Jump to content
Islamic Forum
Puget Sound

The Future Of America: A Political Game!

Recommended Posts

If this is in the wrong place, my apologies.  Please move it to the right forum.  :)


Welcome to The Future Of America, a political game where you can decide the future course of U.S politics.  This game is based upon a similar game by Alternatehistory.com forum user history nerd ( you can find one of the first threads for that game (called Screw Primaries) on that forum here: http://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=326626 ).  From that game:

In our timeline party conventions became increasingly irreverent being slowly replaced by the more democratic process of Primaries. But what if they didn't? What if American Politics continued to be run on the old model with ballot after ballot and back room deals?

In our timeline 1972 was the first election where Primaries had completely replaced the Convention as the method of choosing candidates. Not so in this universe!

And me again:

Basically, you and anyone else who wants to play will be voting on candidates for each party's presidential ticket at their respective national conventions (there are no primaries, hence the name of the game that inspired this) and I will run a simulated election and also simulate each term in office.  

So, basically we're running the national conventions for the two major parties?


How does it work?

You will vote on candidates for the presidential for both parties over a number of ballots and candidates are eliminated until one candidate has 50% plus one of the votes.

What happens after that?

You will do the same thing for the vice presidential nomination for both parties, and then I will simulate an election and the term of the winner.  After that, we’ll do the same thing for the next presidential election, and so on until 2016ish.

Can I write in candidates?

Yes, you can.  They must either be plausible candidates who were actually eligible politicians in real life or real life or fictional people added to the game by you or other players (see below).

How can I add candidates?

You will need to get points.

How can I get some points?

First, you need to make something from an in-universe perspective.  This can be an commentary on the elections, a political ad, a Wikipedia infobox, etc.  It just needs to have some effort put into it.  Examples from that other game:  


Is the Country Ready for Nancy Kassebaum?
(An Op-Ed)

She is a one term Senator from Kansas, and she is running for the Republican Nomination for President, but is the country ready for her? While nominating a woman for President would have history making potential that might at first glance give the Republicans an advantage after not being in the White House for eight years, there are other pros and cons to her viability as a successful candidate that come into play concerning whether or not her party will support her.
She does hail from Kansas, a Mid-Western State, which is by far an advantage within the Party considering the last election which saw a near Republican victory with the GOP carrying most of the Mid-West, but unlike Bob Dole, the Republican Mid-Westerner on the 1980 ticket, she is much more moderate to liberal. This could, of course, help the party in the North and Northeast, but it might dissatisfy the base, which is likely holding her back in the RNC Balloting Process.
Furthermore, there is another Mid-Western Candidate on the ballot that has connections with all branches of the Party. Senator Donald Rumsfeld from Illinois was previously a U.S. Representative, before going on to work in the Nixon and Rockefeller Administrations. As such, he is liked to varying degrees by the liberals, moderates, and, as a result of his own beliefs, conservatives. With this, he also carries the geographic advantage of being Mid-Western, as well as coming from the key swing state of Illinois.
Kassebaum has worked with both sides of the aisle in the Senate, which might be seen as an advantage to attracting independents, it seems to not serve her as well with the party bosses, who grow tired of the McKeithen Administration and the Democrats, who have since pushed vastly expansive environmental legislation, regulating even drilling in the midst of an economic crisis. Kassebaum did support some of the early environmental bills the McKeithen administration would pass, despite much opposition from her party. She also was a supporter of carpet-bombing Iran, without giving her support for further action as many in her party also sought out. These actions in Congress seem to be hurting her even further in the RNC Balloting Process.
However, another liberal, seems to have overcome these drawbacks in the balloting process in the form of Harold Stassen. In fact, should Stassen drop out of the race, they might be well off to endorse Kassebaum, who could theoretically carry a moderate-liberal banner for the Republicans of that kind in 1984. Even if they were not to do that, they might be wise to support Kassebaum perhaps for the VP position so that the liberal wing of the party could have some say within the ticket.
Despite these other factors, Kassebaum being a woman is by far the biggest one affecting her chances to become the nominee. While it would be a historic event and she could very well win the presidency from it, it seems unlikely that the Republicans will nominate her, if only because of the situation in Iran. I've talked to a few of the party bosses, who all seek to remain anonymous. Those that support Kassebaum feel that others see her as too weak to lead the nation when a strong foreign policy leader is needed, saying they fear others are unsure if a woman is up to the job. This was confirmed when one delegate I spoke to, a supporter of Rumsfeld, asked rhetorically, "I don't care who she is, can a woman lead the country while we are entangled up in a war on the other side of the world and the Soviets are in their own conflict literally right next door to ours?" Other delegates I talked to expressed similar concerns, one even saying, "We aren't the Democrats. We cannot afford to be weak on foreign policy when we have an even better chance of winning this than 1980. It's going to be close, still, and we need to stay true to the base of this party."
It seems that, unless Ms. Kassebaum begins converting delegates to her side and begins a massive get-out-the-vote campaign at the RNC, she will not be the Republican Nominee, no matter how strong she would be. And that is a sad thing indeed.

I will then look over your submission and decide whether to approve it or not.  If I do, you will get a point.

So, how do I use points to add characters?

You need to post that you are using a point to add someone to the game.  This can be a real-life person (make sure to include a link to a Wikipedia page or something so I can vet the character) or a fictional character.  If you are doing a fictional character, YOU CAN NOT MAKE ONE UP ON THE SPOT.  You can choose a character used in USG (make sure to include a link or brief bio) or a fictional character from some other work of fiction (make sure to include a link and short description, and make the character realistic).  Make sure to also include the office you want them to run for (House, Governor, Senate, etc.) You can NOT simply add someone onto the convention ballot right away, through.

Let me guess, they need experience?

Yes, that’s right!  Let’s say its 1976 and you want to run someone in 1992 (let’s say Hank Hill).  You make a wiki infobox to get a point, and then you spend that point to add Hank to the game as a House rep.  (If you ask for a Senate seat or Governor for an inexperienced real life person or a fictional character, it may not happen because of their experience, so it might be better to get them into a House seat, state legislature, the Cabinet, or a state executive position (like Attorney General or Insurance Commissioner of a state)).  Once 1992 nears, you can get and spend another point on Hank to run for president (you may not need to do so if he or she gets high-profile enough- check the news in various posts.  If they are high-profile enough, they will run for President on their own and you won’t need to spend a point).  Or you can choose to spend a point, say, in 1984 or 1988, to get Hank into a higher office, like the Senate or a governorship or the Cabinet to make him more experienced and therefore much better at running for the presidency (candidates who are not ready, even if chosen by the convention, will probably be crushed in the general election).

Can you repeat all that again in a shorter version?

Sure.  Basically:

Decide who you want to add to the game.
Get a point by making something per the rules above.
Spend a point to add that person or character to the game in some position.
Optional: Spend another point to get that person elected to a higher office in the future to make them more electable.
Spend another point to make them run for president (you may not need to do this- they may run for president on their own, especially if they are high-profile enough).

What about people who historically run for or were likely to run for President?  Do we have to spend points to add them too?

No, historical candidates will probably be on the ballot anyway, so you might not have to worry about it.  It just depends on how history goes and how the parties evolve.

Can I spend points to making events happen (or not happen) or to give a career boost to people?

Yes, you can!  You can’t spend points to make candidates die before their OTL death or make bad things happen to them, through.  I also will hold final approval on anything you want to do with points, so if you want to do something, just post and ask if its possible!

And if I have any more questions?

Just post in the thread and ask!

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

1976 Background (mostly taken from the game is this based upon, with some edits to fit my scenario:

It wasn't long after Nixon's victory that rumors began to surface that he may have pulled some dirty tricks. It wasn't long before that in 1973 had revealed that Nixon had cronies infiltrate the DNC, steal election plans from hotel rooms and employ blackmail to sabotage the Democrats.  After Sprio Agnew's resignation, Nixon appointed Nelson Rockefeller of New York as Vice-President (instead of Gerald Ford as in RL).  In late 1973 Nixon would be forced to resign from the presidency leaving the liberal Rockefeller in charge.

Rockefeller s term would be rocky however as he proved incapable of working with the conservatives within his own party. His failure to pardon Nixon and selection of moderate VP Ford would prove controversial. Democrats also refused to pass Rockefeller's agenda out of anger at his association with Nixon. Due to his families famous background and unimaginable wealth rumors would fly on both sides of the isle that he somehow "bought the Presidency" or "Set Nixon up".  Of note, Ronald Reagan is running a conservative insurgent campaign in the GOP against Rockefeller.

To vote:

Choose ONE candidate that you are voting for from each party (so, vote for ONE Democrat and ONE Republican) and post your vote.  RPing as delegates is highly encouraged, and may get your points or other rewards.  You can also make deals with other delegates and candidates will take those into account, but they may or may not be accepted by the candidates themselves or may be altered.

1976 Democratic National Convention, 1st ballot

Jimmy Carter
Morris Udall
Birch Bayh
Frank Church
Fred Harris
Henry M. Jackson
George Wallace
Terry Sanford
George McGovern
Write-In (post name, or it won't count)

1976 Republican National Convention, 1st ballot

Nelson Rockefeller
Ronald Reagan
Howard Baker
Edward Brooke
Dan Evans
Barry Goldwater
Harold E. Stassen
Jesse Helms
Write-In (post name, or it won't count)


Example vote (so you can see how to vote on each ballot):

Democrats: Henry M. Jackson

Republicans: Dan Evans

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Get some sleep . History turns on a dime .

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Get some sleep . History turns on a dime .

:huh: :huh: :huh: ???


I don't get what you're talking about???  This is just a fun game I thought some people on here might enjoy.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a woulda , coulda , shoulda .  More fun playing monopoly or scrabble . I think the amount of replies kinda indicates how much fun your game is . No ?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a woulda , coulda , shoulda .  More fun playing monopoly or scrabble . I think the amount of replies kinda indicates how much fun your game is . No ?


Actually, the game is popular on other forums:




Lots of replies here and also below:






And alternate history is a thing that many people find interesting and fun.  It's not simply "woulda, shoulda, coulda", but a useful way to analyze real life history by considering what could have happened and comparing the results to what actually happened.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of people have too much time on their hands . :yes:

  • Like 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now