I'm thinking he would solve a lot of neighbour disputes with some of the laws he might pass.
Vote McAfee, you can trump the others (I should work in American politics)
Now that paranoid playboy John McAfee has personally confirmed to El Reg that he is running for US president, it's time to ask a key question. No, not where his campaign stands on inequality, America's simmering racial tensions, the fate of the middle class, and stuff like that. We need to find out this crucial detail: does …
Boris Johnson seems positively normal in comparison to Trump. He should still get a proper haircut though. Does he do his with garden shears? Also, in Boris' case, the buffoonery is a smokescreen to hide that he's a very bright chap, and he doesn't appear to be a rude arsehole either.
Although Johnson apparently really does talk like that, even under provocation. He came across a mugging a few years ago, charged towards the attackers, still on his bike, and shouted, "clear off you oiks!"
Crazy, idiotic, paranoid and criminal, Americans have repeatedly voted in presidents that fit one or more of these attributes.
Seems the most hated thing to the political media and (seemingly) public is a well balance intelligent leader, especially if they have a socialist outlook.
If one EVER runs for American political office (not just the presidency), PLEASE let me know so I can vote for him!
I'm actually planning to vote for Trump. I figure he'll be entertaining and not get anything done. It's better he not screw things any worse.
They having trouble with Hildabeast and her email saga - might need to add treasonous to the list.
"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason [...]" -- 18 U.S. Code §2381
Hmm. If it was an Exchange server then it would technically be the enemy of all living things, and that would include the United States, but from my experience there is neither "aid" nor "comfort" involved in running it.
You may be stretching just a little bit there.
Intelligent and socialist don't go together, unless you mean intelligent in the sense of most socialist leaders I have lived under in that they and their families become fabulously wealthy while ruining the country they rule over. But then again it easy to sit in your mum's basement and espouse all the 'glories' of socialism when you haven't experienced it first hand right...
> espouse all the 'glories' of socialism
The Economist Intelligence Unit’s where-to-be-born index (previously called the quality-of-life index, abbreviated QLI) attempts to measure which country will provide the best opportunities for a healthy, safe and prosperous life
3 Norway 8.09
4 Sweden 8.02
5 Denmark 8.01
16 United States 7.38
18 United Arab Emirates 7.33
Actually I have and still do.
In the UK there are still a few socialist organisations which we benefit from, the NHS being the most obvious.
Capitalism is wealth generating and helpfull to build aspersions.
Socialism means that my kids can do anything their talent and determination leads them to (inspiring). It means that, no matter what, the health of my family is looked after. It means that if the worst was to happen to me they would not starve.
We need both.
One supports the other.
Businesses needs healthy educated people who won't seal the guttering just for survivals sake.
People need wealth to help pay for the safety net.
So someone with a socialist outlook is an idiot how?
....then he get's my nod, but not a vote. Hey El Reg - Last year you said you're looking into the 'so very complicated that nobody can seem to implement it' TLS?
WHAT THE FUCK? Maybe someone from this org should run for government office ....over there - 'cause you already have the blatant lying straight.
He's not old enough for this cycle (Born: June 21, 1983, age 33 in late 2016). But absolutely, yes, I would vote for Edward Snowden. I not only would vote for Snowden, I would campaign for him for free.
The man has proven himself to be a patriot willing to risk his own welfare for the good of the country.
Having watched some of his youtube vid's slagging off his former antivirus company, he comes across as mad as a box of frogs with a pechant for getting up people's noses, scantily clad women, guns, alcohol and other fun stuff.
Hell yes I would vote for him, seems to me theres not much left in his closet to blackmail him with!
One for posterity.
"Why would anyone vote for this guy? He certainly isn't presidential material in my view."
'Cause he has the Right Idea(tm) with respect to backing up. I would be very interested in securing similar back-up services. Very interested.
AC 'cause She Who Must Be Obeyed might see this.
Why would anyone vote for this guy? He certainly isn't presidential material in my view.
Anyone who pays attention to US presidential voting patterns knows you just answered your own question.
(Personally, I think phrases like "presidential material" are so vague as to be useless anyway, in discussing a candidate's suitability for office. But few people who talk about the US Presidency want to frame that discussion in rational terms. Indeed, that's largely true of all US politics; commentators would much rather grind some adolescent axe like "no career politicians!".)
When people really believe the president has any real power. The owners of the United States aka international finance have long since gotten rid of those they may not approve of (see jfk).
Incidentally jfk and Lincoln both wanted to have sovereign currency, Lincoln with his green backs and jfk with executive order 11110. I will give up all I own the day a presidential nominee says they will abolish the fed. Also aipac have a very strong grip on anyone in American politics, anti Israel and you're out, I'd be interested to see how these 2 view the middle east.
If there were rational debates over the solution of issues common to the electorate, I would not care who was running.
But in the US, the politics of dogma overrides the eminently practical approach of most of America.
Hence the installed bases of the "left" and "right" (there is no difference - they are simply heading power structures with different monetary interests), are fighting tooth and nail to keep the "massaged candidates" on view.
I know nothing of Trump or Sanders (and neither do *you*), but they are not approved and that suggests this is all theatre.
Better have an election or someone will suspect it is fixed...
I gave you an upvote - there's something to the whole name recognition thing...*Clintoncough*, *Bushcough*.
That is sort of my point. We don't have politics at all. We have meta, or even meta-meta politics.
The groups that hold the power and/or money simply rearrange the deck-chairs on the deck, and there is no-one left to steer the ship. Most of political groups are running the gift shops to feather their nests on the lower decks....
Citizens cannot be expected to understand the minutae of the running on the government, so we need a competent civil service to perform this. The problem is we want a meritocratic civil service to solve problems for us all. What we have is an ideologically driven system, that rewards compliance, punishes dissent and has become chaotically entrenched with the money of short-term corporate interests.
I highly recommend reading The Federalist papers and some of the other writings (within 100 years!) that surrounded the creation of the United States.
You might be surprised how much thought went into the very problems we have today...
I'd vote for him, just to shake the GD tree. That coming from my
traditional conservative/ libertarian mindset of past 45 years.
But if he ever offered free SIM cards for everyone that granted free internet
access and free phone service for 'life', I'd decline. Just a word to the wise.
If you do see that offer, invest in a underground bunker.
If you get the reference, gratz.
"invades my privacy to assure me that I am not the enemy it is protecting me from"
Don't know if that's his own or borrowed from someone else, but I rather like it.
I think that the main advantage of McAfee is that you're not likely to get any nasty surprises.
And someone who doesn't want office is probably the best candidate.
"someone who doesn't want office is probably the best candidate"
With a caveat: someone capable, yet immune to the lure of power. That's a truly rare breed. And there is no way of knowing it beforehand. Their virtue shall be known only when they've stepped down by their own will.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019