I was at Intel Vision this week. Increasingly, that company seems a lot like the old Andy Grove Intel with one big, critical exception: It lacks a marketing effort similar to what Dennis Carter drove, which is why Intel isn’t getting credit for much of the incredible work it’s doing. I think Intel should take a page from Louis Gerstner’s IBM turnaround book and fund a similar marketing effort or the pressure on my friend Pat Gelsinger will eventually become catastrophic. Pat was one of the folks who helped me get started as an industry analyst, and he remains one of my favorite people to chat and work with.
However, what I want to talk about was a fascinating interview Gelsinger did with Bruce Mehlman. I’ve been an analyst for most of my career. Not only was this a major part of my undergraduate and graduate work, but I also went to the IBM university and held a variety of analyst and analyst-like jobs in that company, as well as owned one of the largest analysis budgets there. Mehlman is an excellent analyst, but he isn’t an industry or competitive analyst. He’s a political analyst.
While I disagree with his conclusion that Trump will win the U.S. election, I’m not a political analyst. Mehlman could defend his position better than I could defend mine. It would be fun, though likely pointless to debate that outcome with him. He seems like he’d be an interesting guy to chat and debate with, and analysts kind of live for experiences like that. However, after listening to him, I came around to his conclusion that it wouldn’t matter because the bigger issue is the massive dissatisfaction people have with government, and that this dissatisfaction is likely to result in the kind of changes, potentially good and bad, that will result from that dissatisfaction.
By the way, Mehlman also concluded that AI trends will continue under both administrations.
Why Trump Wins
Mehlman’s analysis wasn’t wrong. He pointed out that, unlike prior cycles, we have been bouncing between parties a lot, and people are getting increasingly pissed about the lack of progress. Seventy-five percent are upset with the presidential choice, and 85% are dissatisfied with Congress. In fact, according to his research, the only agency most people trust is the military. Historically, this results in a “throw the bums out” response, and, sadly, Biden is the guy in office (though the folks in Congress are not any safer). To be clear, his prediction on Trump is based on history, and he admitted he thinks this could easily go the other way.
Where I disagree with Mehlman’s prediction is that we’ve never had a candidate in such legal peril as Trump is. In prior waves, even the hint of a scandal killed candidates. Trump is like “scandals ‘r us” and he increasingly appears unhinged while crippling his own party. If Trump weren’t Trump, I think he might win, but Trump is, in fact, Trump, so I hope that makes the difference.
Why I’m No Longer Worrying
Mehlman didn’t say “don’t vote,” but one of his messages is that regardless of who wins, there are going to be massive changes. He mentioned the huge demonstrations that resulted in women getting the vote, the creation of anti-trust laws and changes in the 1970s that resulted from the unpopular Vietnam War. I lived through the latter, and those demonstrations make most of the ones we’ve seen this decade look trivial. Cities literally burned.
This time (and I found this very interesting), Mehlman argued that it looks like both parties are trying to lose. The Republicans are mostly focused on shooting themselves in the foot, and Democrats aren’t even competitive against a guy with over 80 indictments in a party that is getting its talking points from Russia. It really looks like neither one has a clue how to win an election, which would be far more fun to watch if I lived in Finland, the happiest place on earth.
But Mehlman’s point was that with this level of dissatisfaction in both parties, there are going be changes, major changes, that will result from the election. They may not be instant and all of them may not initially be good, but historically we could end up in a better place. People are talking about term limits, actually fixing the voting system, and helping more people vote. More people are active in politics, as well. The kids coming up are seeing this mess and are dissatisfied with both parties, which also supports the conclusion that needed change is coming.
Of course, we should certainly vote. Mehlman wasn’t suggesting sitting the election out, but he was suggesting we shouldn’t worry as much about this election. If history repeats itself, things will get better regardless of who wins. We’ll get through this.
Wrapping Up:
Politics aside, I’ve learned a lot of surprising things at events like Intel Vision over the years. For instance, over a decade ago at a Dell World event, there was a speaker who predicted, pretty accurately, the AI and robotics wave that surprised most everyone else when it hit. These non-product related presentations from experts we normally don’t see or meet with provide information and context that allow us to anticipate changes and prepare for them, as well as putting things like the coming election in perspective. I know a lot of folks blow these off as unimportant. However, for me, they have often had far more strategic and personal value than the transitory product briefs that occupy most of my time. The old CIO presentations at the end of Intel’s old IDC were fascinating and gave me views of future technology that I still use today. NVIDIA’s Jensen Huang’s keynotes are like windows into the future. In this case, Bruce Mehlman removed one of the biggest things I’ve admittedly been over obsessing about, though sadly, that concern has now been replaced by the emergence of Russia’s doomsday submarine. I wonder if Musk still has room on his Mars flight?
