Travis wrote:
>Anyone want to venture a theory as to why the hedge
>fund industry prefers dems over republicans. Has to
>have something to do with a preference for neoliberal
>internationalism over naked imperialism no?
I'm having a tough time making sense of it myself. It's really easy to postulate plausible counter-theories.
Anyway, as to the list, the macro types (Soros, Moore and Tudor) are overwhelmingly Dem-oriented. I can think of several reasons why that would be and just as many reasons why they shouldn't be.
Cerberus, a vulture investor whose business model may be more dependent than others on deregulation and 'free markets', predictably gives overwhelmingly to Repugs. But Farallon, also heavily invested in distressed assets, gives to Dems.
Elliot synthesizes the above two in a way: they greenmail distressed companies and invest in (usually deeply discounted) sovereign debt. Not too surprising they support the current gang of thugs holding power.
The others are oddballs. DE Shaw is very tech/algorithm-centered. Caxton's Bruce Kovner is a Kool Aid-guzzling wacko (charter schools, The New York Sun, etc).
I'd say very few hedge fund guys have created durable institutions larger than themselves, and that the giving figures probably just reflect the founders' individual politics. But that is a sociologically inadequate answer, as the figures subsequently sent by Doug suggest.
__________________________________ Yahoo! Mail for Mobile Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail