After years of moaning that politicians don’t get technology – and, secretly, often quite liking like that – US engineering is watching the country’s 2020 vote more closely than any in recent memory. President Trump was ‘a worry’ in 2016 but there was also plenty of denial.

Tech uncommonly finds itself politically front-and-centre. Though it did not feature that explicitly in last night’s first debate among 10 of the Democratic Party’s presidential candidates, overarching concerns like trade and technology transfer relations with China and the US tax system were on the agenda.

And engineering companies have other concerns. What about the US’s image globally and its impact on how they operate in a global marketplace – or, if you prefer, what alternative is there to Trumpian nationalism? Also, what about the threat of increased social media regulation?

First, an important caveat. Before diving into any impressions, remember that right now the candidates’ arguments are designed to appeal to the Democratic base. You start by getting the nomination and likely pivot a little or a lot toward the centre once you have it. So, there will initially be some raw meat for the gallery if Campaign 2020 is now seen as properly under way.

Nevertheless, there were three main takeaway areas for technology from the inaugural debate.

1. China

With Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping still to sit down for bilateral talks at this week’s G20 Summit in Osaka, Japan, this first crop of Democrats faced the risk of punching water in criticising how the US President is handling the trade war and other Sino-US disputes. Things could greatly change in the next few days, even hours.

However, at the end of the debate it became clear that tensions will persist in some form whoever wins next year’s election. Asked what was the biggest “geopolitical” challenge now facing the US, four of the 10 candidates cited China (Obama administration Housing Secretary Julian Castro, former Maryland Congressman John Delaney, Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar and Ohio Congressman Tim Ryan).

It is true that four also cited climate change, including two of the better polling candidates on this part of the slate, Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren and former Texas Congressman Beto O’Rourke. However, the China hawks underlined a sometimes-overlooked point that most Democrats do not disagree with Trump for trying to take China to task, but rather over how he is doing it.

And technology also has justifiable concerns about China, IP theft by its companies and the conditions under which their subsidiaries in the country are expected to operate.

But again, the question will now get put, even to those candidates who did not highlight China specifically, “How do you plan to do things differently and more pragmatically?”.

The US is not going back to any status quo ante bellum commercium. Tonight’s second Democratic debate is almost certainly not going to change that either.

2. Trump debug

Some commentators were surprised that President Trump hardly featured by name during the debate. He himself tweeted a ‘BORING!’ comment on proceedings (a reflection of a consequently bruised ego, perhaps). But he did loom over them.

Anyone expecting a return to the kind of mud-slinging and embarrassing comparisons of manhood that bedeviled Republican debates last time was disappointed.

There were some tensions, mainly over healthcare, but the candidates typically strove to provide measured and thoughtful responses to what were pointed and well-phrased questions – even though the size of the field limited their main answers to just 60 seconds.

This targeted impression of ‘adults-in-the-room’ was not just about Trump. Lesser-known candidates (and, admit it, how many of the candidates mentioned so far are familiar to you) needed the opportunity to establish themselves as high-minded contenders. But the sense that US politics needs to regain some gravitas was common to the field, and communicating as much was aimed at middle- and working-class voters alike.

This kind of differentiation against Trump was hoped for by much of the tech community and elsewhere. It was pretty much delivered.

3. Pay your whack

There was some robust discussion about excessive corporate power and breaking up conglomerates, but there remains a broad spectrum of opinion among Democrats as to how far Washington should go (moreover, this first debate was seen as more indicative of the left of the party).

Where there does seem to be broader agreement is on tax. With Amazon again in the news for appearing to pay essentially no tax at all in the US, although under quite legal arrangements, New Jersey Senator Cory Booker cited them specifically during the debate. Booker, significantly, has been seen as one of his party’s less aggressive thinkers on the break-up question.

That probably will not raise too many smiles at technology’s C-level (though those further down corporate ladders may have other opinions). But a rollback of the Trump corporate tax cuts, and a more stringent regime, would appear likely if whoever wins the Democratic nomination goes on to the White House.

Then again, there won’t be that many Valley CEOs who will be surprised by the prospect. One privately acknowledged to me last month that while Amazon-type arrangements might well be legal they have become “not realistically sustainable”.

That is probably a good point on which to wrap up this review of the first Democratic debate because it did not contain any real surprises overall.

It would have been nice to hear these Democrats talk about the impact of AI, machine learning and robotics on both blue- and white-collar employment. One assumes they will do so in the months to come given than many of the 2016 Trump voters they want to win back are people who will be directly affected by these trends.

But for now, this was a chance for politics-watchers and tech leaders to catch their breath after so long on the Dragon Donald rollercoaster.

Though yes, tonight does bring us Debate Two with Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders among others, so maybe tomorrow’s column will be one, long mea culpa.

If you want to take a deeper dive, a complete transcript of the debate is available here.

After years of moaning that politicians don’t get technology – and, secretly, often quite liking like that – US engineering is watching the country’s 2020 vote more closely than any in recent memory. President Trump was ‘a worry’ in 2016 but there was also plenty of denial.

Tech uncommonly finds itself politically front-and-centre. Though it did not feature that explicitly in last night’s first debate among 10 of the Democratic Party’s presidential candidates, overarching concerns like trade and technology transfer relations with China and the US tax system were on the agenda.

And engineering companies have other concerns. What about the US’s image globally and its impact on how they operate in a global marketplace – or, if you prefer, what alternative is there to Trumpian nationalism? Also, what about the threat of increased social media regulation?

First, an important caveat. Before diving into any impressions, remember that right now the candidates’ arguments are designed to appeal to the Democratic base. You start by getting the nomination and likely pivot a little or a lot toward the centre once you have it. So, there will initially be some raw meat for the gallery if Campaign 2020 is now seen as properly under way.

Nevertheless, there were three main takeaway areas for technology from the inaugural debate.

1. China

With Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping still to sit down for bilateral talks at this week’s G20 Summit in Osaka, Japan, this first crop of Democrats faced the risk of punching water in criticising how the US President is handling the trade war and other Sino-US disputes. Things could greatly change in the next few days, even hours.

However, at the end of the debate it became clear that tensions will persist in some form whoever wins next year’s election. Asked what was the biggest “geopolitical” challenge now facing the US, four of the 10 candidates cited China (Obama administration Housing Secretary Julian Castro, former Maryland Congressman John Delaney, Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar and Ohio Congressman Tim Ryan).

It is true that four also cited climate change, including two of the better polling candidates on this part of the slate, Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren and former Texas Congressman Beto O’Rourke. However, the China hawks underlined a sometimes-overlooked point that most Democrats do not disagree with Trump for trying to take China to task, but rather over how he is doing it.

And technology also has justifiable concerns about China, IP theft by its companies and the conditions under which their subsidiaries in the country are expected to operate.

But again, the question will now get put, even to those candidates who did not highlight China specifically, “How do you plan to do things differently and more pragmatically?”.

The US is not going back to any status quo ante bellum commercium. Tonight’s second Democratic debate is almost certainly not going to change that either.

2. Trump debug

Some commentators were surprised that President Trump hardly featured by name during the debate. He himself tweeted a ‘BORING!’ comment on proceedings (a reflection of a consequently bruised ego, perhaps). But he did loom over them.

Anyone expecting a return to the kind of mud-slinging and embarrassing comparisons of manhood that bedeviled Republican debates last time was disappointed.

There were some tensions, mainly over healthcare, but the candidates typically strove to provide measured and thoughtful responses to what were pointed and well-phrased questions – even though the size of the field limited their main answers to just 60 seconds.

This targeted impression of ‘adults-in-the-room’ was not just about Trump. Lesser-known candidates (and, admit it, how many of the candidates mentioned so far are familiar to you) needed the opportunity to establish themselves as high-minded contenders. But the sense that US politics needs to regain some gravitas was common to the field, and communicating as much was aimed at middle- and working-class voters alike.

This kind of differentiation against Trump was hoped for by much of the tech community and elsewhere. It was pretty much delivered.

3. Pay your whack

There was some robust discussion about excessive corporate power and breaking up conglomerates, but there remains a broad spectrum of opinion among Democrats as to how far Washington should go (moreover, this first debate was seen as more indicative of the left of the party).

Where there does seem to be broader agreement is on tax. With Amazon again in the news for appearing to pay essentially no tax at all in the US, although under quite legal arrangements, New Jersey Senator Cory Booker cited them specifically during the debate. Booker, significantly, has been seen as one of his party’s less aggressive thinkers on the break-up question.

That probably will not raise too many smiles at technology’s C-level (though those further down corporate ladders may have other opinions). But a rollback of the Trump corporate tax cuts, and a more stringent regime, would appear likely if whoever wins the Democratic nomination goes on to the White House.

Then again, there won’t be that many Valley CEOs who will be surprised by the prospect. One privately acknowledged to me last month that while Amazon-type arrangements might well be legal they have become “not realistically sustainable”.

That is probably a good point on which to wrap up this review of the first Democratic debate because it did not contain any real surprises overall.

It would have been nice to hear these Democrats talk about the impact of AI, machine learning and robotics on both blue- and white-collar employment. One assumes they will do so in the months to come given than many of the 2016 Trump voters they want to win back are people who will be directly affected by these trends.

But for now, this was a chance for politics-watchers and tech leaders to catch their breath after so long on the Dragon Donald rollercoaster.

Though yes, tonight does bring us Debate Two with Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders among others, so maybe tomorrow’s column will be one, long mea culpa.

If you want to take a deeper dive, a complete transcript of the debate is available here.