Venture Capitalists Split on Choice Between Harris and Trump

In the bustling tech environment of Silicon Valley, being a venture capitalist (VC) is synonymous with prestige. VCs play a crucial role in deciding which startups receive funding, viewing themselves as pivotal players in the evolution of technology.

Recently, the endorsement of former President Donald Trump and his running mate JD Vance by some influential VCs has generated significant attention. However, this prompted a spirited response from hundreds of other venture capitalists who have pledged their support for Vice President Kamala Harris. This has sparked a notable debate within the tech community about which presidential candidate is more suited to foster innovation and create favorable conditions for startups.

Political discussions in Silicon Valley, historically conducted behind closed doors, are now being openly debated across podcasts, social media platforms, and online discussions. Stephen DeBerry, a venture capitalist who supports Harris, noted that while some of his closest friends back Trump, the tech investment community has long been politically diverse.

“We ski together. Our families are together. We’re super tight,” DeBerry, who runs the Bronze Venture Fund, explained. He highlighted that their differences stem from varying policy perspectives rather than personal enmities.

The movement “VCs for Kamala,” which boasts over 700 supporters, illustrates a collective effort among tech investors rallying around shared values. DeBerry emphasized that this is the first instance he has seen such a unified stance from his peers in the industry.

David Cowan, an investor at Bessemer Venture Partners, pointed out that there are several pragmatic reasons for VCs to back Trump, particularly his policies that may bolster corporate profits and appeal to affluent investors. However, Cowan expressed his support for Harris, expressing concerns about the negative environment for business that a Trump-led future could engender.

On the other side, several prominent VCs have publicly shown support for Trump on the platform X, with some contributing to a pro-Trump super PAC called America PAC. This PAC includes conservative tech industry leaders with connections to influential figures like Musk and Peter Thiel, who have rallied behind Trump’s favorable stance toward cryptocurrency.

Despite Biden’s policies causing some friction within the investment community due to concerns about taxation and regulatory measures, Harris’s candidacy has invigorated interest from VCs who had previously remained indifferent. Much of this enthusiasm stems from Harris’s familiarity with Silicon Valley during her career, including her tenure as California’s attorney general.

Leslie Feinzaig, the founder of “VCs for Kamala,” pointed out that VCs are inherently risk-takers looking to invest wisely. She stressed the challenges faced by startups trying to navigate an unpredictable legislative environment.

The divide within the tech sector has led some firms to experience conflicting political allegiances. Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz, notable venture capitalists, have publicly endorsed Trump, while their colleague John O’Farrell has expressed his support for Harris.

Doug Leone, a former managing partner at Sequoia Capital, also backed Trump, voicing his worries about various issues, including immigration and national debt. Conversely, Michael Moritz, another partner at Sequoia, criticized fellow tech leaders endorsing Trump, suggesting they are making an error in judgment.

Shifting allegiances have become apparent, with Shaun Maguire, a partner at Sequoia, acknowledging his substantial contributions to Trump’s campaign despite having supported Hillary Clinton in 2016. He recognized differences in political stances around women’s rights but still viewed Trump as surprisingly insightful at times.

Feinzaig established “VCs for Kamala” in response to what she perceived as a disproportionate representation of political views within the VC community. Responding to the narrative driven by the Andreessen Horowitz firm, she sought to showcase that there are diverse perspectives among investors.

The discourse surrounding VCs and elections became increasingly pronounced following a July podcast in which Andreessen and Horowitz declared their support for Trump, claiming that the government had grown more hostile towards startups. They specifically criticized Biden’s proposed tax increases and regulations that they argue could stifle developing sectors like blockchain and artificial intelligence.

Vance has echoed concerns regarding “little tech,” emphasizing that those who support Trump from within Silicon Valley are not the major tech giants, but rather innovators concerned about governmental restrictions on their ventures.

As the competition heats up, DeBerry articulated his disagreement with some of the views held by Andreessen Horowitz, especially their framing of the debate. He asserted that the choice isn’t merely between big and little tech; rather, it’s a question of fostering stability as represented by Harris, in contrast with the chaos associated with Trump.

This political landscape is complex, as attitudes toward regulation of monopolistic corporations have become increasingly nuanced and do not strictly adhere to party lines. Vance has expressed favorable views towards FTC chair Lina Khan, while prominent VC supporters of Harris have critiqued her approach to corporate regulation.

U.S. Representative Ro Khanna remarked that despite notable Trump support within Silicon Valley, it represents only a small fraction of the tech community. He emphasized the need for Democrats to better resonate with younger entrepreneurs on issues such as digital assets to regain their appeal.

Naseem Sayani, a general partner at Emmeline Ventures, expressed that the endorsements by Andreessen and Horowitz became catalysts for those in the tech industry opposing Trump. By joining “VCs for Kamala,” she aimed to affirm that the investor community is varied and not solely represented by a single political ideology.

“We’re not single-profile founders anymore,” Sayani stated, highlighting the diverse nature of entrepreneurs today. “How can they feel comfortable building businesses when the environment they’re in doesn’t actually support their existence in some ways?”