Kamala Harris: Ideal Presidential Candidate for Tech Industry

Kamala Harris offers a stable, innovation-driven approach essential for the tech industry's growth.

### Kamala Harris: The Ideal Candidate for Technology and Venture Capitalists
* 💼 The tech industry thrives in a stable environment, which is why many support Vice President Kamala Harris for president, as her leadership could **foster global relations and rule of law**.
* 🌍 The tech sector is vital to the U.S. economy, with many large companies deriving the **majority of their revenues from overseas**, making a **stable political climate essential for their success**.
* 📈 Lina Khan’s approach to mergers and acquisitions has raised concerns among venture capitalists, as her restrictions may **hinder funding opportunities for emerging tech companies**.
* ⚖ Gary Gensler's regulatory stance on cryptocurrency needs to shift towards **clearer rules that promote beneficial technological investments**, aligning with Harris's understanding of the tech landscape.
* 💡 Harris has shown an **intellectual curiosity** about how technology can benefit everyday Americans, contrasting with President Biden's **less engaged approach** to the tech industry.
* 🤖 Her proactive measures, such as involving tech companies in discussions on AI regulation, highlight her commitment to **fostering innovation while ensuring safety and compliance**.
* 🚀 Should former President Trump return to office, there are fears that his administration could revert to "**grifter capitalism**," which could **destabilize the tech industry** and **hinder American prosperity**.
* 📊 Ultimately, Harris's vision for a **rule-based, innovation-friendly environment** positions her as the clear choice for the technology sector and venture capitalists looking for **stability and growth**.

The pitch in the page was to keep this focused on tag. So I would like to ask you, why is Kamala Harris the best candidate for the technology industry and venture capitalists around the US? Well. So what the tech industry needs is kind of a stable environment in order to, you know, kind of follow the rules and prosper in an ability. Because, by the way, one of the things that the tech industry brings to us is a kind of a it's one of our most successful global industries where most of, for example, the large tech companies get the vast majority of their revenues overseas like the majority and depend on the business. And and so good global relations, in addition to stability and an ability to kind of know that you're following a rule of law versus what I think of as grifter capitalism, all of that leads to like a you know, the reason why I and others like me support Vice President

Harris for president, because I think those are the more fundamental things than, you know, whether or not a corporate tax rate goes up or down a little. Obviously, those can be important in other times for business. But that's the reason why I think within the technology industry, I think it's a fairly clear choice. Reed. We recently had SEC chair Gary Gensler on the program, and a part of the conversation for both candidates is continuity at the FTC and the FCC. You've actually spoken publicly, I think, about both already. But what is your latest position on those two roles? Lina Khan and Gary Gensler? If Kamala Harris were to continue in the White House due to their impact on the technology industry. Well, let's see. So first, since I've spoken because I get asked a lot about Lena Khan. You know, one misconception to clear up is I've never, ever talked to Kamala

Harris or anyone in the White House about Lina Khan for this. So, this is entirely a press set of stories where I'm asked about my point of view. And I think she's done a very good job on a number of things. And to compete staff that click to cancel on subscriptions, a number of things on M&A, speaking as a partner at Greylock and as a Silicon Valley person who invests in companies trying to create the next generation of large tech companies, her, you know, kind of like waging war on M&A is actually, in fact, as unhelpful to the tech industry. It actually accomplishes something different than what she thinks she's accomplishing. She's things she's trying to accomplish the, you know, kind of the limitation of the growth of the large tech companies. And actually, in fact, she's causing a lack of funding for any of the companies that might potentially compete with

them. And so that's a that's a different thing. And that's the that's the Lina Khan, which I still have the same point of view, and I've asked about it from anyone. And from an expertise point of view, I will continue to say that. Gary Gensler I think the question and I know Gary I've talked to him from the MIT days is how do you kind of shift kind of a kind of approach to crypto that's less kind of hit with stick and more of a here's the set of rules that we could set out that would create a beneficial technological investment that helps us position globally. And I think it's been uneven. And so I would hope that, you know, Vice President Harris, who grew up within the California tech community, understands the importance of this kind of rule of law, you know, kind of equal basis, innovation, economy. She talked about, you know, kind of

innovation opportunities. She's the only presidential candidate in U.S. history who's spoken about the importance of founders. And so I hope that she would bring a kind of a more innovation-forward point of view here and, you know, would anticipate that an innovation-forward perspective. Is that the key difference? Do you anticipate if hypothetically, we had a Harris administration, a difference from the current Biden administration on where else might she differ? Well, I think so. So she has always brought a certain, you know, talk to her over the years and this intellectual curiosity to what's going on in the tech industry, how that can help everyday Americans, how that can help the rest of American industry. And so it's kind of like, look, I, I realize that the tech industry is about innovation and building new things and those building on new things and new products and services. But they're also ways that can help all of America.

And those are the questions that she's asked. Now, Biden, who has done a number of great things in his presidency. You know, he's controlled inflation better than, you know, post-COVID than any other, you know, kind of first world country in doing that and I think has done a number of very good things. But he has not been as engaged with the tech industry, whereas I think, you know, Vice President Harris, including, you know, kind of in her very acceptance speech has been. And so I think that that kind of of of of how do we engage in the conversation when look, for example, what she did in the artificial intelligence, you know, regulation and executive order process. She ran that first thing she did, she brought all the companies into the White House to say, hey, we really need you guys to be going foot forward on safety and regulation. What kinds of things can you voluntarily

commit to? You know, I talked to the folks who were there. She pushed them very hard on that. Then she looked at, okay, so this is what they can commit to. Here's what we can put into an executive order law. Here's what we can do to ongoing monitor to what happened and leave room for innovation. That's what I expect across her approach in the entire technology industry with A.I. as the instance of it. Let's go to the other hypothetical, because she's engaging at the moment with the tech community. But many would say that Trump is very much engaging with the technology community with the amount that he's having. Elon Musk on stage. If we see Musk taking a bigger role within a future administration, what does that mean for you and ultimately for the relationship that Silicon Valley has with Elon Musk? Well, I think it depends on what the Trump administration, what Elon does.

I think, you know, the Trump, you know, Trump and Trump presidency won. You know, his early presidency has shown a certain amount of grifter capitalism. It's like trying to penalize his opponents using the instruments of state. You know, obviously, you know, we saw that happen with Amazon, which probably is, you know, now inside knowledge of probably correlated with Bezos's, you know, forbidding The Washington Post from issuing a support statement. And so it's kind of like the if you're going to be an individual company retaliatory, it's part of what might underlie a terrorist regime is I can choose like who I'm doling out favors to. That does not create a good, stable environment for investing in, you know, kind of like, you know, how do you invest in an overall industry and ecosystem? And so then the question, you know, would come down with Elon.

Obviously, Elon's businesses have great ties to government. I mean, the whole space business is deeply tied to regulation and kind of government contracts. Automobiles are also tied to a bunch of regulatory frameworks. Obviously, you know, what's going on with, you know, kind of media and information has ties there, too. And I think, unfortunately, XCOM is the primary supporter of conspiracy theories and, you know, other kinds of things, which is a serious problem. All of that. The question is as all right, well, does it continue to be grifter capitalism, which is calling out to specific companies, or is it rule of law? Read on the attacks and conspiracy theories. Bloomberg did a deep report, a data-based piece of investigative journalism on that recently. And in that segment on the show, which you can find on YouTube, we gave his point of view, which is that they disagree with that.

And if you allow me to, I've invited Elon Musk onto this program many times, and you are here, and he's not. And something's different in this election. You are a well-known person in the world of technology, but there are others on both sides who are speaking out, in my experience, more prominently than previously. Have there been any negative consequences of that? For example, if you are a venture capitalist or a CEO, that publicly speaking about your political orientation and your support of a candidate has resulted in a loss of opportunity in deals or whatever it may be? Well, I've seen, you know, I think, you know, this is something that's this fraught. You know, I don't think it's just, you know, retaliation in business circumstances from folks who are supporting Trump. Like, I saw, you know, kind of, you know, when VCs were speaking out, some helpers

were very supportive of Trump. Not a great likeness, but in other firms, kind of, you know, withdrew their support from venture firms. I've seen other kinds of things where, you know, people, you know, kind of, you know, kind of business relationships have soured because of it, you know, which I think is very unfortunate. I mean, I actually think that part of what we should aspire to as Americans and as business people is to is to kind of say, hey, look, what we should do is say, what's the thing that we do to make American business and American industry better? And, you know, like I've I've I've heard of Republican senators trash talking me internationally where, you know, you think they'd be supportive of American businesspeople. So I think that there is I think there are consequences of it, which, you know, I think is unfortunate. But I think it's more important to be,

you know, kind of patriotic about what is good for America, American industry, and American society, even when you have this fear. Let's talk about the souring of certain relationships. The first thing that comes to my mind is the souring of the relationship of who was a co-founder of OpenAI, Elon Musk, and now OpenAI, I mean, explicitly in its new form. Have you spoken to Sam Altman about and indeed OpenAI about the worries of Musk, who seems to have a dislike for the business? If he took a more prominent role within the administration, what would it look like for more broadly to have Elon Musk in a position of power? Well, one of the things that I would worry about if Elon took a more prominent role is that he would view that the only real success for the industry is if he is doing it. I mean, this is part of the question around the fact that he's kind of doing

these baseless lawsuits against Open Eye that are, you know, kind of like, well, I gave money philanthropically and I should get a cut of what then turns into a commercial, which is, by the way, illegal. Right. And so, you know, so that kind of of of of of issue might then rear its head in this kind of tradition of, you know, kind of Trump's grifter capitalism. I would hope that actually, in fact, if if Ellen were to accept a role that he would go, look, what I care about is all of, you know, the tech sector, American industry, not just my own efforts. And I think we'd have to see what would play out there. The latest on the litigation between the two, I believe, is October 8th, when open, I accused Elon Musk of harassment in that legal fight. And again, we've covered it on this program read and we'll go back to it.

And is AI and regulation of AI being discussed enough in this election by either candidate? Well, I'm not sure that it's the most central thing for kind of the general American society at the moment. Look, I think the how we get the benefits of AI for American industry, American society, American consumers, I think is really important. And one of the things about regulation is it tends to slow down innovation. It tends to delay. And I think our tools for getting a medical assistant on every smartphone, a tutor on every smartphone for every American, and maybe even more globally. I think those are the important things that we're trying to get to, and that's less of a discussion about, you know, AI in the election, but more kind of like we should be building towards the future. REED If former President Trump were to get a second term in office, how are you preparing for that and how do you

approach it where that to be the case? Well, if that's the case, then I would hope for the folks who have argued to me that, you know, you shouldn't actually, in fact, take President Trump's words seriously, that the fact that he is declaring, you know, like a tariff war where he can do individual kind of grifter capitalism, but that's actually not what he's going to do, that he's going to try to be more business forward, more technology forward. And you should not be paying attention to what his words are. I would hope that they would be correct. If it ends up being what I fear, which is actually, in fact, a, you know, kind of an individual kind of, you know, like sweating various businesses for his own kind of political favor. I think that will affect American industry in a way that will affect American prosperity.

And so I think you have to build in more resilience to chaos and uncertainty, and that's what you would do. I'm obviously very hopeful that Vice President Harris will win the election. And so therefore, haven't done enormous contingency planning yet.

Greylock's Hoffman on US Election, Silicon Valley Impact

Welcome to the Bloomberg Technology YouTube channel. Subscribe for original series and mini-docs on game-changing technologies, profiles on innovators, live conversations with experts, and breaking technology news & analysis from Bloomberg TV.

Bloomberg Technology

Kamala Harris: The Ideal Candidate for Tech and Venture Capital

Kamala Harris is seen as the best candidate for the tech industry due to her focus on stability, global relations, and rule of law.

Her support for Lina Khan's approach to M&A is viewed as unhelpful for the tech industry's growth.

Gary Gensler's uneven approach to crypto regulation raises concerns, but Harris's background in the California tech community is expected to bring a better understanding of the industry's needs.

Kamala Harris's Potential Impact on Innovation

Kamala Harris is the only presidential candidate in U.

history to emphasize the importance of founders and innovation.

She has a strong intellectual curiosity about the tech industry and its potential to help everyday Americans.

Harris's approach to regulating artificial intelligence and engaging with tech companies is expected to drive a more innovation-forward agenda compared to the current Biden administration.

Grifter Capitalism and its Impact on Business

Trump's early presidency displayed grifter capitalism by using state power to penalize opponents, with Amazon's situation and Bezos's influence on The Washington Post as key examples.

Elon's businesses, heavily tied to government contracts and regulation, raise concerns about the stability of investing in an overall industry.

The speaker highlights the negative consequences of publicly expressing political support, noting that it can lead to a loss of business opportunities and deals.

The Impact of Trump's Support on Business Relationships

Trump's support has led to a withdrawal of backing for some venture firms and soured business relationships, which the speaker finds unfortunate.

The speaker emphasizes the importance of prioritizing American business and industry over personal grievances.

Elon Musk's potential prominent role in the administration raises concerns about his influence on the tech sector and his ongoing legal battles with OpenAI.

AI and its regulation are not the central focus of the current election, with more emphasis on leveraging AI for American industry and society.

The speaker believes that regulation can slow down innovation and is more focused on building towards the future.

If former President Trump were to win a second term, the speaker hopes for a business and technology-forward approach, but is also preparing for potential chaos and uncertainty.