Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
United States Politics

John McAfee Pondering Presidential Bid 184

Posted by Soulskill from the couldn't-hurt dept.
An anonymous reader writes: Since this U.S. presidential election cycle clearly isn't chaotic enough already, it seems John McAfee is now considering a campaign as well. Wired reports that McAfee hasn't decided for sure yet, and he's hoping to persuade somebody more charismatic to run with his backing. He said his advisors are pressing him to run, adding, "I have many thousands of emails saying please run for President. It's not something I would just choose to do on my own." What would his platform be? It actually sounds pretty simple: "It's clear that the leadership of our country is illiterate on the fundamental technology that supports everything in life for us now, that is cyber science, our smartphones, our military hardware, our communications." He'd be a strong proponent for privacy and autonomy. We should know in a few days whether McAfee is in or out — Wired says he "seems far more concerned with having his voice heard on one particular issue than with taking a seat in the Oval Office." Something seems to have changed his mind about politics: in a 2014 interview here, McAfee said. "I would never run for office, neither would I want to be in office, of any kind. I would rather drive a nail through my foot." According to the paperwork McAfee has filed, he is founding a new party (PDF).
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

John McAfee Pondering Presidential Bid More

John McAfee Pondering Presidential Bid

Comments Filter:

  • Libertarian? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Archangel Michael ( 180766 ) on Tuesday September 08, 2015 @04:32PM (#50482375) Journal

    I want to know which party he'd run under. Or if he would be independent.

    • I want to know which party he'd run under.

      That would be the "Pants on Head" party. Not much different than the usual suspects, but with a little added bit of crazy.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by stooo ( 2202012 )

      Antivirus for all !!! Yay...

    • I want to know which party he'd run under. Or if he would be independent.

      The GOP field is too crowded. Run as a Libertarian or as a Democrat. Since Biden may not run, and Hilary is imploding, that's the best opportunity

      • Run as a Libertarian or as a Democrat. Since Biden may not run, and Hilary is imploding, that's the best opportunity

        Among people who understand what McAfee software was intended to do, the Lessig/Sanders ticket probably has that demographic tied up.

        • Among people who understand what McAfee software was intended to do, the Lessig/Sanders ticket probably has that demographic tied up.

          Did you mean Lessig/Sanders as an either-or, or do you think there's a possibility of a Lessig for president and Sanders as his VP? Don't think that would ever be a possibility. If McAfee decides to run, his new party can be called the Vanity party, and Lessig can join him.

  • Security Clearance (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Doesn't the President need a security clearance?

    Can someone who ran a drug lab get a security clearance? I think they ask specifically about drug use if you apply for a security clearance.

    • No, the President does not require a security clearance.
      He has access to virtually all information by virtue of his Constitutional office.

      • Re:Security Clearance (Score:5, Insightful)

        by FlyHelicopters ( 1540845 ) on Tuesday September 08, 2015 @04:45PM (#50482477)

        He has access to virtually all information by virtue of his Constitutional office.

        You'd think so, but there have been times when the President was removed from "need to know" on various bits of information.

        The cracking of the Japanese code in WWII was withheld from FDR for a time, and other information has been withheld from time to time.

        That being said, your statement is generally true.

      • Re:Security Clearance (Score:5, Insightful)

        by geekmux ( 1040042 ) on Tuesday September 08, 2015 @04:51PM (#50482517)

        No, the President does not require a security clearance. He has access to virtually all information by virtue of his Constitutional office.

        Yeah, something tells me the POTUS position kinda gets a pass on the whole background investigation thing.

        It certainly will have to if Hillary is somehow elected.

        • The background check is accomplished during the election campaign. People who oppose a candidate will delve into that persons background in depth looking for the slightest abnormality or perceived wrongdoing to gain electoral advantage. There is nothing the FBI, NSA, CIA, DIA, or any of the other state security services can discover that cannot be discovered by the general public. The closer a person gets to being elected the harder his opponents will look for any thing to derail that persons chances of bei

    • They ask about your drug usage over the past 7 years. I just went through the process. As long as you aren't currently doing them nor have done them recently, its usually a pass.

    • In principle anyone can get a clearance. Yes, drug questions are involved. But it is a discovery, not an inquisition. Saying you did drugs does not preclude obtaining a clearance. Omitting drug use from the PSQ will almost certainly result in denial.

  • Peak Slashdot (Score:3)

    by American AC in Paris ( 230456 ) on Tuesday September 08, 2015 @04:37PM (#50482419) Homepage

    This is a front page story.

  • I guess it makes sense.... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Doug Otto ( 2821601 ) on Tuesday September 08, 2015 @04:43PM (#50482459)
    Most of the other candidates are batshiat crazy, why not throw John into that mix?

    • Re:I guess it makes sense.... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Fire_Wraith ( 1460385 ) on Tuesday September 08, 2015 @04:53PM (#50482541)
      Yeah, like we can do any worse than a former Tech CEO whose product is mostly known for slowing systems that use it to a crawl. I mean, I guess it could be worse - you could have someone who ruined one of the iconic tech companies of Silicon Valley by pushing a buyout of an increasingly unprofitable hardware company against the advice of pretty much everyone and their dog, nevermind laying off tens of thousands of workers, who's now running for president claiming that as part of their qualifying experience.

      Oh, wait...
      http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08... [nytimes.com]

      • Re:I guess it makes sense.... (Score:5, Informative)

        by dpidcoe ( 2606549 ) on Tuesday September 08, 2015 @04:58PM (#50482589)
        To be fair, he's completely disowned the product that has his name on it and has made slashdot news a few times when he's gone on rants about how terrible of an antivirus it's become.
        • become??? I dont ever recall a time when it was good

          • There may have been an instant of time, long ago in the legends, when it was an excellent anti-virus. But as they say, the moment was fleeting.

            • He stopped having anything to do with antivirus since the early Windows 98 days. That is, Windows ME wasn't a thing, and neither was Windows XP for that matter.

              During those days it wasn't any slower than any other antivirus software that I recall, and it was actually easy to remove if you wanted to do so. It wasn't until about 2004 that both McAfee and Norton became the dread of many a computer user.

            • There may have been an instant of time, long ago in the legends, when it was an excellent anti-virus. But as they say, the moment was fleeting.

              That time was in the DOS era, when every minute felt like hours, so the moment was less fleeting than you might imagine. Mcafee was the antivirus for DOS. And ISTR it was still relevant into the Win3.1 era, but I repeat myself.

          • become??? I dont ever recall a time when it was good

            Then you have a poor memory. There was a time when MBR and TSR viruses for MS-DOS could be removed either by a format or by using McAfee. Norton came soon after, IIRC. But for a while McAfee reigned king in the AV space.

        • In 2012, when asked if he personally uses McAfee anti-virus he replied by saying "I take it off," and that "It's too annoying." - Wikipedia

          "Hackers see hacking me as a badge of honor". He added that for his own security he has other people buy his computer equipment for him, uses pseudonyms for setting up computers and logging in, and changes his IP address several times a day. - Wikipedia

          So he goes through extraordinary efforts to keep using Windows for no proffitable reason. Seems presidential to me.

    • Re:I guess it makes sense.... (Score:5, Funny)

      by TheGratefulNet ( 143330 ) on Tuesday September 08, 2015 @05:00PM (#50482619)

      do I really have to go for the obvious joke?

      ok. you forced me.

      the reason we do not want him to be president is: once he's installed, he'll be impossible to be removed!

    • Camacho 2016! [redbubble.net]

    • The entertainment factor will double. If this keeps going on, the US presidential coverage will get the highest ratings of any show in the last decade.

    • I think the more batshit crazy candidates in the election, the better. And it leads to some interesting revelations.

      It's quite frightening, when you can't tell if an election soundbite came from Donald Trump, Hilary Clinton or John McAfee. They all, in fact do, start to sound like they are all batshit crazy.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by jrumney ( 197329 )
      He's already proved himself to be an inconsistent hypocrite, so he is probably well qualified for politics.
  • Yep, I know I'd want a guy who's voluntarily played Russian Roulette to occupy the presidency. No wonder he wants to emphasize who he'd run with, or who'd run in his place.

    • Re:Stability (Score:5, Funny)

      by Fire_Wraith ( 1460385 ) on Tuesday September 08, 2015 @04:47PM (#50482489)
      I'm thinking Charlie Sheen. Together, they've probably done more drugs than half the country combined. It'd certainly be entertaining!

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by rwyoder ( 759998 )

        I'm thinking Charlie Sheen. Together, they've probably done more drugs than half the country combined. It'd certainly be entertaining!

        I also immediately thought of Charlie Sheen...and Ted Nugent. ;-)

    • Re:Stability (Score:5, Funny)

      by Applehu Akbar ( 2968043 ) on Tuesday September 08, 2015 @04:54PM (#50482549)

      "Most of the other candidates are batshiat crazy, why not throw John into that mix?"

      Here's how I would do it: In every election, place McAfee by default onto both the Republican and Democratic candidate list. The parties would have to go to special trouble to delete him from the list each time before someone better could be run. Deleting him would not be tat easy, either; it would take a special "removal tool."

    • Yep, I know I'd want a guy who's voluntarily played Russian Roulette to occupy the presidency.

      two reasons:

      1) he's not a pansy

      2) he does not scare easily

      being somewhat serious, for a moment, we have 'leaders' who continue to play the "be afraid! all the fucking time!" card. they now govern by fear and we lose rights more and more as those jerks continue to screw us over for their own good.

      I'd like to have someone in office say 'life is hard, its unsafe by definition and by nature and we are not going to le

    • I know I'd want a guy who's voluntarily played Russian Roulette to occupy the presidency.

      What's wrong with a little bit of gambling with a toy gun [pineight.com]?

  • Public Service Experience (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Tablizer ( 95088 ) on Tuesday September 08, 2015 @04:53PM (#50482535) Journal

    Business leaders should spend at least 4 years as a representative in Congress or a state governor in my opinion, and show aptitude there. Running government and dealing with politics is too different from the private sector. You have to learn how to compromise and persuade, not just order around underlings to carry out your vision your way.

    This also applies to Trump, Carly, and Carson.

    • Not true. Those politicians owe a lot of favors. They take their orders from the private sector.

    • You have to learn how to compromise and persuade, not just order around underlings to carry out your vision your way.

      You have a very skewed vision of how business leadership works. It's definitely different from politics, but it's impossible to be a successful executive without being good at compromise and persuasion. At the CEO level this is perhaps a little less important with respect to your own company, but it's still relevant to relationships with shareholders, partners, suppliers, and even large customers. And as executives rise through the ranks, or start companies, those skills are essential as well.

    • Re:Public Service Experience (Score:5, Interesting)

      by ganjadude ( 952775 ) on Tuesday September 08, 2015 @05:31PM (#50482785) Homepage
      I disagree. I want someone in government who isnt in government for the single reason that they are not in government.

      we have gone how long electing governors and senators and we end up with bush and obama??? yeah we can do much much better if we open the pool to those not beholden to the whims of government
      • I want someone in government who was dragged kicking and screaming into the position. If you really want the position, I don't trust you.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by T.E.D. ( 34228 )

        I disagree. I want someone in government who isnt in government for the single reason that they are not in government.

        But then they'd be in government, and you'd have to impeach them to replace them with someone who isn't in government.

    • It really depends on if you want the leader to merely administrate things competently, or if you want her to pass 'great laws and make great changes.'
      At this point, I mainly think, "Please don't mess things up too badly."

    • Business leaders should spend at least 4 years as a representative in Congress or a state governor in my opinion, and show aptitude there. Running government and dealing with politics is too different from the private sector. You have to learn how to compromise and persuade, not just order around underlings to carry out your vision your way.

      That's a bunch of "nice to have"s. But making it a requirement would be an arbitrary limit on the citizens' ability to elect a candidate of their choice. Sorry, I can'

  • Evolving positions over time (Score:5, Funny)

    by steveha ( 103154 ) on Tuesday September 08, 2015 @04:54PM (#50482543) Homepage

    I wonder if he has also reconsidered his position on driving a nail through his foot?

  • What the hell. I'd vote for McAfee before I vote for Trump. If Trump can run, why not McAfee?

    • What the hell. I'd vote for McAfee before I vote for Trump. If Trump can run, why not McAfee?

      McAfee has experience with the "running" part. How long did he avoid extradition?

  • Must be a joke? (Score:4, Informative)

    by Timmy D Programmer ( 704067 ) on Tuesday September 08, 2015 @04:56PM (#50482569) Journal
    Wasn't he a fugitive from murder charges, and also not born in the US. Only slightly better presidential option than Trump.

  • Who cares if anyone runs without backing from either side of The Party? It's not like anyone who wasn't part of the DemReps was elected president in the past century and a half.

  • I thought that felons were ineligible to run for the US Presidency.

    ?

    • 1. No, they're not ineligible.
      2. John McAfee isn't a felon.

      No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

  • At this rate (Score:5, Insightful)

    by CanadianMacFan ( 1900244 ) on Tuesday September 08, 2015 @05:36PM (#50482807)

    Maybe the US should just consider picking someone at random. Just write a program that takes all adults that meet the criteria for president (age, born in the US, etc) and select one. Can't be worse than what's going on now. And as a added bonus US carbon emissions will plummet since there won't be all of the campaigning.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by godrik ( 1287354 )

      I always thought that picking congress for a year out of the citizen on the jury duty list would be better than whatever we have right now.

    • Re:At this rate (Score:4, Informative)

      by Michael Woodhams ( 112247 ) on Tuesday September 08, 2015 @11:53PM (#50484535) Journal

      Arthur C Clarke's novel "Imperial Earth" does this: The future USA have decided that anyone who wants to be in the Whitehouse should never be allowed to be there. They make a list of people who are competent and would need to be dragged kicking and screaming into the Whitehouse, but once there will do their best. Then they just choose their president by lottery from that list.

  • He should join Lessig (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Bob Gelumph ( 715872 ) on Tuesday September 08, 2015 @05:39PM (#50482819)
    Larry Lessig is looking for a running mate, so that he can resign in favor of the VP after reforming the electoral system.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by DrXym ( 126579 )
      Even if Larry Lessig didn't stipulate it, I'm sure he'd prefer if his running mate was sane.

  • He meets all of the qualifications to run.... ...and he could even pardon himself for that murder in Belize... ...but lacks all the skills necessary to represent 319 million US Citizens.

    Still... it would be the quickest way to get the Executive (including the DoJ)
    to lay off pot... and he's not as loony as Donald Trump.

    E

  • As insane as this sounds, I would love to watch a debate between McAfee and Trump. I think it would be some form of epic.

  • I like John... but my vote would hinge on his selection of a VP.

    Sadly the VP selection is so late in the game that I cannot convince myself
    that knowing what I need to know when I need to know it is very much
    in doubt.

    I would like to keep the Electoral College and change primary laws to
    address a team from the get go.

    The EC may prove to to be out best check and balance in this upcoming popularity poll.

  • And a gram up every backside!

  • It's clear that the leadership of our country is illiterate on the fundamental technology ...

    Yes, there is no doubt that most politicians in most countries know pretty little about technology, science, maths, medicine etc. Being a successful politician - and even more, being a successful president - requires skills that are very far removed from what it takes to be a good engineer. They may not be skills that we as engineers appreciate or admire, but that is to some degree because we simply don't have those skills. And of course, in recognition of that, they have advisors to help them make decision

  • Would be WIIIIIDE OPEN! Free pot to the disadvantaged, so he'd have the poor vote and the tech vote.
    Free birth control of all kinds, so he'd have the women's vote.
    Sounds like he could win!

  • McAfee said. "I would never run for office, neither would I want to be in office, of any kind. I would rather drive a nail through my foot."

    But... I could actaully see him doing that. Just once to experience the sensation of it.

Slashdot Top Deals

Real programmers don't comment their code. It was hard to write, it should be hard to understand.

Close