News Bill Gates for President?

Bush made some bad decisions, so did Blair. Difference is that Bush made himself look like an idiot while doing it. He has made so many blunders with regard to the way he presents himself that ridicule is now as much about the person as the policies. Blair on the other hand retained his integrity, looking like someone who had made a genuine mistake more than completely misjudging the situation.

Personally I would vote for Blair again but if I were American, I wouldn't have voted for Bush. Then again, I don't think I would have voted for any of the candidates. Next election in the UK is going to be a tough one for me as I'm sure as hell not voting for Cameron but none of the likely candidates from the Labour party interest me either. Lib Dems lack direction at the moment and with those three out the way who is left? The minority parties either have flawed policies or a lack of organisation.

If Gates (or Branson as his UK equivalent) were running then he'd get my vote for sure. At this point in time both the US and the UK need someone with a head for business to sort out the mess; at the moment there are too many lawyers around who try to solve our problems through new laws rather than actually addressing the issue.

A good example would be knee-jerk policies like the VCRB: for those that don't know it bans the sale of replica firearms in order to prevent crime, but all it really did was hurt groups such as re-enactors, independent film groups and combat gamers. The government solved that by handing out exemptions but now there are so many holes in the bill that anyone who wanted a replica can still get one while making a lot of hassle for those with legitimate uses.

 

Good post!
I'd have to agree to an extent- Blair has certainly presented himself the best, and I'd definately vote for him if there were an election tomorrow. Having said that, we all know he's leaving and the only Labour member I can really say I'd fully support as PM is Miliband, but he's not standing for the job. Branson would be a good choice if it weren't for his controversial ventures- starting a business called Virgin and having bought the UK's first gay bar won't relate to everyone really.
In terms of Gates though...why not?! He'd do America a lot of good and would give them the kick in the right direction in terms of humanitarian issues, as well as having the business expertise that you need to handle the world's biggest economy. Sure, there might be better candidates out there, but we know it's not the average Joe Public who suddenly finds themself in Presidential elections in America- you need power to get power, so Gates is already in a better position than most.

<A88>

 

Serving in the military helps high profile (hero in time of war) high ranking officers transfer to politics. Not serving in the military allows political opponents to throw mud.

The thing about Bush is that he was supposedly in a cushy position and received special treatment to be excused from the duty everyone else in his position was expected to complete. It was all just a huge mudslinging campaign.

Back to topic - if Gates were president, maybe our deficit/debt would finally stop increasing. There used to be a sign in lower manhatten showing our debt numbers and it was skyrocketing each second.

 

Is that the one that stopped because they round out of digits on the clock?

<A88>

 

That's the one. THey had to reprogram it not to show cents because they needed two more digits on the dollars

Just remember, The last president ran a surplus.

 

don't call me hypocrite....... Every American i know in person complains about everything, even if things are perfect.
and i asked what was the difference so i could understand what the hell is going on there.

here the political system varies with each country..... we in Portugal have a very stupid and complex and ineffective system that is dragging us to our doom, the president of the republic has only 2 powers, he is the military supreme leader and he can demand a dissolution of the parliament..... IIRC he is powerless in everything else, we have a prime minister, that is.... more powerful but still useless, the main power is in our parliament and it is dominated by one single party that uses its powers to their own advantage and business plans.

 

American's like our complaining! Its the only way we feel any power, since its not like our government represents us at all. We live in a political system where you can get %51 of the nations votes and still lose an election. The Senators who "represent us" take bribes and let lobbyists write the legislation. Some great "democracy" we have here. And technically the US is not a democracy anyway, its a republic, so I don't see why Bush says we are spreading democracy. We don't have much of a republic either...oh well...what can you do? Elect Bill Gates obviously, he has so much money he won't need to take bribes!

 

He has enough money not to be influenced by it but he may be just as bad as bush when it comes to helping out his buddies at the expense of everyone else. I think that gates gave money to bush in 04 so he may not be the best canidate anyway.

 

"Anyone but Bush"

Let there NEVER EVER be a Bush as a president of USA after the current one finally gets the F out of the white house...

 

You make it sound better than it was... that translated to the debt clock going the other direction, not being "in the black". Still, a great point. According to the Google IFL result for "national debt clock", we're in over $8T and increasing by over $2B a day. Holy crap. I don't know how we still have an economy with numbers like that...

 

I don't know if there will be or not, As the current president has no sons, His brother isn't interested in the office as He like Florida too much and I don't know If the Governor has any sons.

I doubt anyone could get Bill Gates to run, He likes PCs too much.

Me I like John McCain US Senator of Arizona for President.

 

If only the american policy on presidents allowed foreigners to campaign for president.

Arnold For president

(no i am not being serious)

 

According to most politicians (here anyway) when your budget says you need to borrow $43,000,000 but only spend $41,000,000 you have a "surplus" (wink, wink, nudge, nudge) of $2,000,000.

 

No, he did not give to any political party. But he has gone on the record as an democrat, so... if anything wrong party.

Haha, you joke but many Americans think he would make a decent president. I agree with his social issues, but as far as his financial policy, we need someone who will cut spending while not raising axes. IE: a republican. Want to fix the budget? stop spending trillions of dollars a year on OTHER countries, and get rid of (for the most part) social security, Medicare, ect... Problem solved.

 

That's true, however, keep in mind that if the US ever truly "paid off" the national debt it would screw up most of the financial sector. Most of the national debt is in the form of long term treasury bills and is seen as a very safe investment. If the government were to suddenly stop issuing T-bills it would cause a serious dislocation in the market.

What Bill Clinton did was to balance the budget and pay down the debt to a amount that was lower than when he took office and created a situation where the government was taking in money faster thant it was spending it, allowing continued debt reduction. It appears, from what I've read (Admittedly, I am just thinking about this for the first time), that this irritated the financial conservative in Bush who felt that instead of collecting more in taxes than you need to run the government, we should cut taxes and leave the debt alone in the theory that people, especially business, would spend the extra money to grow the economy. That was all well and good pre-9/11 but then suddenly he wanted to spend lots and lots of money on government and security and the military and thought he could do it without raising taxes. Unfortunatly, it didn't quite work.

As for how we still have an economy, enjoy it while you can. The dollar has dramatically lost strenth against other currencies recently and most of the economic indicators are tepid to poor. This in an economy which is hugely in debt, dependent on foriegn investors to buy that debt, and has a mahoosive liability coming up in the retirement of the baby boomer generation.

Anyone care for some Soylent Green?

No arguement there, except that if you guy the entitlements (Social security, medicare, medicade, etc) you're going to have a civil war on your hands. You have a very large, politically powerful generation which has been promised these golden years all their lives, who have paid into these programs all their working lives, and if you tell them "oops, never mind, you're on your own", well, it wouldn't be pretty. Politically, it's a non-starter.

As for a republican being needed to lower the deficit, let me just say look at the current and last president and their effects on the national debt. That and the fact that only people in Washington DC currently talking about reducing the debt are democrats. The national debt is an issue that either party can appropriate to their ends. The traditional roles of the parties as far as fiscal policy go seem to have been reversed.

 

Sorry I have just have to ask: When things have ever been "perfect"? Americans complain (and quite loudly) because it is a freedom.... And a rare one.


I pose the question if he would be a donkey or elephant. He could destroy the democrats run for 08' by running as a democrat.... Don't you think? Split the vote up between which ever will be the Demo's main canndidate, Hilary/Gore/Obamma by running as an independent as the that other filthy billionaire did in the 90's. McCain would take flight to office.

Gates is the only man with enough popularity and wealth to accumulate votes in the states right now.... Except the Govener of California of course

 

Talking off Gates and politics, I wonder what he would say about this . British MP s looking for 66 percent pay rise !