The winners of the August 8th SC vote are …
- AARP (American Association of Retired Persons) (14 votes)
- NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) (14 votes)
- Koch Brothers (14 votes)
- United Auto Workers (14 votes)
- Fmr. Mayor Michael Bloomberg (11 votes)
- Fmr. Pres. George W. Bush (10 votes)
- Fmr. Rep. Ron Paul (10 votes)
- V.P. Joe Biden (9 votes)
- Fmr. Gov. Jeb Bush (9 votes)
- Fmr. V.P. Dick Cheney (9 votes)
- Sheldon Adelson (9 votes)
- Warren Buffett (9 votes)
on the first round, from a field of 20 endorsers (chosen from an initial field of approximately 70 endorsers).
Note: Right-Wing Blogosphere (9 votes) and Left-Wing Blogosphere (9 votes) also tied for 8th place, but on admin discretion won’t be added. Instead, endorsers who are more specific in those areas will be added at a future date.
Voter turnout was down from 24 to 18, a drop of 25% from the previous month.
These endorsers will be added to the official 2016 campaign.
Interestingly enough, the SC thought Bloomberg was a more important possible 2016 endorser than W. Bush.
You can see a list of upcoming features voted on by the SC to be implemented for President Forever 2016 here (scroll down to ‘What’s coming up next?’).
The SC will vote again on September 8th.
If you want to participate in the vote, you must be a member of the SC (Steering Council).
16 thoughts on “Vote Result for August 8th, 2014”
Yeah, it is odd that Bloomberg was more important than George W Bush. I feel like Bloomberg is becoming less important. It’s probably because George W Bush is an automatic for Jeb Bush if he runs.
Can we please have the game now? we’ve been waiting for months for it.
Good point about being an automatic for Jeb Bush.
The game isn’t ready to be released for the Mac yet. It is the sole focus of development right now, but it’s not going to be released until I feel it’s ready. Even then, there will probably still be bugs in it. It’s going to take time.
I think the main reason for our impatience is because we’ve been used to a monthly update. Anytime a person has a more favorable usual circumstance, there will be protest when certain privileges or expectations are taken away. I understand the time involved and I don’t expect you to do any more than you can. If anything, our over-eagerness reflects our loyalty and love of your product. I recently made a list of my all-time favorite games and shared it online. This game is included on the list. I am sure it is the same for others. We will wait, and still checking the website for rumors of update, but don’t expect any of us to be patient. We are kids at the dinner table with knife and fork in hand waiting for the next course.
Thanks for this – it’s been a difficult development step, but in the end it could very well be worth it. We’re getting close to it being ready.
Boy I love a cheating AI where you have a 14-15 point swing in multiple states within a few days
Go back to game design school
There shouldn’t be any cheating by computer players.
Can you tell me what happened in terms of the % swing?
I actually had a similar situation happen when I was playing as Julian Castro (I think it was at least) in the Primaries. I would be up in the polls 10-30 points in many of the states and then on the day of each primary, Biden would all of a sudden jump 20-30 points putting him ahead in most states.
Now on the other-hand: A 14-15 point swing in a poll is not all that unlikely over the entire game. 50 states +DC +PR, etc with the game’s polling MoE (I presume though we are talking a 100% and not a 95% level of confidence here?): it is possible. Let’s say there are 15% undecided and a MoE of 5%. If the poll is max error to one end and the undecideds break 12-3 for the same candidate: That right there is a 14 point swing for that candidate. While such situations are rare, they are statistically possible. Just dealing with the states alone plus DC gives you 19,890 general election polls. You can add the primaries on to that. That is a lot of polls. There are bound to be some oddities in there.
Thanks for this – you’re right, it could be possible.
My initial guess as to what’s going on would be it has to do with voters who are included as ‘undecideds’ in the game engine (or perhaps are aligned with a player who isn’t on the ballot anymore), who then break heavily for one candidate or another.
I’ve never had a 30% jump, but I’ve seen 0.7% undecided voters in a state and then the winner end up being someone 3rd in the polls in that state. I think this happens because:
1) The polls are not updated daily
2) The polls are not updated daily, and everyone is running ads against the winning or for themself
3) The polls are not updated, and because of ads, the undecided voters are really more than 0.7%
4) Because of the above, and because so many are running ads in that state, the undecided voters are actually very high between the last poll and the primary.
Honestly, I like the surprises sometimes. In fact, I think an upset victory should lead to more momentum if the state is won. Perhaps if there is a way to program this. A boost for someone who never leads in the national or that specific state poll.
Interesting – I’ll keep an eye out for this.
Yes, it would be nice to have effects like that. And the opposite – if someone’s ahead by a large margin and then survives by the skin of their teeth, then it’s not as big a boost.
Also, I have noticed several times when i start the election with everyone undecided the polls still poll candidates that are not in the race, can this change? Like in Iowa sometimes Rand Paul does not enter the race and he has 20% of the vote and I could be playing as Cruz or another republican candidate and have 35% of the vote and Paul Ryan has 25% of the vote, and polls say that there are 5% undecided voters, however all the percentages added to the candidates that are being polled but do not declare candidacy’s votes are now up in the air, this means that Paul’s 20%, in my experiences go to Pual Ryan and he defeats me by 10% or more depending on how many do not declare candidacy. Is there any fix for this?
Hmmm … If you’re saying a candidate is activated but not on the ballot in a region, the reason the game includes their %s is that they could very well get on the ballot before the primaries. But you’re right – it would be nice to view percentages only with candidates on the ballot. We’ll see.
Or are you saying that a candidate withdraws from the race, but they still have %s in upcoming primaries? If so, I’ll look into this, thanks.
has not declared candidacy, therefore not on ballot, this would also mean if they waited that long to join/ they would lose critical campaigning time therefore % would be lower. Also this might be able to be fixed by adding the latest date one can enter the race and if comp candidates haven’t entered by then there name would no longer be on the poll. And prior to the deadline to enter so you can see how you are polling the candidates % would still show on the polls, just a thought
Kevin has a point. Implementing “filing deadlines” for primaries would be a great way to rectify this.
Then the candidates who didn’t declare that they were running could then become national endorsers