Marc Benioff, the billionaire CEO of Salesforce and a stalwart Democratic donor, found himself at the center of a political and social storm this week after suggesting that President Donald Trump should send the National Guard to San Francisco to address public safety concerns. The comment, made in a phone interview with the New York Times prior to October 17, 2025, triggered a cascade of criticism from political leaders, business peers, and the broader San Francisco community, eventually prompting Benioff to issue a public apology and attempt to clarify his stance.
Benioff’s initial remarks landed with a thud in a city long known for its progressive politics and skepticism toward federal intervention. Speaking to the New York Times, Benioff expressed support for the Trump administration’s approach to deploying federal troops in Democrat-led cities, saying, “We don’t have enough cops, so if they can be cops, I’m all for it.” According to CNBC, his comments were made in the context of the annual Dreamforce conference, which brought an estimated 50,000 attendees to downtown San Francisco during the week of October 13-17, 2025. Benioff later explained that his suggestion came from “an abundance of caution around the event.”
The backlash was swift and fierce. Local leaders, including San Francisco Mayor Daniel Lurie, California Governor Gavin Newsom, and Representative Nancy Pelosi, publicly rejected the notion of federal troops patrolling the city’s streets. They pointed to falling crime rates and increased police hiring as evidence that local efforts were working. Governor Newsom and San Francisco politicians emphasized that federal troops were not welcome, with Newsom holding a press conference to reinforce the city’s autonomy and progress. District Attorney Brooke Jenkins was particularly direct, accusing Benioff of supporting “government-sponsored violence against US citizens,” as reported by Breitbart News and the New York Times.
Within Benioff’s own circle, the fallout was immediate. Ron Conway, a prominent venture capitalist known for backing companies like Google, Airbnb, and Stripe, resigned from the board of the Salesforce Foundation on October 16, 2025. Conway, a longtime Democratic donor and close friend of Benioff, cited a “misalignment of values” as his reason for stepping down. “I no longer recognize Marc Benioff,” Conway reportedly said, signaling a deep rift within the city’s tight-knit tech and philanthropic communities. Conway had also been a major donor to Kamala Harris’ 2024 presidential campaign and was known for championing progressive causes in the Bay Area.
Benioff’s comments also caught the attention of national and tech industry figures on both sides of the political aisle. Elon Musk, who has become increasingly vocal in his support for Trump’s policies, quickly amplified Benioff’s statement on social media. Musk described downtown San Francisco as a “drug zombie apocalypse,” echoing the president’s own harsh assessment of the city. President Trump himself weighed in, calling San Francisco “a mess” and openly considering the deployment of the National Guard. David Sacks, a longtime friend of Elon Musk and Trump’s AI and crypto czar, extended an invitation to Benioff to join the Republican party, posting, “Dear Marc @Benioff, if the Democrats don’t want you, we would be happy for you to join our team. Cancel culture is over, and we are the inclusive party.”
Faced with mounting criticism and the threat of further division, Benioff took to X (formerly Twitter) on October 17, 2025, to retract his earlier statements. “Having listened closely to my fellow San Franciscans and our local officials, and after the largest and safest Dreamforce in our history, I do not believe the National Guard is needed to address safety in San Francisco,” Benioff wrote. He added, “My earlier comment came from an abundance of caution around the event, and I sincerely apologize for the concern it caused. It’s my firm belief that our city makes the most progress when we all work together in a spirit of partnership.”
The apology, while welcomed by some, did little to quell speculation about Benioff’s political future and the implications for Salesforce’s relationships with both government and the tech sector. As CNN reported, Benioff’s ties to Trump extended beyond his support for the National Guard deployment. Internal documents revealed by the New York Times purportedly show Salesforce pitching itself as a technology provider to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), suggesting its AI tools could help boost hiring, evaluate tips, and improve ICE investigations. Salesforce responded by noting that it has served the U.S. government under multiple administrations, including those of Barack Obama and Joe Biden.
Salesforce’s role as the largest federal government contractor among cloud software companies has only heightened scrutiny. The company holds contracts with multiple agencies and is reportedly seeking additional work with ICE to use artificial intelligence tools in expanding law enforcement capacity. This revelation has added a new layer of complexity to the debate, raising questions about the intersection of business, technology, and politics in an era of polarized national discourse.
For many in San Francisco, Benioff’s apology came as a necessary, if belated, step toward healing. The city had just hosted what Benioff described as the “largest and safest Dreamforce in our history,” an event that drew tens of thousands of visitors and showcased the city’s resilience. Yet the controversy has exposed deep divisions—between local and federal priorities, between tech leaders and public officials, and within the city’s own progressive community.
Some observers have noted that Benioff’s experience is emblematic of a broader shift in the Bay Area, where tech billionaires are increasingly willing to break with liberal orthodoxy, sometimes courting controversy in the process. As Bloomberg and Mercury News have pointed out, Benioff is only the latest in a string of high-profile tech leaders to find themselves at odds with the city’s political mainstream. The tension between public safety, civil liberties, and the role of federal intervention remains unresolved, with both sides fiercely defending their visions for San Francisco’s future.
Despite the uproar, Benioff’s walk-back may serve as a reminder of the power—and the peril—of public statements in the digital age. With every tweet and interview, influential figures like Benioff are forced to navigate a minefield of expectations, loyalties, and consequences. As the dust settles, the city’s challenges remain, but so does its capacity for debate and, perhaps, reconciliation.
In the end, Benioff’s apology underscores the importance of listening, adapting, and working together—a lesson that resonates far beyond the confines of San Francisco’s tech corridors.
