We have decided to resurrect this website in 2020, not because we still think Bill Gates is a viable presidential candidate, but because we feel like this website and the idea behind it is more valuable now than it ever was before.

American politics have deteriorated to a kindergarten level ever since Donald Trump started his 2016 presidential campaign. We’ve seen everything slip away even further in the last years, and with just a month before the 2020 election, we are extremely worried with the political discourse in this country.

Do you remember 2008? Obama vs McCain? A tough campaign, but without the swearing, the lies, the bipartisan media and the lingering feeling of a contested election.

Let’s hope Joe Biden gets elected, and we can have a somewhat normal campaign in ’24.

We’ve tried… We really have! We wanted to evoke political debate and to a certain extend we succeeded to do just that. On the other hand, we failed miserably to draw enough attention our way. Bill Gates probably noticed and read the website and our arguments, but he probably didn’t feel the drive needed to go for that presidential candidacy…We would like to thank all of you who tried to get this thing to work, and we hope we’ve inspired some people to think about the US Presidency in a way they never did before.

I’ll leave the website in it’s bare form online as a reminder of better times. This, however, will be our final update.

Peace!

As we posted yesterday we decided to launch a petition. We know doing this petition means taking a risk. We know this petition means opening our website for people spamming and abusing the little input fields we give them. Yes, we know people will sign this petition with bogus names and bogus e-mail addresses. The thing is: we decided to go for it anyway – armed with enthusiasm and motivation!

We’re hoping thousands of people will sign the petition, and even though we know there are thousands of people supporting our ideas, it’s not going to be easy to actually get them to add their signature too… We’re counting on all our supporters to help us get the word out, and appreciate all the exposure we get!

We tested the petition during the last few days and haven’t had any serious problems. But, should you encounter any problem what so ever please let us know!

Thank you so much for your support! CLICK RIGHT HERE TO SIGN OUR PETITION!

No, we’re not dead! We’ve been busy, though… We’re working hard to get a stable and reliable petition system set up to show the world how much support there is for this whole “Bill Gates for President thing”…

We’ve reached some of our goals: getting the ideas out, stirring up a discussion and getting people to think about the whole presidency thing… The petition is probably the most expected next step….

There’s more to come, but we’ll let the holidays pass first…. See you soon!

To the WGT (”Windows-Gates-Transfer”-syndrome) argument identifying Bill Gates with errors or omissions in Microsoft software, I would answer, imagine any of our politicians running Microsoft! There’s a good laugh! Concerning the non-issue of bugs in MS code, I would point to the vast numbers of hackers trying to exploit the software (because it is there, yes, I know, it’s irresistible!), and further note that it would be surprising if there were not some employees of Microsoft who are doing a little, uh, “internal crusading” let’s call it charitably, for open source alternatives to the company software. Even if there were no hackers or destructive sympathizers, running an enterprise the size and speed of Microsoft would guarantee errors, because human beings, like their software, have not been formally verified as error-free. In addition, I doubt that Bill Gates writes those incomprehensible error messages himself!

The very concept of Microsoft – a giant campus – is advanced beyond older business models. The employees I have seen, heard and read the writings of (including Bill Gates himself) are enthusiastic and positive, partly because they have to be, sure, but also because the employees working for Bill know they are in all likelihood destined to become millionaires, and they all know they are contributing to the frontier of advancing knowledge and utility for the average person, and so they partake of the optimism of service at the forefront of their field. The symbol of the frontier that they are living out is an American tradition that is unacceptable in the current political climate of win-lose mindsets and criticism of traditional America.

How long has it been since we have seen anything so positive come out of our government? I hate to be negative, as it seems against the positive nature of this website, and the positive call for Bill Gates as president, but I had hopes that the current President might devote much more effort to getting us a foothold in space, or end the Iraq war long before this, or that a candidate from the other party might have acted to fix over-managed health care or the plight of the homeless. But we have not seen the kind of hope in politics that technology promises every day, that is, the hope of curing the sick and prolonging life, of preparing by forethought for natural and man-made disasters, of universal care for those who need it. The political parties seem afraid to actually address these issues in public, much less offer us a candidate who is an unqualified winner, a completely successful entrepreneur!

To cut to the chase, imagine an America returning to the frontier of a rational war on human poverty and misery! Imagine, for an example that is particularly poignant, charities run on a business model (as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation requires, if you hadn’t heard), as if they really hoped and were designed to succeed at their impossible tasks! Imagine the multiplier effect of technology, and cutting-away of deadwood, that rational thinking with a grasp of technological issues and successful management could accomplish, when applied to the unresponsiveness of government and the political incumbents that seem baffled by it, or ignorant of it. Then imagine a government that finally returns to the ideal the founders had for the Republic: appoint (okay, elect) grownups, not demagogues, for high office. For President, elect a responsible person who has proved he can handle enormous responsibility, and trust him to do a competent, no, a superb job, as he has in managing his own affairs. Now, that is an exciting idea! Bill Gates for President!

We would like to thank Dan for sending in this article.

Every four years pundits, radio talk show hosts and U.S. citizens beg for a presidential candidate who’s not a career politician. And every four years the two major parties nominate — you guessed it — career politicians! No true, non-political alternatives have the party backing, or, it seems, the ability to connect and gain our trust. I guess voters don’t mind career politicians after all.

Donald Trump is too full of himself (but Letterman would have great material), Ross Perot was too preachy and weird, and Arnold is too foreign (meaning he legally can’t run; not that I’m against Austrians).

Here’s a name that could overcome all these obstacles: Bill Gates. Not the old Bill Gates spouting technology, wearing ill-fitting clothes and crushing competitors for sport (though his company is doing this with relish and third parties are paying the price). No. I’m talking about the new Gates of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

As far as I can tell, Gates has not pledged allegiance to either party (probably the only thing he and I have in common). In 2004 Gates gave only $22,500 to candidates with a slight edge to Democrats. For someone with Gates’ pockets, this is as close to giving nothing as you can get!

I mentioned this idea to my mother and her eyes opened wide (the way they did every time my high school assistant principal called) and she exclaimed “Wow!” After a few seconds of thought she said “Wow” again.

Bill has no major skeletons (I’m guessing) and has taken non-political, purely rational stances on today’s major issues.

Who would you trust to develop a policy on global warming? Who is today’s best ambassador to the third world, to India, to China? But Bill has no experience in foreign policy! True, but neither did the governor of Georgia, California, Arkansas or Texas. Imagine if our fundamental approach to the world was based on logical approaches to curing disease, spreading opportunity, saving the environment and teaching children. A foreign policy flowing from this river would be rich indeed.

Imagine offering our enemies all of these benefits.

Would Iran rather have nukes or freedom from disease? Maybe they’ll go for the A-bombs, but will all regimes react the same? I doubt it. And remember, Bill promised to retire in two years, just in time for his new job in 2008. We’ll just have to live with a total gutting of U.S. anti-trust laws!

Who are you going to vote for? Let me know at dbarney@redmondmag.com.

Doug Barney is editor in chief of Redmond magazine and the editorial director of Redmond Channel Partner magazine. You can contact Doug about “Bill for President” at dbarney@redmondmag.com. The source of this article (first published on 1-oct-2006) is redmondmag.com. Article re-published with full permission of the author.

The last few days have been a ride for us, and we’re spending quite some time reading and replying to e-mails from our visitors. We started working on a FAQ today and will hopefully be adding it to the website in the week to come.

One kind of e-mail deserves some special attention though. Loads of people send us e-mails about Microsoft products (most of the time people are referring to malfunctioning operating systems or browsers), with a closing paragraph saying: “that’s why it’s so obvious Bill Gates would make a shitty president. We call it the “Windows-Gates-Transfer (WGT)”-syndrome and it appears to be a serious problem amongst the members of certain anti-Microsoft subcultures. They’re all very passionate about their arguments (that’s a good thing, by the way), but I can’t say I really see their point. Here’s a very nice example of WGT:

If the quality of code M$ produces is anything like the quality of leadership BG would show as a president, you’ll see the USA limp even further backwards in the global technology pact. Look at the amount of time and money M$ put into vista, and compare that to Linux. Every distribution of Linux beats Vista in efficiency, less cost to produce, etc. It’s basically a cheaper, technologically better product.

I honestly don’t get it. Yes, I admit: I’m a Firefox user. Yes, this website is hosted on a server running a Linux distribution and yes, I like the Google search engine. I’m not the only one in our collective either (yes, we even have a Linux user on our team). Where’s the relevance? Was Ronald Reagan a bad president because he played in shitty movies like Tropic Zone or Girls on Probation? That just doesn’t make sense. You don’t have to like the Microsoft Corporation or the Microsoft products support our ideas.

We’re trying to get Bill to run for president simply because we’d like to see someone with his profile in the top spot, not because his browser has the best features. On a final note, this e-mail from Sutter sums it up nicely:

I think this is a great idea, as do all I’ve spoken to. Many of us have our reservations regarding Windows and Microsoft products, but we can see clearly that Bill could very well do a damn good job as President of the US. Many of us (here in Melbourne) find it irritating that the USA has such an influence on other nations in the world (including our very own), we’d certainly like to see someone who can think get voted in.

We receive so many “At first I was like, euh… But now that I think about it…”-remarks! It’s amazing to see that a lot of people are giving these ideas a chance, debating whether or not they could support Bill Gates as a presidential candidate. That’s great! We would like to thank all of you for sending in your own ideas, beliefs and thoughts.

Time for a short selection of comments from the BB’s (Bill-Believers):

In outsourcing to India, he made Microsoft more productive economically and more profitable. If he had these same goals as president, our country might be in much better shape. Now all we need is a legislative branch that doesn’t put party affiliation before logic. ~Joyce B.

That will be a change from people that are looking only for power and historical respect. Those are things that gates already has. No more of those religious values used in every sauce to hide their real agendas. If with gates we cut half the crap, we will live in a better world. ~Erik H.

I am seemingly the last person who would vote for Gates. I am a Christian and an avid Mac User. But because of his experience as a CEO of arguably the most powerful corporation in the world, and because he has taken his power and used it for good, I would certainly vote for Bill Gates as president. I think he would make a great president. And besides, its way past time that we had a nerd in the Oval Office. ~Dallas M.

I am a Republican, Born-Again, fundementalist Christian. I would vote for Bill Gates for any political office in a heart beat. Year’s ago I was one of the anti-MS, Linux geeks. When I started workign as a developer in 1996, the tools his company created made my life so much easier. I am now very pro-Bill. How could anyone deny his experience, based on his role, and helping America get back its monopoly on Democracy would rock *laughs*. ~David G.

I think what you’re doing is brilliant. If I were American I’d definitely vote for Gates. I only hope that he takes this seriously! ~Edward S.

Bill Gates for President? As a Brit who watches American politics with distane, I’d support this 100%. He has a track record of getting things done. Please consider opening the Gates of the White house. ~Graeme

A decade of political scandal is a very good thing for someone with vast non-political experience seeking to enter the political arena. After feeling betrayed and mislead by many insiders, there are those who will place more trust in someone who has yet to be corrupted by Washington. ~Steven S.

Bill has the kind of charisma that can save post-Bush US. ~ Bacabuda

Want to discuss this some more? Check out our discussion board.

By posting these remarks we received in our mailbox we just earned the right to add a provocative title. Anyway, some of the comments and e-mails we receive make interesting points against our case, most of them don’t. We’ve filtered out the “Bill Gates can’t be a good President because Microsoft is *xxx*” and the “Bill Gates is not a successful business man because Microsoft is *xxx*” crap, and decided feature these arguments:

This is an interesting idea, but completely unrealistic and a little idealistic. If Big Business’s influence in politics is bad, then the biggest man in Big Business who influences not only US politics, but world politics as well, should be just as bad. Politics is not Viral Marketing. ~Susan Adams

You’re suggesting to put the head of Microsoft, that needed the threat of HUGE fines from the EU government to abide by the laws. I’d not want any person who’s leading a company that operates like that anywhere near a position of power. It’s bad enough to see how badly M$ is organized and how restrictive they are. ~Stigu

But seriously folk, although I do like the fact that he’s not going to try to speed up the rapture, I don’t think he has a clue about people who are drastically different from himself. His philanthropy is great, but something makes me think he won’t understand (or has lost touch with) what us broke ass, underdogs are going through. I have had enough of seeing the same old rich, out of touch, White male presidents already, so let’s at least consider thinking outside of the power paradigm for once. ~Vargusvictor

There are many other more respected and worthy people out there, really. ~Steed K

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. ~Beren

As for Gates: My only concern is loyalty. Do you think he would be more loyal to our country or to businesses like Microsoft. The Gates foundation suggests he might do the right thing, and probably would, but loyalty could still be a concern. Also what party can he run under? The democrats and republicans would never take him, so it would have to third party. Would people still vote for him or would it be seen as a wasted vote? ~Jim

Being rational is good, but a President needs to inspire, too. Jimmy Carter is a fairly rational guy and he gave the country “malaise.” Ronald Reagan was not the most rational guy and he gave us “morning in America.” On the being unselfish point, again there is the Jimmy Carter comparison, great humanitarian, not so good President. And as for management, being President is a lot different than being head honcho at Microsoft. As President, you need to be able to work with Congress and (to a lesser extent) the Supreme Court as fellow powers in the land. When is the last time Bill Gates had to share power with anyone? ~JQ

There were many more arguments for the no-camp, and we’ll surely zoom in on some more of them in the next few days. Until then, feel free to comment on these views by using either the comment system or our discussion board.

In the next few days we’ll be zooming in on some of the opinions people have been spreading on the net about the whole “Bill-Gates-for-President-Bandwagon”. Here’s an excerpt from a blog entry earlier on today that caught our eye from the Times Online News Log:

President Gates of the United States. Do you like the way that sounds? Because you are not alone. A cause doing the rounds of the internet this week – admittedly where you would expect to find his base – is for Bill Gates to run for President in 2008, or any time he wants to.

It took us a moment to get used to the idea, but then we wondered why we hadn’t thought of it before. The Microsoft man has done computers; he’s done capitalism; he’s doing as much as anyone to get on top of HIV / Aids and Malaria; so why not the White House?