John McAfee announces he's running for President
money.cnn.com
money.cnn.com
If I think of McAfee three things come to mind:
1. Creator of awful anti-virus software that slows your computer to a halt.
2. Fled Belize on some murder scandal.
3. Is crazy paranoid.
As for some murder scandal, I think it makes sense to check out his side of story: https://www.reddit.com/r/netsec/comments/3hr9f0/i_am_john_mc... https://www.reddit.com/r/netsec/comments/3hr9f0/i_am_john_mc...
The entire AMA is quite interesting, though he seems a bit paranoid indeed (on the other hand - if there's some truth in Belize government opressing him, I'm not surprised).
McAfee was only bought by Intel in 2011, it was getting worse and worse for years before that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpRvaQsGIY8
Anyway, given how the field looks likely to shake out, I might just vote for him as a default option.
It's strange how if you have enough charisma people will rally behind you no matter what you've done.
No wait, don't imagine it, watch it happen in this 1998 episode of the Ruby Wax show:
Plus, in the US, your cat can run for President. It means absolutely nothing.
The age requirement is a tough one...I believe that would make your cat the Ralph Hall of feline politicans.
Can the cat become President? Clearly not.
Can the cat get on the ballot? I imagine every locality requires people on the ballot to be eligible to take the office in question, so no.
But we're not even at that stage yet. Right now, "running for President" is nothing more than an announcement that a person is doing so. It's one of those actions that you can perform merely by stating that you're doing it, like "I apologize" or "I order you to ...."
And on that note, I'm running for President too. Unlike most cats, I'm actually eligible, so I have that going for me.
Odds are something like 15:1, so if you think it's 150:1 - or more - that's a 10x certain return. It's a no-brainer, in that case.
The point is that talk is cheap. Of course it's more likely that he won't become president, but don't rule out the chance that he might. If you do, it'd be wise to put your money where your mouth is.
You are right, talk is cheap and I am just shooting my mouth here, like everyone here.
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/us-politics/us-president...
Lots of people taking bets.
It's a peer to peer platform. Approx £500k punted on the US president so far on betfair.
For what it's worth Nate Silver thinks he has no chance.
One reason I think he may do it is that he's spoken out against the carried interest exemption for hedge funds. It seems obviously fair that hedge fundies should pay as much or more as doctors and nurses and the like but the mainstream politicians don't touch it because they want the campaign contributions and are scared of them funding their opponents instead. I'm hypothesising that the voters are fed up with their representatives being bought by wealthy special interests.
He doesn't strike me as having ulterior motives like every other candidate out there right now.
Unfortunately he lacks the charisma, command, and authority necessary in a President and I think his handling of the OA 206 protesters at his Seattle Rally is pretty telling of how he'd flounder in that role.
That's working out pretty well for Trump. McAfee doesn't have the giant personal warchest Trump has, of course.
> Plus, in the US, your cat can run for President.
Only if it's 35 or older, which is unlikely.
What he's trying to get is unknown, but he may get something like a cabinet-level position. Secretary of State Donald Trump should give all voters a moment of pause.
He's also reaching a point in his campaign where he's spending considerable time preparing himself for the primary season and will also need to start spending considerable money.
It's hard to really see why he would do all this in order to make Jeb Bush seem "less bad". If you recall the 2012 primary, there were a similar number of candidates, but the person who won was the most moderate of them, Mitt Romney. However, in 2012, there was never really on "outsider" as popular as Trump. I think it's less apt to compare Trump to Herman Cain than it is to compare him to the runs of Steve Forbes or Ross Perot.
Trump's current popularity might be completed related to the fact that he isn't coming from a political background and isn't acting like a politician. Mark Cuban said he doesn't necessarily support Trump's positions, but does support the idea that we need more people like Trump involved in politics.
Is this for real? It sounds like a parody.
"My tools for national security consulting are primarily a semi-auto .22 rifle with a silencer."
"I also do my most productive security designs while having extended sex."
"My favorite real-time software is the XM153 remote control software that comes standard with the XM153 50 caliber machine gun."
It's not an article; it's an interview. The questions are not satire, but his answers surely are.
Edit: this was the link from the article. My bad, no https.
It also has instructions how to register for voting an opponent theoretically might want to sabotage in order to deny him some votes.
These two things are basically the only content of the site.
Sounds like an antivirus.
Unfortunately, for unfunny people, it's easy to confuse this with "no humor allowed."
>has become
They seem to be way more competent running their country than bunch of lawyers ru(i)nning US.
People forget that civic leadership is a requirement for running a country. Just like managers have to "herd cats," politicians have to herd a more diverse group of roles. I'm not trying to garnish sympathy for politicians, I just want to point out that their requirements are not easily translated from any one field, such as real estate, engineering, business leadership, chemistry, etc.
Also, their decisions are constantly compromises. Most people cringe when they have to compromise b/t two things such as cost and quality. Politicians typically compromise b/t about ten things like: legacy, human rights, quality of life, cost, reputation, longevity, state of relationships at local, county, state, region, national and international level, etc, etc. They even have to compromise against themselves in order to stay in power. It would make me completely ill to have nearly all of my decisions play out with a near 10% net efficiency :)
What do we really need for a leader? A leader. A consensus builder. A decision maker. And inspiration.
This is the sort of guy they can rally around and at least keep him up in the polls.
You can run a right wing, loudmouth, ignorant asshole as long as he hits some of the concerns of middle America.
But you'll never run someone with his background, no matter how smart he is. The conservative voters (and I'm thinking the camo and nascar group here, ie 95 percent of the country) are still hung up on "drug bad", "white good" and other one-syllable talking points.