Why Republicans Won't Retake Silicon Valley

An anonymous reader writes "Republican consultant Patrick Ruffini, who counts Google as one of his clients, sketches out a way that the GOP could 'win back' Silicon Valley — but he gets smacked down by tech businessman Francis Cianfrocca. 'Patrick's basic thesis is that the VC firms that fund the Valley will rebel at being regulated by [Treasury Secretary] Tim Geithner, who is talking about increasing reporting requirements for both private equity and venture capital. Assuming I understand them both correctly, something tells me that neither Geithner nor Ruffini understand deeply what venture capital is all about.'"

Comments

A lot of geeks are libertarian leaning

[Anonymous Coward]

The GOP just needs to embrace that aspect of the party more.

Re:A lot of geeks are libertarian leaning

[h4rr4r]

No, a lot of undergraduate white kids who have had mommy and daddy pay for everything and have never had any real life experience are libertarian leaning.

This is because it became fashionable to be "libertarian leaning" for the kids 5-10 years before them it was fashionable to be "socialist leaning".

 

What's the problem?

[nuclearpenguins]

The "business as usual" thing is what got us all into this economic mess in the first place. I don't see what the problem is with a little more regulation of all things financial. Sure, it may suck for a little while, but it's the price we have to pay for 30+ years of financial shenanigans.

I think it's a geography issue

[halivar]

I'm not convinced that the overall political leaning of Silicon Valley has anything to do with the respective benefits of the parties on the industry. Rather, it just so happens that the industry is made up, largely, of people who live in a pretty liberal area. Silicon Valley leaned Republican back when California, itself, leaned Republican, and hasn't leaned that way since. I live in an southeast red state, and by straw poll, the people involved in the tech industry here have politics that pretty heavily reflect the general population.

Silicon Valley isn't up for grabs because San Francisco isn't up for grabs.

When will you all realize..

[Anonymous Coward]

that the "us vs them" bullshit is ruining america in every measurable sense?

There's full blown media war between fox (right) and msnbc (left), and the victims are anybody with the ability to absorb two opinions, then form their own.

If you are registered voter for either party, you are a follower, a simpleton, and are part of the problem.

Vote for the MAN, not the PARTY.

Troll? Really?

[ericrost]

How is this a troll? Its kind of a tough position for someone living on either a) Mommy and Daddy's money, b) Subsidized student loans, or c) Scholarships to be truly libertarian. Yet middle class white kids do take that hypocritical position while undergrads fairly often. Seems like a fair thing to point out.

Re:Troll? Really?

[Anonymous Coward]

How isn't it a troll against every single white person that lived with their parents? Does the fact that you grew up black with two moms negate my life's experience; just because I grew up white with a dad and mom? What about the just the fact that you aren't white? Does that mean your statement is as racist as it sounds?

In other words: What the fuck gives your life's experience any more credibility than anyone else's; regardless of the ones who's parents were obviously more financially successful than yours?

What's fashionable is parent's narcissism, vanity, and greed being greater than their will to parent. What's also fashionable is being a lazy black person that believes and furthers the belief that white people are evil, and somehow owe you generations of handouts.

I know I will most certainly be modded troll, but I am pretty sure I still need to say that it is black people like you that make black people like my friends call you niggers.

Re:Troll? Really?

[MalleusEBHC]

Berkeley isn't the university where the wealthy kids go. It's actually fairly affordable (at the in-state rate), especially considering the education you get there.

Re:Troll? Really?

[tsm_sf]

1) Don't forget: the vast majority of college professors are unabashed liberals, if not outright socialists.

There are plenty of conservative professors, they just don't fit into the Jesus and Shotgun ethic that drives the GOP today. When you decide to take an anti-intellectual approach to politics you're going to, surprise, lose the intellectuals.

Re:Troll? Really?

[timeOday]

I'll chime in with my own "Actually"... extreme political views of all stripes are most often held by those whose beliefs have not yet been challenged by real-world experience. Most often this is due to youth and inexperience, though it can also be preserved indefinitely by wilful ignorance.

Re:Troll? Really?

[m50d]

I'm fine with the government collecting taxes to provide infrastructure that benefits society as a whole, as well as helping people in need (which doesn't mean spending money stupidly; training and educating people would be a lot more effective than just sending them a check every month). I'd even be okay with the government helping with health care for people that need it, since a healthy population is far more productive, which benefits everybody. For issues other than economics, I'm pretty far down the libertarian side; the government shouldn't be involved in what people do in private, including who they sleep with and how much marijuana they smoke.

That's not libertarian, that's good old-fashioned left-liberal.

No mention of Sarbanes-Oxley?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's hard to take seriously an article that makes no mention of Sarbanes-Oxley, which effectively closed the IPO market for venture funded start-ups.

Whichever party cracks that door back open has a shot at winning big supporters from Silicon Valley.

Apolitical? Research donations online, it's easy enough to do. Venture capitalist contributions are large, and in the last election cycle went about 2 to 1 in favor of Democrats.

Could that go to 1 to 1, or even 1 to 2, in favor of Republicans? Certainly, it's up for grabs. Every day employment falls in Silicon Valley, even more so.

Re:No mention of Sarbanes-Oxley?

[Skyshadow]

I don't see the GOP making gains in the Valley or moving in the right direction to do so. On the contrary, the GOP is actively moving further and further away from being the party of the well-educated, tech-savvy individual living in an urban area (aka, the Valley).

If we were to see an actual return towards fiscal conservatism and keeping government out of peoples' private business, we might have something to discuss. So long as the GOP chooses to base itself on gay bashing, anti-scientific rhetoric and hating on immigrants (legal and otherwise), they'll never see gains here.

Oh, and having Carly Fiorina on their side doesn't exactly improve their image, either.

Re:I'd think taxes would be a better avenue.

[Fortunato_NC]

Assuming the "rich" software engineers you're referring to made less than $250K last year, they actually got a tax cut from Obama. Stop drinking the GOP Kool-Aid for a minute and think about where your interests really lie. A 3% tax hike (actually, expiration of a previous tax cut) on the top 5% of taxpayers is not a march towards socialism, it's a sound fiscal move.

Typical politics

[AnalPerfume]

The Bush era GOP embraced the religious lunatics so much that the rest of America were eventually turned off by them and kicked them out of office. Like any ousted party, their ONLY role in life is to get back into power, which means fooling enough people who they'd turned off before to vote for them again. For this, they will try what the polls tell them they need to try, regardless of their real plans when they get back into power. Those plans will no doubt fall back to mirror the religious lunatics who can be relied on to "vote God". The same applies with the party in power, their ONLY goal is to stay in power. Beyond that, everything is false promises and rhetoric.

I used to think the GOP were all about the rich, conservative middle / upper classes who seek to be allowed to profit from everything without any limitations, and let the poor carry the tax burden. I used to believe the Democrats were a slightly more socialist version of the GOP. I used to think Obamma would be willing to change a few things in the balance of corporation / government / people, but the more I see his decisions, the more I was right to think that the system IS broken and needs to be changed in favor of the tax paying US people.

Politicians deal in speeches. Speeches talk AT the people, not WITH them. Speeches are pre-planned rhetoric carefully worded to mean many things to many audiences as well as written FOR a specific audience. Speeches are rehearsed and performed; not unlike actors on stage in a play. Actors play roles which are not them, doing stuff they wouldn't do, saying stuff they wouldn't say. It's performance lying....and politicians wonder why they are never believed.

I haven't found that

[Trepidity]

In my experience, geeks are generally in favor of civil liberties, but also in favor of significant government provision of public services, such as high-speed rail, NASA, and funding for the National Science Foundation. Many also support significant regulation of markets, such as more vigorous enforcement of antitrust law, and institution of net-neutrality rules.