
Potential Presidency for Zuckerberg? - BrahamMehta
https://www.wsj.com/articles/mark-zuckerberg-hits-the-road-to-meet-regular-folkswith-a-few-conditions-1499873098
======
creaghpatr
Last sentence of the article, which is improperly titled for some reason:

>As Mr. Zuckerberg was leaving, he made one request, Mr. Moore said.

>“He said, ‘If there are any news reporters that call you, just make sure you
tell them I’m not running for president.’”

The majority of the article is just about how Zuck's entourage worked to try
and make his encounters feel more spontaneous. I felt bad for both the
tokenized middle Americans and for Zuck, for whom the construction of his
social encounters was necessary for security (and lets not kid ourselves,
probably PR) reasons. I don't know if he'll run for President but I think for
as tacky and PR-related as the trip is, I think he does genuinely want to
learn more about the rest of the country, if only to improve Facebook's UX.

That's not an endorsement though. I think he would get crushed in a
Presidential campaign.

------
Simulacra
I will spend every time I have against Zuckerberg becoming President. I do not
trust him, and I do not want Facebook or him running this country; Sadly, in
many ways, they already do.

------
mdevere
He is Hillary 2.0 and would be a disaster for Democrats.

~~~
gremlinsinc
I wouldn't say Hillary 2.0 ... I like Mark, I hate Hillary... I don't think
Hillary would be quick to jump on single-payer healthcare and guaranteed basic
income trains... but I'm not really sure he's cut out to be a politician,
personally I'd much rather it be Bernie Sanders, he was born for the job.

------
wavefunction
I hope he sticks to running facebook and his... charitable endeavors.

From my perspective the current inhabitant of the White House provides a fine
illustration that "success" in the world of business does not necessarily
translate into success or effectiveness in the world of public service and
politics. This feeling has only been compounded by the likes and conduct of
members of the current administration like Tillerson and Mnuchin.

Zuckerberg's demand not to be quoted after meeting and talking with people is
a huge red flag to me, for example.

~~~
wfunction
To be honest, I'm no fan of oil company CEOs, but I have yet to see anything
bad from Tillerson as secretary of state. He seems like a pretty normal
secretary of state, and almost like the only sane guy in the administration.

~~~
komaromy
His treatment of the press corps has been more or less abysmal, but he does
seem to be one of the less destructive cabinet members.

~~~
wfunction
Could you link to something? Would be interested in reading more, since I
haven't seen this in the news.

~~~
komaromy
[http://thehill.com/policy/international/asia-
pacific/323205-...](http://thehill.com/policy/international/asia-
pacific/323205-tapper-tillerson-traveling-without-press-insulting)

First link I found.

~~~
wfunction
Oh geez, thanks for the link. I'd cut him some slack. I feel like if I was
working under Trump I wouldn't be eagerly jumping in the middle of a crowd of
reporters and telling them to throw questions at me in my first 2 months
either. "One of the less destructive cabinet members" is quite an exaggeration
for someone who's literally only had 2 months and the only bad thing you can
think of is that he's run away from a few reporters. I'd be scrambling to get
my crap together and figuring out what I'm supposed to do before worrying
about answering to reporters about a job I just started. If there's any actual
destructiveness on his part that he's refusing to talk about with reporters,
that'd be much fairer of an assessment...

------
zitterbewegung
I would see Zuckerberg rise to power by first becoming a California Governor.
Maybe he could swing by getting the Republican Nomination without experience .

------
wfunction
He's doing this because he thinks he's a competent politician who could make
the world better? Or because he's looking at Trump and eyeing the throne,
realizing everything a billionaire president could get away with?

~~~
4y5yswghe
Trump seems to have proven that wealth is now considered enough of a virtue in
its own right to qualify you for the highest office in the country, regardless
of lack of political (or any elected) experience, policy ideas, general
principles, or character.

~~~
newtem0
Its people like you who are the problem. What an idiotic statement. Youve
clearly never watched a single campaign speech from trump. Youve never
investigated or even contemplated how his campaign really worked or the issues
of his voter base. You dont understand anything because youve never attempted
to view the whole thing objectively. Please just shut up.

~~~
dang
We've banned this account for violating the HN guidelines. Would you please
not create accounts to do that with?

------
scj
The core question I have is... How much advantage is there skewing Facebook in
favour of a candidate? Could it translate to a 3% improvement in the polls?

Even if it could help, it'd probably be wiser for him to back a candidate that
shares his vision than run himself. It only makes sense if he can't find
someone he would endorse (publicly or otherwise), or if he just wants the job
for himself.

------
gurkendoktor
Can't read the article thanks to the paywall, but I'm not a fan of the
underlying idea. If you think Trump's words of admiration for Putin are scary,
then what is Zuckerberg's blatant fanboyism for Xi Jinping?

[http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/china-s-
president-x...](http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/china-s-president-xi-
jinping-turns-down-mark-zuckerberg-s-request-to-name-his-unborn-child-at-
white-a6679156.html)

[https://www.forbes.com/sites/elizabetheconomy/2014/12/09/zuc...](https://www.forbes.com/sites/elizabetheconomy/2014/12/09/zuckerbergs-
love-affair-with-xi-jinping/)

------
Finnucane
I have a hard time imagining Zuckerberg going along with letting someone else
run Facebook for four years while he was doing something else.

~~~
e15ctr0n
He's already doing it with Sheryl Sandberg.

------
e40
Paywall, so I can't read before commenting, but the main question: would he
need to divest himself of FB shares before running and/or if he wins?

~~~
Finnucane
Not necessarily. Past presidents used blind trusts to put their assets and
investments aside so that in theory they wouldn't be motivated by personal
profit while president. It's not illegal for a president to conduct personal
business while being president. It's unethical for the president to use his
office for personal gain. And it is unconstitutional for the president to take
money from representatives of foreign governments.

~~~
e40
That wouldn't work here, though. Whether he holds them directly or through a
blind trust, he'll know he has FB. Just because he can't sell doesn't matter,
he could make decisions as POTUS that would greatly benefit FB.

