Can't tell if this is sarcasm, so why do you think Sheryl Sandberg would be a good candidate? I personally feel like I cannot trust any Facebook leadership as Commander in Chief.

Because what we really need in the White House is more corporatism and more identity politics.

The current administration is doing a pretty good job casting doubt on the "if you can run a business you can run a government" idea.

Tillerson, for example, found that the State Department is a very, very different beast than Exxon.

Mind listing the failings of the current administration that support this?

It would be easier to list a success. Seriously. The failures jump off the page. Maybe it's not PC enough for you because it looks partisan, but frankly, they've proven rank incompetence over and over again.

The best compliment I could give Tillerson is he probably WANTS the State Department to collapse which is why he's utterly under-managing and under-staffing it. By any other metric, of course, he's an abject failure.

You keep using the present tense, I'm not sure you're aware that Tillerson is not the SoS anymore.

What are the failures?

I cited Tillerson as a nice example.

If you want more, https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/16/us/politics/a...

Parent already provided you an example. I feel like your question is begging for a political argument, and there's multiple places on the internet (that's not Hacker News) where you can have those.

Which example are you referring to?

Rex Tillerson?

"Tillerson was “one of the worst secretaries of state” in modern history, according to experts from across the political spectrum."

https://www.vox.com/world/2018/3/13/16029526/rex-tillerson-f...

My post only had two lines, and one of them literally says "Tillerson, for example".

It's pretty easy to follow the news. You don't need others to google things for you.

Please list the failings in clear language here...

People here are not obliged to do research for you and rephrase it in language you can understand. There is a lot of clearly written source material out there if you look for it.

Unless you've been hiding under a rock, you know how the current administration has been running things. You are free to have a positive of negative opinions of their actions, but you are clearly aware of what other people might characterize as failings.

You might think you're being the calm and reasonable one here, but you're not asking this question in good faith. It's clear you just want to pick a political fight on hacker news. While we are not above politics here, there is a time and a place for that. And it's not here or now.

How about the inability to repeal obamacare, a main goal of theirs for many years, while having 100% control of the government?

i never saw any green jobs by the millions that obama promised during his campaign. Whats ur point?

did Obama control all the government?

If the democrats run Zuckerberg, Sandberg, or Eric Schmidt, they'll once again be losing my vote. I don't even want to imagine what the future would look like under an administration run by someone from the surveillance capitalism world.

Mark and others designed the total free for all that is Facebook data policy, I wouldn’t vote for him or (especially) Schmidt, who loves surveillance. Yes I’d want to hear what she has to say about that.

Schmidt loves surveillance, and openly idolizes Henry Kissinger. He's probably the most terrifying possibility of the three people I mentioned.

"Move fast and break things."