Zuckerberg for POTUS? Don't laugh.

[Saz]

[Saz]

holy shit, comparing Brownback to zuckerburg. lmao you can't make this shit up, no wonder you liked hillary.

Stick to the public sector bro, you wouldn't survive anywhere else.

[exploited]

I think in terms of management and delegation, running a public company the size of Facebook is more than enough experience to understand the nature of bureaucracy, how to deal with public officials, how to appeal to the public, how to do damage control, how to get people under you motivated, etc. At that level of work you are basically a politician already, just for your shareholders and your consumers.

Beyond that, "experience" is vastly overrated, especially during a time when the US needs drastic changes on a national level. What you want is experienced expert advisors, and a President who knows how to deal with difficult, opinionated experts. He needs to be able to manage talent and get things done while working through all the roadblocks and networking - the actual operational details are almost always left up to the advisors, and are only presented to the President when that particular action has ramifications on his level.

The best CEOs in the world are 40-60. If peoples bodies didn't degrade until then, the best athletes and warriors would be too. The best scientists and academics reach their peak during this time. It is universal for a reason. You need youth to be in charge and experience to temper them, not the other way around.

[NAB]

Can you imagine the NSA's intrusion into our personal lives if Zuckerberg is at the helm?

[exploited]

[NAB]

[exploited]

To be fair, a guy like Zuckerberg faces a considerable number more threats than you or I. First there are the crazies, and then there are the people who would love to rob you or otherwise steal from you, and then there is the press. I think to have any kind of semblance of "normal life" or the privacy that means, in his position, you would require quite a bit of land to make that happen. It's why all these dudes have serious bodyguards too.

Also to be fair, the existence of a billionaire is an affront to human dignity.

[exploited]

Zuckerberg for President wouldn't be as appealing to youth as you think. For one, he is a billionaire, and has shown quite a bit of ruthlessness in his career and his personal acquisitions. For two, Facebook isn't particularly "cool" for kids anymore - it is a well-used product, to be sure, but it is about as cool as Ford or Chevrolet. Lastly, we don't know anything about Mark Zuckerberg's political beliefs. I have no idea what he stands for, and unless he has spoken at length about his politics elsewhere and I missed it, neither do you.

Saying you would commit to a candidate before actually having a candidate whose views you can ponder would be irresponsible.

Would I take him over Trump? Yes, I would, but that means almost nothing.

[ToddStarnes]

He's apparently been methodical and rigorous in ensuring that there is little to no hint of his political stances. This suggests he's apolitical or preparing for a campaign. The latter seems more likely.

A political neophyte with proven machiavellian chops, no apparent ideology, and unparalleled access to data isn't a man I want anywhere near the WH. Give me Donald's buffoonery over an extraordinarily gifted, intelligent and competent unknown quantity with that sort of power.

[John Galt]

yup.

social media was already highly effective at distorting the election; the same amount of people said they got their "news" from facebook as they did from broadcast television. with the man behind that scourge running things? i'd recommend having a bugout bag ready