Bernie Would Have Beaten Trump(?) | Super PAC$ + Elections of US America Election

POLITICS, n. A strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles. The conduct of public affairs for private advantage.

— from The Devil’s Dictionary

Trump surrounds himself with Wonks in **Elections of US America Election**.

More often than not, I refuse to let go of the past. I dwell on events that I can’t change and I stew over what-if scenarios. One of those scenarios is the 2016 Presidential Election. The election in which Liberals chose an unlikable business-friendly moderate over an anti-corporate avenger. The election in which Americans voted a reality show host into the White House.

I needed to do something creative with my pain, so I played out a conjectural Sanders vs. Trump scenario using two card games: Super PAC$ and Elections of US America Election (yes, that’s the actual title). I hoped that my analog simulation would show that the greedy Pig-Fucker that now squats inside the White House would have succumbed to The Bern in 2016.

Bernie would have done better against Trump, but not by much, and it probably wouldn’t have been enough.

Elections of US America Election: The Card Game was developed by Game the News, who normally make serious video games, and published by Wonkette. Yeah, THAT Wonkette. While it abstracts a lot of the political process, it communicates the basics pretty well. Each Round, players compete for either a Large State card or multiple Small State cards. State cards dictate how many Voter cards, which represent voting blocks, are up for grabs in the current Round. By winning State cards players collect Electoral College Votes. Whoever reaches 270 Electoral Votes first, wins.

Each Candidate has a special power, and separate Appeal scores for Democrats, Republicans, and Independents. Players also have a hand of Wonk cards. Wonk cards can apply instant benefits or drawbacks, buff your Candidate for the entire Round, or summon permanent political staff, aka Wonks. Players take turns gaining votes from the pool of Voter Cards or playing Wonk cards. Whoever vacuums up the most Votes wins a Large State, or the largest of the Small States in play. Then the next Round starts by drawing new State and Wonk cards.

To a political news junkie, it’s a pretty good representation of election drama. The main thing that’s missing is any mention of Gerrymandering. Apparently, this game takes place in an alternate universe where the Republicans don’t cheat. And Republicans in the real world cheat a lot. Between big money donors, voter suppression, Citizens United, blocking Obama’s appointees, appointing savagely hard-Right judges, appointing screamingly unqualified judges, suppressing government data, and restricting agency verbiage, the GOP has stacked the deck in their own favor to a ridiculous degree. “Marketplace of Ideas” my ass. Why bother defending the virtues of Conservatism when you can just keep all the Poors from voting?

In each **Elections of US America Election**, Candidates fight for Voters in one of more stakes.

Then again, Dems Gerrymander too. They just don’t do it to the same extent, and probably never will. By the time they take back all the statehouses they lost during the Obama years, new laws will kill the practice. Because even those hardcore Conservative judges being appointed right now may not want The Orange Usurper staining the party’s reputation any longer. The GOP got what they wanted anyway: a horde of monstrous jackasses from the Federalist Society deciding who wins and who loses key legal battles for at least the next generation.

Sanders could have at least split the Screw ’Em All voters.

It’s possible Trump may not even care about re-election. He’s lining his pockets right now. Just by being president, the value of his brand has ballooned dramatically. At the very least he’s been able to charge way more for Mar-a-Lago memberships. The Presidency is nothing but a cash-grab to Trump. Then again, you could say the same thing about most other Conservatives.

In **Elections of US America Election**, Trump’s special ability is to ignore Scandal effects. Instead, they increase his pull with Republicans and decrease his pull with Independents and Democrats.

Out of three games of Elections of US America Election, Sanders won only once, and by the slimmest of margins. Populism can counter populism, but Trump’s immunity to Scandals (which are a thing I neglected to mention) and Bernie’s inability to leverage Super PACS (the legal entity, not the other game) screwed the chances of a Progressive win.

Super PAC$ is a different beast entirely. Instead of vying specifically for the White House, Candidates fight to score the most Power. There are elections for the House, the Senate, and the White House, all of which can net you Power. I assume this represents your party winning congress, and you winning the White House. But you can also gain Power from Factions (which represent voting blocks, special interests, etc) and Investments. This means you can lose all three elections and still win the game. It’s difficult, but possible.

In **Super PAC$**, Trump doubles the cash he gets from banks, big business, etc.

Trump supporters love it when he talks about Power. It makes them horny. They say they wanted someone powerful who wasn’t a politician. But a politician is anyone involved in politics. Did they really want a leader? Trump hasn’t led anyone anywhere. Did they want a public official? Anyone elected to office can call themselves that. Did they want a statesman? Romney was a statesman and salt-of-the-earth types hated him. Did they want a public servant? Only if he served them and them alone. In the end, they didn’t elect any of these. They elected a Boss.

In this game of **Super PAC$**, Trump loses to Sanders, but still gets richer from campaigning.

I’ve disliked most of my Bosses. It was never personal. I just hate being told what to do, and telling people what to do is the function of a Boss. A few of my Bosses could also be called “Managers”, and one was even a “Leader”, but those weren’t the traits they were hired for. Bosses only hire other Bosses. And since the sole desire of a Boss is to be in charge, they’re more likely to be in charge. Then it’s Bosses all the way down.

And Trump is the bossiest of Bosses. I was surprised he won over who I used to think of as Take-This-Job-and-Shove-It Americans. But I wasn’t even phased when other rich people flocked to him. They all knew that he’d rig the system for his own gain, and that rigging would help them too. Big Oil, Big Banks, Big Prison, and Big War couldn’t wait for him to take office. Their minions in Congress may have bitched about it, but The Rich weren’t going to let Congress stop Trump from making them richer.

The 2016 presidential election was a rejection of elitism, but when did elitism start meaning, “college graduates”? When did having a doctorate in philosophy make you an enemy of Real America? Elites are The Rich. The Kochs. The Mercers. Zuckerberg. TRUMP! But The Orange Man convinced Middle America that he was different. They accepted this anti-intellectual know-it-all as one of their own.

Maybe Trump’s presidency was inevitable. Presidents are rarely experts in anything relevant to actual governing. They’re just the charming ones that convinced enough voters that they should be in charge. The experts, wonks, and academics do the intellectual grunt work. The big picture stuff is better left to Bosses. Because being charming and rich makes you worthy of the big picture thinking. It was only a matter of time before someone ran on a purely “I’m the Boss” platform.

In this alternate universe, Sanders whipped talk radio audiences into a punish-the-rich frenzy, and the hosts followed along.

Maybe Bernie was doomed from the start. He may have been objectively better than either Clinton or Trump, but he wasn’t charming or rich enough for Big News to cover him. Plus, his “Tax the Rich” policy basically made him the unofficial Occupy Wall Street candidate. CNN and even left-leaning MSNBC couldn’t promote the candidate that would shine a light on their failure to cover the Occupy movement.

Sanders’ “Tax the Rich” angle is modeled fairly bluntly in Super PAC$. It forces opponents to trash Investment cards. If other Candidates are winning with Factions, it doesn't help much. But if they’re winning because their pockets are deep, Bernie punishes them for being too rich. Just like he might have done in real life.

Or maybe not. In three games of Super PAC$, Sanders beat Trump for the Presidency every time, but didn’t win every game. In the first game, Trump won by grabbing a ton of Investments and taking the House. The second time, Sanders won all three Elections, but Trump’s investments were so massive he only lost by 1 point. This reflects the theory that he intended to profit from the election, but didn’t really want to win. Only once did Sanders become President, win the game, and destroy Trump’s wealth. So, Bernie might have saved us, but Trump was probably going to get richer anyway. Then he would have had more time to manage his newly expanded wealth. And then…TRUMPtv.

Final Notes

The creators of Elections of US America Election were too clever by half. The card text is both overly cynical and unclear. The rulebook is poorly designed and written. Plus, the full game takes two to three hours to play. That said, it is a better example of an election than Super PAC$.

Super PAC$ is well designed, well written, and it’s more fun. It’s also way shorter. Plus, it makes funding a bigger part of campaigning. However, it ignores the process of running a real race.

If you follow politics, professionally or otherwise, buy Elections of US America Election (and the expansion). If you’re a gamer, buy Super PAC$. If you follow politics AND you’re a gamer, get either. If you’re obsessed with both games and politics, get both.