A lot of people make the fatal mistake of conflating "good for business" with "good for startups." A lot of these pro-business candidates actually pass a lot of legislation which protects the incumbent businesses (who happens, coincidentally, to be a large political contributor).
This is particularly true with many of the Republican candidates as much of their leading contributors are large corporations (who startups hope to disrupt, such as cable companies, cellular networks, food industry, etc). And while the Democrats are certainly as corrupt, they often get their pay-offs from sectors which won't negatively impact startups as often (e.g. unions, education, alternative energy, etc). Although I will fully admit that they're both equally in the financial service's industry pocket.
At the moment I don't know for sure who is running. Plus on top of that the president doesn't actually have that much power (directly) to protect or hurt startups. A lot of the issues come from legislation passed by the houses or state stupidity.
This is particularly true with many of the Republican candidates as much of their leading contributors are large corporations (who startups hope to disrupt, such as cable companies, cellular networks, food industry, etc). And while the Democrats are certainly as corrupt, they often get their pay-offs from sectors which won't negatively impact startups as often (e.g. unions, education, alternative energy, etc). Although I will fully admit that they're both equally in the financial service's industry pocket.
At the moment I don't know for sure who is running. Plus on top of that the president doesn't actually have that much power (directly) to protect or hurt startups. A lot of the issues come from legislation passed by the houses or state stupidity.