Why not? Well…
We’ve had a rough (but great!) day here at Bill Gates for President dot net. After being featured on Scott Adams’ The Dilbert Blog, our url traveled the web at high speed, quickly ending up on Slashdot, and quite a few other websites, blogs and discussion boards … The high amount of traffic less than two days after the official launch of this web page was a bit too much for us to handle for about an hour, but after moving to a new web server (Yes, we’re still on a linux machine!), we were able to recover within a decent time frame. We would like to thank everyone for the attention this website has received, and apologize for the short downtime!
We haven’t just received a large number of visitors, our mailbox was flooded as well. Even though about 90% of the e-mails were supporting our ideas, we also received some interesting insights from the “No way”-side of the discussion. We’re in the process of gathering their most interesting remarks, and will report on them as soon as possible. Free speech and all that.
To sum up this very short update: “keep it coming!”. We seem to be repeating ourselves when we say we are not only here to get Bill to run for President of the United States; we want to provoke political debate and maybe even notorious critics to think: “Why not?”. Whether or not, and how you answer that question is completely up to you (but please, fill us in!).
26 Responses to “Why not? Well…”
Leave a Reply
Social Bookmarking
Thank you:
Lingerie Blog
Mazda mx-3
Blog-Tique
Sam Farha
Intimissimi
Wicked Weasel
The Daily Treat
Luxury Lingerie Shopping
Beachwear
Even though I am a Canadian citizen, I beleive Bill Gates would make a perfect president. Hey, whats the competition?
I’m opening a new site soon and I will link back to this site when it is finished.
Come on guys, why BillG as president? Just because he managed, by luck and shady business practices, to become one of the richest men in the world? Despite what Microsoft spin doctors like to tell you, he’s a man of limited vision - he’s the same one who dismissed the Internet as a fad in the mid-90s and started building MSN as an old-fashioned giant BBS. The very fact you chose a non-MS product such as Linux for your Web server speaks volumes about his qualifications as a businessman.
And about the charity thing… it smells PR all around it. As proved by the fact that every donation is well publicized worldwide, much more than is usually done with other high-profile or public figures.
There are many other more respected and worthy people out there, really.
I’m not an American citizen, but why not?
“There are many other more respected and worthy people out there, really. ”
like mr. Bush?
Mr. Gates may be a man of limited vision, but perhaps his vision doesn’t require taking over the world using military force.
Besides, with Microsoft’s lobbying clout, Bill wouldn’t really have to be elected President. . .we could just transfer the title.
http://forum.literotica.com:81/showthread.php?t=480408
Probably not work-safe, but another message board discussing the site.
The Earl
ok, so a guy gives BILLIONS and no i didnt make a mistake that is supposed to be a “B” there, he must be only in it for PR right?, u show me somebody who GIVES MORE, and while your at it, how about giving some real reasons why you think he shouldnt be president, cuz the PR for charity is shoddy at best
With regard to Bill for Pres - It’s all good. Go big Fella!
With regard to you site advertising God, thats google getting a little carried away. Vanquish the word of google on the triple double you. Begone you foul beast.
Ok, done now.
Chaderac.
WoW! I thought this would be a joke site. I don’t see any jokes… oh… except for the title that is.
Why would this be a joke? I think you guys make an excellent point, and I’m behind you 100%. I think it’s funny to see most of the negative replies are from people who say: “I don’t like windows so he would be a bad president”.
That makes sense…. NOOT!
I had the pleasure of watching Bill Gates receive the James C. Morgan Global Humanitarian Award at the Tech Museum Awards in San Jose this past month. He gave what I consider to be a really great speech.
I looked online and couldn’t find a video, but here’s a transcript:
http://www.microsoft.com/billgates/speeches/2006/11-15TechMuseum.aspx
He spoke about how research into the diseases that are killing most of the people around the work lags behind, say, research in reducing baldness. He spoke with passion and without reading a teleprompter.
Now I use Linux and home and work and am one of the crowd that tends to be prejudiced against Microsoft because they’re so big and wield what I consider to be an unhealthy amount of influence. But I want to take issue with those who think Microsoft or Bill Gates are motivated by evil intentions. There’s no big difference between the way Microsoft tries to increase sales and any other company. The problem is that Microsoft has been so successful that free market competition isn’t working well.
The big thing that Microsoft has been called on the carpet for is giving discounts to computer manufacturers that bundle Windows with every computer. This is absolutely a normal strategy — you get software bundled on computers all the time where the software manufacturer gives a discount because the manufacturer sticks it on every computer. It’s not evil, just good business.
The problem is that once you become too big, what used to be good business practices can now become unhealthy. The problem is you don’t just wake up one day and think “Wow, we’re so successful, let’s stop try so hard to sell our products and give the other guys a chance.” And that’s why we have anti-trust laws which kick in and let the government, on behalf of the rest of us, in effect say to Microsoft that they’re too successful and need to back off from some of their business strategies.
There are really two ways to run afould of anti-trust laws. One is to be so successful that you have a monopoly or close to it, and your business practices need to be restricted. The other is that you secretly call up your competitors and fix prices with them, like the airlines did in the 1980’s for example. I think the second is a bit on the evil side, but it’s not what Microsoft has been accused of.
So to summarize, I think Bill Gates is smart and well-intentioned. It’s OK and healthy to dislike Microsoft because it wields too much influence, but that doesn’t mean that the people who have been leading Microsoft have been doing so with evil intentions.
If you work in IT, then BG is the last person you want to see president. Quite simply, if he were president, you’d never get a raise. In fact, the chances of you losing your job would increase quite a bit. Already, the software industry is pushing to increase the number of H1B visa issued each year - he’s publicly stated that if he could change laws he’d get rid of the H1b cap (google for “bill gates” and H1b, since this lame excuse for a comment editor doesn’t allow for HTML or previews). That would mean the country would be flooded with really cheap IT labor. And you’d be out of a job or working at significantly reduces wages.
Besides, he’d never get the bible vote, with his support (both real and perceived) of what science.
Look folks, my main problem with any business person being president is that in business they were the BOSS. Government doesn’t work that way. Could he being people together and get them to move in the direction he supports? That’s the question.
I would trust BG much more than any of today’s politicians who are playing the “hereditary democracy” farce. BG succeeded in a very difficult, competitive and continuously evolving industry that runs the world’s economy. I think he’s beyond his “personal quest for power and money”, so I can trust him to make decisions that affect all aspects of people’s lives.
I would vote him for President of The World, if there was such a thing. But I guess I’ll have to settle for President of the USA, which is the next closest match.
Beware adopting the “Why Not” campaign catchphrase. It was the tagline of the less-than-successful Kinky Friedman gubernatorial campaign in Texas this past election. Other than being an inspiration for potential voters to conjure answers to the question, the phrase has an inherent under-dog ambiance. Instead, consider taglines that reflect Bill’s strengths over other candidates. And remember, if you ask the people “why not,” they will tell you.
Why not?
At least he wouldn’t be there for the money… that by itself would make 99% of the Washington lobbyists impotent, since approximately 100% of our elected officials are in it for the money.
About the charities dig… you either give it to charity or to the IRS. Take your pick.
Well sure, let’s give it a run down:
Pro: He is clearly a shrewd and intelligent leader. It seems likely that the same traits that led MS to the top would benefit our country.
Con: Those traits included a willingness to betray allies and destroy competitors that wouldn’t go over so well in international politics.
But: The social responsibility he seems to be expressing through the Gates Foundation may balance this out?
Pro: He is wealthy, so presumably less prone to bribery.
Con: He doesn’t need to be swayed by big business representatives; he IS a big business representative. His beliefs on issues like DRM and IP are clear, and run directly counter to those of many others in the various technology industries.
But: He knows money inside and out. He is just the sort of man I’d like to be in charge of our economy… ~if~ I could be convinced that the obvious conflicts of interest were resolved.
Pro (to me): He seems to be driven primarily by reason, rather than subjective things such as religion.
Con (to certain others): He seems to be driven primarily by reason, rather than concrete things such as religion.
Pro (to me): He has no military background, and will presumably be very unlikely to treat military action as the obvious solution to complex international problems.
Con (to certain others): He has no military background, and thus is not suited to the role of Commander in Chief.
But: How many of our presidents ~really~ had sufficient background to fill that role well? Does a stint as a grunt in Vietnam, or even exceptional service that only gets you half way up the ranks, really qualify you for the biggest chair in the Pentagon? It seems to me that CinC is one of many roles that each president needs to grow in to in a hurry, once he is sworn in.
Would I vote for him? Almost certainly not, because of the first two cons. It would take an opponent as distasteful as Bush for me to consider it.
I seriously feel some of the people commenting don’t get the point of this website. I THINK I do and I even think they make it pretty obvious.
This isn’t about Microsoft and their products.
This isn’t about George W Bush.
This is about giving the idea some thought and getting people to consider a highly successful business man as president.
I say you guys provide us with some bumper-stickers or t-shirts: I’d surely put one on the back of my gasoline-slurping SUV.
that’s what you get for using Linux. And if so, you are no longer a serious site for recuiting BG.
“that’s what you get for using Linux. And if so, you are no longer a serious site for recuiting BG.”
I don’t get it Bill. What are you saying?
Good job on supporting the World Aids Day!
I like the idea of having Bill Gates as the US President, eventhough I’m Belgian (European).
The only bad thing about him is indeed the fact that he is a big businessman, but as has been said, he is mainly driven by reason and most other presidents are influenced by big companies, so that shouldn’t be too much of an issue.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m a linux guy too. I don’t use windows anymore because of its inflexibility, but I’m not against the way Microsoft spreads it. It might not be that free software friendly, but after all, we’re concurrents.
If I were American I would certainly vote for Bill.
I’m still undecided, but after viewing the “why bill?” page I’ve realized that it might actually be a pretty good idea.
What concerns me is that he is a businessman and not a politician. Although not all of our successful presidents have had an expansive political background, I beleive that not having one may weaken him as a candidate.
Either way, I’ll be sure to link my website here since it is a very interesting idea. I highly recommend creating a forum for this site because such a site is bound to stirr up some debate, but currently there isn’t any place to put it. If you need any help regarding forums, you can contact me at hotshot[at]clangis[dot]com (or webmaster[at]clangis[dot]com). I would recomend invisionpower, vbulletin, or phpBB if you don’t want to spend any money on them.
Microsoft is very much like a government. In fact, it suffers from similar ills that plague the US Government.
With the kind of resources and market control that Microsoft has, the company, led by Bill, should be able to create products that are 99% error free on 99% of the systems. But from my experiences 99% of the systems will experience errors.
To expect and accept anything less is shameful, especially since simple engineering practices (which I call common sense) can correct the problem.
How about let Bill go to the White House, and let me lead Microsoft over the next four years.
- Jerry Richards for President of Microsoft
Since we are thinking outside the political box, let’s go a step further. Let’s elect Bill’s wife Melinda as President. After all, she has done a masterful job of steering Bill from being a ruthless automaton to someone who now appears to have an actual human conscience. If she can do that, maybe she can do the same for America.
…I prefer Chuck Norris
Can you say:
CONGRESS.SYS Corrupted: Re-boot Washington D.C (Y/N)?
(I asked that on a diffrent website and got 104 Ys (34 were repeats) and 208 Ns (all were repeats…
-from the same person!)