Allthewebnews

Tech Titans Divided: Harris vs Trump – Who’s Better for Innovation?

Tech Titans Divided: Harris vs Trump - Who's Better for Innovation?

It is highly esteemed in Silicon Valley to be a venture capitalist. Those in charge of allocating capital to new businesses consider themselves as nurturing the technological waves of the future.

Some of the most prominent figures in the industry took note when they backed former president Trump and the venture capitalist he chose as his running mate, JD Vance.

After that, a slew of additional venture capitalists, some well-known and others less so, lined up behind Vice President Kamala Harris, igniting a political divide over who would be better for technological innovation and the circumstances under which companies might flourish. Many political meetings in Silicon Valley occurred behind closed doors for a long time. Those once-in-private discussions have recently gone viral, appearing in online manifestos, podcasts, and social media.

Some of Stephen DeBerry’s closest friends support Trump, according to the venture capitalist and Harris supporter. Even though it’s based in a liberal region of Northern California, the IT industry’s financiers have always been ideologically divided.

Our skiing paths cross. All of our families are here. According to DeBerry, the head of the Bronze Venture Fund, “We’re super tight.” This has nothing to do with our inability to communicate. Almost all of these people are men, and I adore them. They have a special bond. All we have is different views on how to handle policy matters.

The question that needs answering is if the over 700 VCs who have joined the “VCs for Kamala” initiative would match the promises made by Trump’s wealthy backers like Elon Musk and Peter Thiel. Although this is “the first time I’ve seen a galvanized group of folks from our industry coming together and coalescing around our shared values,” according to DeBerry, it is noteworthy nonetheless.

According to David Cowan, an investor at Bessemer Venture Partners, “There are a lot of practical reasons for VCs to support Trump.” These reasons include policies that could drive corporate earnings and stock market values while favoring rich patrons. However, Cowan stated that, as a venture capitalist with a “long-term investment horizon,” he is endorsing Harris. This is due to the fact that, in a “Trump world reeling from rampant income inequality, raging wars and global warming is not an attractive environment” for backing thriving enterprises.

On Musk’s social network X, a number of well-known venture capitalists have expressed their endorsement of Trump. A number of prominent conservatives in the tech world with links to PayPal and SpaceX, as well as members of Musk’s inner circle, have contributed to a new pro-Trump super PAC named America PAC, according to public documents. A major factor is Trump’s support for cryptocurrencies and his pledge to cease a crackdown on the industry.

Despite the fact that certain members of the investment community have grown distant from Biden due to his stances on tax policy, antitrust monitoring, and overregulation, the attention of venture capitalists who had previously been on the sidelines has been reawakened by Harris’s presidential campaign. Some of the buzz is based on Harris’s preexisting ties to Silicon Valley, which she cultivated during her tenure as attorney general of California and her work in the San Francisco area.

We do purchase risk, don’t we? Leslie Feinzaig, creator of “VCs for Kamala,” said in an interview that they are attempting to purchase the appropriate kind of risk. “It’s really hard for these companies that are trying to build products and scale to do so in an unpredictable institutional environment.”

Some companies are now on opposite sides of the tech divide. While Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz—the namesake venture capitalists of the firm—endorsed Trump, John O’Farrell—one of the general partners of the firm—promised his support for Harris. No additional comment was offered by O’Farrell.

Regarding “the general direction of our country, the state of our broken immigration system, the ballooning deficit, and the foreign policy missteps, among other issues,” Doug Leone, a former managing partner of Sequoia Capital, voiced his disapproval of Trump in June and endorsed the candidate. Tech leaders who are backing Trump “are making a big mistake,” according to Michael Moritz, who has been Leone’s longtime business partner at Sequoia and authored an article for the Financial Times.

Sequoia partner Shaun Maguire, who backed Hillary Clinton in 2016, gave $300,000 to Trump’s campaign, according to an X post by Maguire. In June, Maguire gave $500,000 to America PAC, while Leone gave $1 million, according to the Federal Election Commission records.

When it comes to women’s rights, I couldn’t be more different from Republicans. After more consideration, Maguire expressed her disapproval of Trump’s plans. “Nonetheless, I find his foresight to be surprisingly prophetic.”

According to Graham & Walker’s managing director Feinzaig, who started “VCs for Kamala” out of frustration with “the loudest voices” becoming what she called “sounding like they were speaking for the entire industry,”

The majority of the VC discussion surrounding the next election stems from a manifesto and podcast that Andreessen and Horowitz released in July. In it, they expressed their support for Trump and laid out their ideas for a “Little Tech Agenda” that they claimed was in opposition to the policies pushed by Big Tech.

In particular, they pointed to Biden’s plans to increase taxes on the rich and companies as evidence of a growing anti-startup sentiment in the United States, as well as restrictions that they claimed would stifle new blockchain and AI-based industries.

Vance, an Ohio senator who worked for Thiel’s investment firm in San Francisco, expressed a comparable view on “little tech” over a month prior to being selected as Trump’s running mate.

They aren’t from big tech, are they? These were the donors who were actively supporting Trump in Silicon Valley. It’s not a big deal. Innovative firms are being started by them. The government should not be able to stifle their capacity to create, Vance stated in a June interview with Fox News.

A few days prior, Vance had accompanied Trump to a fundraiser in San Francisco held at the residence of conservative venture entrepreneur and ex-PayPal CEO David Sacks. A group of 100 people, including “some of the leading innovators in AI,” listened to Trump’s speech, according to Vance.

DeBerry stated that he does not necessarily disagree with the views held by the founders of Andreesen Horowitz. However, he does share their concern about influential corporations having too much sway on the regulatory bodies that oversee them. He takes issue with their “little tech” framing, particularly when it originates from a multibillion-dollar investment corporation, which he claims does not represent the interests of the average person. The choice is “chaos and stability,” with Harris standing for stability, according to DeBerry, whose firm prioritizes social effect, rather than big tech vs little tech.

To make matters more complicated, there is no longer a clear party line when it comes to taking a strong stance against the monopoly power of large firms. Vance has praised Lina Khan, whom Biden appointed to head the FTC and who has challenged multiple tech companies. Harris has the support of prominent venture capitalists like Reid Hoffman (co-founder of LinkedIn) and Vinod Khosla (co-founder of Sun Microsystems and an early investment in OpenAI, producer of ChatGPT), who have both harshly criticized Khan’s strategy.

A Democrat from California whose district includes Silicon Valley, U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna, has stated that the tech community in the area is comprised of “thirds or less” of Trump supporters, who are an outspoken minority. Khanna argued that Democrats need to have a greater grasp of the allure of digital assets, in contrast to the White House’s investments in renewable energy, electric cars, and semiconductors, which have enticed tech entrepreneurs.

In Khanna’s opinion, the Democratic Party has suffered among young people and entrepreneurs due to its apparent lack of support for Bitcoin and the blockchain.

Emmeline Ventures managing partner Naseem Sayani noted that the fact that Andreessen and Horowitz backed Trump made them a lightning rod for techies who were against the Republican candidate. She wanted the kinds of companies that she helps finance to realize that the investor community is not homogeneous, so Sayani joined onto “VCs for Kamala,” as she put it.

“We are no longer seen as prominent founders,” she stated. Women, people of color, and every possible intersection are all present. When their immediate surroundings don’t provide adequate conditions for business growth, how can they be at ease constructing such enterprises?

Exit mobile version