Politicians use technology to promote themselves and gather and use data to help get elected. Look at what Obama’s ground game did to Hillary Clinton in 2008. Look at how Donald Trump uses and manipulates the media. Look at how Fox News has helped rich conservatives stay that way by getting poor conservatives to join their cause.
Tim Cook for President
No, I cannot take credit as the first member of the global Apple Fan Folk to come up with that idea as it’s nothing new but certainly interesting, and even possible given the current political season. After all, businessman Donald Trump is conducting a blitzkrieg through Republican primaries with little more than insult laden stump speeches and Twitter, which combine to keep his name at the top of every newscast, liberal or conservative.
You know how you can tell if a politician is lying? Their lips are moving.
Apple circa 2016 finds itself– and it’s outspoken CEO– in a unique position, defending the average everyday citizen from government tyranny while surveys indicate most Americans think Apple is on the wrong side of the privacy and security issue and should help the government with what it wants because, you know, terrorism.
Apple’s products tend to be more popular among those customers with discerning tastes; those who do not bow before the status quo. The better educated. People with a bit more disposable income. And, with the lone exception of Rush Limbaugh, attracts a customer base that appeals to the the heart and the mind as a single design esthetic, Disney-esque vs. Big Brother.
But Tim Cook for President?
It’s 2016 and crazier thoughts have already won a few primaries, so one could easily ask the question, “Why not?” The reasons both for and against are many and varied. Cook is not as rich as Trump or Bloomberg so he cannot finance his own campaign. But he could enlist the best of Silicon Valley to assist such a venture. Cook seems to have a conscience and that alone might be sufficient to disqualify a technologist from public service. Sexual preference not withstanding, Cook could make a reasoned and impassioned case for a candidate with no political experience yet able to inspire others (surveys indicate the vast majority of Apple employees give Cook high ratings for how the company is managed; compare that to popularity ratings of politicians currently in office) to support a candidacy from a truly citizen politician.
Apple for President
Based upon Citizens United and Mitt Romney, corporations are people, too, so why couldn’t Apple run for president? The company was born in the U.S. Apple is more than 35-years old. Money isn’t a problem and an entire campaign– if not an entire Apple Party— could be completely self-financed, or, in the alternative, funded by an iPhone app that simply took donations from your iTunes account.
That brings me to voters, which might be at the heart of the immense political discord that threatens the country. From my perspective, voters don’t know how to choose a candidate, instead, their decisions and support are formed more from a odd blend of media exposure, perception, and loud noise, rather than bothering to ask a candidate exactly how they will fulfill campaign promises. That infection seems to exist on both sides of the aisle. Maybe a future Apple Watch will have a sensor that can determine whether or not an owner is qualified to vote based upon a DNA test, some blood work, and Siri listening in on a few conversations and making a recommendation for voter qualifications.
It could happen. And it couldn’t be any worse than the current process for selecting candidates or voting, now could it?