Tech Workers Like Sanders and Warren, But Their Bosses Like Biden

Campaign donations expose the Silicon Valley class divide.

Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren at the Democratic Presidential Debate in Detroit in July 2019.Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Of all the Democratic presidential candidates, Sen. Bernie Sanders and Sen. Elizabeth Warren have been the harshest critics of big tech. Both have promised to break up Amazon, Apple, and Alphabet (Google’s parent company), which they say are monopolies. Sanders successfully pressured Amazon into increasing minimum wage for its employees to $15, and Warren’s proposed “wealth tax” would undoubtedly make a big dent in dot-com CEOs’ assets.

Yet Sanders’ and Warren’s skepticism toward Silicon Valley isn’t entirely mutual. The two have raised more money from the employees of 20 major tech companies than any other candidates, though tech execs were more enthusiastic about seeding Pete Buttigieg’s failed startup campaign.

Overall, 96 percent of tech employees’ $2 million in donations went to Democrats, though President Trump brought in more than Amy Klobuchar and Tom Steyer, who have since dropped out of the race. Google employees gave just under $700,000 to Democratic candidates, with more than half  going to Sanders and Warren. 

Who’s getting tech workers’ money 

To get a sense of how the presidential race is playing out in Silicon Valley and other tech hubs, we analyzed more than 20,000 Federal Election Commission records of contributions to presidential candidates by the employees of 20 well-known technology companies including Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Twitter, Apple, Salesforce, Amazon, and Netflix (and their major subsidiaries). The data only includes gifts made in 2019, so no contributions to Michael Bloomberg were counted. 

A deeper look at the numbers shows that the candidates’ support splits among different levels of of workers. Warehouse workers, shoppers, technicians, administrative assistants, rideshare drivers, and support staff from Amazon, Uber, Lyft and other tech companies overwhelmingly backed Sanders, followed by Trump. More than 50 gig workers who identified themselves as drivers for Uber, Lyft, Amazon, and Instacart gave to Sanders. Tesla assembly line workers, PayPal customer support representatives, and Intel manufacturing technicians overwhelmingly gave to Sanders. (We counted gig workers even though some companies do not treat them as employees. To avoid double counting, gig workers who listed two employers were not included.)

Gig workers feel the Bern

This trend flipped when we looked at tech executives, directors, vice presidents, and other members of the C-suite. They overwhelmingly gave to Pete Buttigieg and former Vice President Joe Biden, more moderate candidates who haven’t taken positions that threaten tech companies. Among Buttigieg’s contributors were Pinterest’s CEO and chief operating officer, Lyft’s chief technology officer and chief strategy officer, Microsoft’s chief technology officer, and Google, Apple and Saleforce’s chiefs of staff. Biden’s supporters included vice presidents and senior vice presidents at Amazon, Google, Microsoft, and Apple.

Mayor Pete could compete—in the C-Suite

A majority of the tech workers who have made contributions to presidential candidates are managerial and mid-level employees such as engineers, managers, and analysts. They mostly gave to Sanders and Warren, who together got three-quarters of the contributions from these employees. The gap between Sanders and Warren among this group was quite narrow, suggesting no clear front runner. 

Mid-level tech workers split for Sanders and Warren 

Looking at each of the remaining candidates’ contributions from different types of tech workers shows how Sanders and Warren are winning Silicon Valley’s money—but Biden is doing well in the boardroom. 

How the remaining candidates stack up

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate