidents do.

  29. @Jonathan The Boston Tea Party started it all, and we are continuing the vision that tyrants should not be in power, constantly depriving the people the rights given by the Constitution. I will support a Democrat the day when big government controlling the American people- that idea, is no longer an option.. Honestly, I believe the American people deserve better than the so called “leaders” in power..and I mean Republicans as well as Democrats. I would like to continue this discussion, but I am in a hurry and have to leave. I look forward to your response.

  30. @Dallas

    Depriving people of rights? I’d say the Tea Party is more inclined to deprive people of rights. Most of them are against gay marriage, abortion, equal access to health care, among many other things. Most liberals are for gun control, only a few wish to get rid of guns all together. Democrats/liberals aren’t depriving anything in the constitution; however, they may try to amend it, which is constitutional. If the 2nd amendment is revoked in the constitution by a new amendment, then it isn’t depriving anything in the constitution, because it is then constitutional not anti-constitutional. Are you in the belief that the original constitution is infallible? If so, slavery was endorsed and the Bill of Rights (including guns) were the first 12 amendments, and weren’t part of the original constitution. Amendments are created because the constitution, an 18th century creation based off compromise, is too faulty to exist through time without modification.

    The real Tea Party wanted representation #1, it was more than just not wanting a government. They weren’t anarchs and the US Government is nothing similar to George III. We elect the president and congress people to represent us. We are represented, the Boston Tea Party was not. That was the issue.There are more rhinos, dinos, Democrats, GOPs and liberals than there are Tea Party member, our country will represent that. Tea Party organizations, according to wikipedia, have dropped from 1,000 to 600.

  31. @Anthony, I encountered minor errors that could be fixed? During the 2016 scenario’s general election, when I was playing as Sarah Palin, I clicked one of the islands near the bottom of the map, and a “-0 out of bounds” error appeared. Also, could you update the “VP change” button in a future update? And, if possible, could you change the poll #’s during the general election to show positive/negative momentum which is shown in the primaries? Thanks

  32. A PPP Poll came out today and has Huckabee at 16%, as the front-runner, however Bush, Christie, Paul, Ryan are all close behind.

  33. What is the time estimate for the next update?

    A new poll came out today with Ryan leading Republicans; however, Huckabee wasn’t part of this poll.

    And Paul now leads NH in the latest poll.

    I haven’t seen any polls with Bachmann or Palin in a long time. I’d like to see one with Huntsman. All the polls tend to only include Christie, Ryan, Cruz, Paul, Jindal and Bush, with an occasional Huckabee or Walker.

  34. Would it be possible to create a event in the 2016 scenario, causing Christie to have negative momentum, relating to the recent scandal? Or lower his percentages?

  35. @Dallas and Anthony
    In case you are curious, here are how the candidates are doing in the last few polls. Hopefully, these are reflected in the update, somewhat. The most recent polls will be on the left, with older polls on the right. All of these polls are from this month.

    Christie 13/13/12 [Scandal has hurt him but he’s still competitive]
    Ryan 20/8/13 [Ryan gains most in a narrow field]
    Bush 18/14/11 [Bush gains a lot in a narrow field]
    Paul 11/11/13 [Those leaving Christie aren’t seeking Paul]
    Huckabee NA/16/NA [Ryan supporters seem to prefer Huckabee]
    Cruz 12/8/9 [Cruz gains when Walker and Jindal aren’t considered]
    Rubio 10/8/8 [Rubio isn’t gaining much]
    Walker NA/6/6 [Walker isn’t inspiring his party]
    Jindal NA/5/3 [Jindal isn’t inspiring his party]

    Clinton 73/67/65 [Isn’t losing steam]
    Biden 12/7/8 [gap between him and Warren is getting closer]
    Warren 8/7/7 [however, Biden destroys her when Clinton isn’t an option]
    Cuomo NA/2/3 [losing support; Biden gains on Warren with him out]
    O’Malley NA/1/1 [losing support; Biden gains on Warren with him out]
    Schweitzer NA/1/1 [severe dark horse]

    General Election:
    Clinton lead vs. Christie 12/2/8 [Christie doesn’t lose much vs. Clinton even with scandals]
    [Christie still strongest vs Clinton but loses in every poll]

    Polls from left to right: ABC News/WashPost, PPP, Quinnipiac

    For you, Dallas, here are the results for polls in which Palin or Bachmann are in the questionnaire.

    In Marist poll in Dec, Palin gets 8% (6th place)
    In a PPP poll in Oct, Palin gets 7% (6th place)
    In a PPP poll in Nov 2012, Palin gets 7% (tied in 6th place)

    Bachmann isn’t in any poll and Palin is only in these three. This suggests that neither seem to garner any serious attention; although, that doesn’t discount them running or doing well in the primaries. I’d assume Bachmann would get around 5% at most. I don’t see her doing better than Palin. I don’t remember how well she did in the polls in 2012.

  36. A Quinnipiac poll came out today for Florida.
    Clinton leads all Republicans in Florida. Bush is the closest to beating Clinton–he’s 6 pts down. She beats Rubio by 10 in his own state (Clinton beats Cuban-descent Cruz by 20 pts in a state with a lot of Cubans) Bush leads all Republicans with 25%, Rubio second with 16%, Paul 11%, Christie 9%.

  37. According to several articles, Palin has the highest approval rating among potential candidates. Could this to be a event that boosts her momentum in the 2016 scenario? Maybe the event would say “Palin has the highest approval rating”.

  38. @Dallas

    I think the case would have to be the same in Sept 2015
    Where did you see this approval rating for her? Do you have a link?

  39. @Anthony
    Any chance we can have Romney as a “What-if” candidate? He actually won a Republican Primary poll in New Hampshire, beating out Rand Paul, who was second.

  40. @Jonathan re Romney,

    If there’s serious noise about Romney making another bid, then it’s possible.

  41. @Dallas re Christie,

    I have increased his Corruption rating in the latest internal 2 -> 3. Outside of that, we’ll see in the next while.

  42. @Jonathan re next update,

    Things are coming along well with the Official-Undecided feature. I’m guessing next week for test release. We’ll see.

  43. Here is the link, and I would like to correct my first post. I meant Favorability rating.

    The best liked person we tested on this poll with Republican primary voters is actually Sarah Palin who has a 70/20 favorability rating. She’s followed by Huckabee at 64/18, Ryan at 58/18, Paul at 58/21, Bush at 56/18, Cruz at 45/20, and Christie at 40/38. Most of those numbers are similar to what they were a month ago but Christie’s seen a substantial drop from +18 at 47/29 a month ago to his new +2 net favorability. – See more at:

  44. I guess it kind of makes sense, because Palin is 3rd most unfavorable, Rand Paul barely being more unfavorable. Huckabee, Ryan and Bush are least unfavorable. That makes sense.

  45. Gotta love how the most regular contributors apart from Anthony are in the tea party and huffington post. That’s America for you.

  46. I like how you think Huffington Post is a party. I consider myself an unaffiliated progressive that votes Democrat because it’s slightly closer to what I want. I probably won’t ever have a party I like with a shot at the presidency.

    I’d be interested to see the political demographics of people that have bought this game.
    Maybe Anthony can make a scenario with all the contributors. I start with about $5,000 in my campaign war chest. I start in Texas, but the only people voting for me are in Massachusetts, Vermont, Hawaii and DC. I’m not allowed to campaign in the deep south or in the tornado states because I’ll provoke assassination attempts on my person. I’m only on the ballot in New England+NY, DC and Hawaii and the West Coast. Dallas is on the ballot in all the states that I’m not on the ballot and he’s not on the ballot if I’m on the ballot.

    Damn, Dallas beats me in the electoral vote 395-143.
    Of 129 million voters: He wins the popular vote 76% to 24%

  47. I read some articles and it seems like Howard Dean and John Kerry are now possible Democratic Candidates
    i also have a question about the undecided feature, will candidates get extra momentum when they run or well they have there usual percentages?

  48. Yeah, but make sure he’s an Independent and not a Democrat. He caucuses with Democrats. I don’t think he’s ever been a Democrat.

  49. And Newt Gingrich said he’d probably run. I’d really like to see a Gingrich-Cruz debate that’s two people with a debate skill of 5 (in President Forever game terms).

  50. I think Newt Mitt Kerry and Dean. Bernie would be interesting as the independent.alternative to the democratic candidate. i think some platforms need to be edited. warren should be further left, cuomo to the right. huckabee should be more right wing.

  51. @Josh
    I agree on making Warren more left and Huckabee more right. I also would like to see Romney, Kerry, Dean and Sanders in the game. And Gingrich, who said he’d probably run.

    Is there a way to revert candidates back to only VP choices? I know you can promote a VP, but some candidates, like Castro, Martinez and Pawlenty, are looking more like VP choices only. Kasich, Snyder and Pence should probably be presidential options for the Republicans, however.

    They’re mention in this:

  52. Long time no see. Anyhow, Gingrich just said he’ll consider running again. He’s unlikely to though. I agree on making Warren more left but disagree on making Huckabee more right. He’s kind of the opposite of a libertarian really, socially conservative but he’s not a fiscal conservative. He gets bad marks from fiscal conservatives and doesn’t really advocate for cutting spending.

  53. Huckabee, from what I can see, is where he needs to be on most issues. On the social issues he’s on the right, but on the fiscal issues and immigration issue he’s not, fitting for a self-identified “compassionate conservative”.

    Joining hands with Patty Murray on spending, Ryan should move more leftish on fiscal issues as well.

  54. Jake i see what your saying on huckabee but i disagree with moving Paul Ryan to left on fiscal issues. i felt like the budget compromise was pretty conservative and ryans whole campaign would be based on fiscal conservatism and repealing ACA

  55. @Dallas
    I think it would work with charisma and Ground Support. Poll #s should only be based on polls. Therefore, I think Palin should get like 4 charisma and high ground support. I wouldn’t give her a 5, because she was still the 3rd worst in unfavorable, despite being the best in favorable.

    I can see Gingrich running. I honestly don’t see why he wouldn’t. I wouldn’t vote Republican, but I thought he actually did pretty well for most for most of the campaign. And I think he’d probably improve upon last campaign with great pre-primary debate performance, similar to last time. I feel like Gingrich is more likely to run again than Santorum, Palin, Bachmann.

  56. Santorum was the last runner-up. His numbers are polling really bad for that position, but I think it’s rather likely he’ll run again. He also has the evangelical niche. Gingrich might be happy being a commentator now.

    Ryan and Murray’s budget deal wasn’t fiscally conservative, the Tea Party, Pauls and Cruzes were against it.

Leave a Comment