Topic: How do you think crypto donations to campaigns might shape Bitcoin regulation? (Read 440 times)
October 25, 2024, 04:39:36 PM
I do not think that they're going to be affected with such decisions in relation to altcoins that are donated to them. What they will remember is that someone donated to their campaign and that's it. It won't amaze them whether it's in the form of any altcoins or Bitcoins because what looks to them is that they're just supporters that are willing to place in money so that they can work on their campaign. And there's always the friends of friends that are willing to donate and help for that cause without the need to let them know that they have donated. Whether Trump or Kamala would say "I will do this....crypto/bitcoin blah blah blah". It's still about "I will" and it could possibly change and forgotten because there are other more important issues for them to do and solve.
October 25, 2024, 03:31:54 PM
I read that "Ripple Labs Founder Donates Another $10 Million in XRP to Support Kamala Harris," and we all know Ripple still has that ongoing SEC case. By principle, politicians shouldn't take gifts that could mess with their decision-making. So, what if Kamala becomes president? Ripple will definitely expect something back for their support.
And what if politicians take donations in altcoins, like how Trump also received some? Does that mean their decisions on regulations could end up favoring altcoins over Bitcoin?
And what if politicians take donations in altcoins, like how Trump also received some? Does that mean their decisions on regulations could end up favoring altcoins over Bitcoin?
All this political donations will not change anything. Bitcoin aside, in the previous elections that has been held in the US and other influencial countries, the campaign promises are just like waste of saliva people used and forget and I think this is another campaign that is going to be left in the dark, those politicians are very wise with their choice of endorsement because they fear the fire back that will comes back to them, so this changes nothing.
Trump was pro Bitcoin eventually when he wasn't in the office again and was campaign like he was going to pass a bill for Bitcoin to have a place in the US but let's wait and see him win the election, that's when you will realize how terrible he is a president and a leader who campaign with Bitcoin. Politicians are shameless people that forgwt easily but whoever wins the election, it changes nothing about Bitcoin.
October 25, 2024, 02:51:59 PM
But maybe the biggest change, if Kamala decides to help, could be making Bitcoin a legal tender. That could set the stage for other countries to follow suit.
Do you truly believe that will happen in a country like the U.S., i do not think so, the U.S. cannot make another currency a legal tender alongside the dollar. If we are to get another country that will make BTC a legal tender after El Salvador, then i doubt that it will be a first world country, it will probably be a third world country. 
October 25, 2024, 01:24:33 PM
And what if politicians take donations in altcoins, like how Trump also received some? Does that mean their decisions on regulations could end up favoring altcoins over Bitcoin?
If you look at it from the perspective of a decision that would alter the course of coins as we have it, where altcoins would be favored by a seating government due to donations from a campaign perspective, I doubt we would have that. In fact, it would be an inter conflict that would exist between altcoins than Bitcoin.It’s also unlikely that, there would be some subjective to certain cryptocurrency over the other. I mean, where would they look at it? From a point of ease to regulate or something else?
At most, they would project one above the other and that’s the height of it.
October 25, 2024, 12:32:14 PM
No it will not. In the political scene those things are normal. They are doing to register their present to the government so that the government policies will not against them and not to over take bitcoin. Government decision will not over shadow bitcoin. And the only thing that can over take bitcoin is the population of the altcoins. If the users are more than the users of bitcoin then the altcoin will definitely overpower bitcoin and not the government policies. Bitcoin store of value is very high and only this year investors have made profit many times. But investors of altcoins like Ethereum even loses the more so they can't pass bitcoin in any form. Since everyone want their projects to be known, they would donate to support the candidate of their choice. But you have to know that bitcoin has nobody to donate to but it is still leading the cryptocurrency ecosystem. It is only the users donate their portion of bitcoin to support the candidate of their choice and not the founder or related but the users like me and you.
hero member
Activity: 770
Merit: 538
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
October 25, 2024, 11:55:25 AM
What ever influence a politician must have impacted in any altcoins, it can not make such altcoins to be the best choice of all investors. Every investor still have their preference for what ever coins or token they want to invest into and the politicians can not detect or force people on the token they should buy or not.
The donation of ripple is actually because they need something in return but I doubt if kamala can win the election.
Politicians could only change a persons idea based on how much they love that politicians. I mean think about it this way, if you are very much in love with Kamala Harris and you love her so much that you are going out and trying to get a lot of votes for her and work everyday to get her some voters basically working for her every single day, then you are going to end up with a lot of people like that investing into Ripple because how Ripple is investing in her election as well.The donation of ripple is actually because they need something in return but I doubt if kamala can win the election.
However, if you are a person who doesn't care about her or any other politician then you are not going to care, then it's all about if you like Ripple or not, if you do then you can get it and if you don't then you won't, on the other hand if you are a Trump supporter then you are going to sell any Ripple you have and never buy one neither. This is why that is what matters and we should be considering how this is going to be the most important part and not going to matter much.
I understand what you means and you are actually right about it, it's quite easy to convince your followers to do something and they can just agree to do it freely because of the love they have for you but what I mean is that, it is not also possible that a politician can just make all investors to buy into one altcoin. Many persons will still have their choices on other coins.
October 25, 2024, 07:45:32 AM
What ever influence a politician must have impacted in any altcoins, it can not make such altcoins to be the best choice of all investors. Every investor still have their preference for what ever coins or token they want to invest into and the politicians can not detect or force people on the token they should buy or not.
The donation of ripple is actually because they need something in return but I doubt if kamala can win the election.
Politicians could only change a persons idea based on how much they love that politicians. I mean think about it this way, if you are very much in love with Kamala Harris and you love her so much that you are going out and trying to get a lot of votes for her and work everyday to get her some voters basically working for her every single day, then you are going to end up with a lot of people like that investing into Ripple because how Ripple is investing in her election as well.The donation of ripple is actually because they need something in return but I doubt if kamala can win the election.
However, if you are a person who doesn't care about her or any other politician then you are not going to care, then it's all about if you like Ripple or not, if you do then you can get it and if you don't then you won't, on the other hand if you are a Trump supporter then you are going to sell any Ripple you have and never buy one neither. This is why that is what matters and we should be considering how this is going to be the most important part and not going to matter much.
October 23, 2024, 04:44:07 PM
And what if politicians take donations in altcoins, like how Trump also received some? Does that mean their decisions on regulations could end up favoring altcoins over Bitcoin?
Politicians favour influent and powerful entities which support them financially. It has been always like this. The most likely outcome is that decentralization loses strength in crypto industry, as politicians become adept of one or another concept of cryptocurrency, while rejecting or difficulting the usage of other cryptos which aren't interesting for them.Not only regards cryptocurrencies, but also regards crypto services you can expect movements like this. For an example, I can mention Binance exchange which employeed a nephew of economy minister from my country to one of the main spots of the company inside our territory.
People who have such ideas and implement them are considered the smart strategists of our time, although in fact they are just vassals of power.
hero member
Activity: 770
Merit: 538
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
October 23, 2024, 01:45:15 PM
I read that "Ripple Labs Founder Donates Another $10 Million in XRP to Support Kamala Harris," and we all know Ripple still has that ongoing SEC case. By principle, politicians shouldn't take gifts that could mess with their decision-making. So, what if Kamala becomes president? Ripple will definitely expect something back for their support.
And what if politicians take donations in altcoins, like how Trump also received some? Does that mean their decisions on regulations could end up favoring altcoins over Bitcoin?
And what if politicians take donations in altcoins, like how Trump also received some? Does that mean their decisions on regulations could end up favoring altcoins over Bitcoin?
What ever influence a politician must have impacted in any altcoins, it can not make such altcoins to be the best choice of all investors. Every investor still have their preference for what ever coins or token they want to invest into and the politicians can not detect or force people on the token they should buy or not.
The donation of ripple is actually because they need something in return but I doubt if kamala can win the election.
October 23, 2024, 01:27:28 PM
I read that "Ripple Labs Founder Donates Another $10 Million in XRP to Support Kamala Harris," and we all know Ripple still has that ongoing SEC case. By principle, politicians shouldn't take gifts that could mess with their decision-making. So, what if Kamala becomes president? Ripple will definitely expect something back for their support.
And what if politicians take donations in altcoins, like how Trump also received some? Does that mean their decisions on regulations could end up favoring altcoins over Bitcoin?
Definitely it will favour altcoins. Because already they are looking for possible means to reduce bitcoin to nothing, even though trump wins the election, bitcoin will still stand firm more than any cryptocurrency, its self explanatory that any other coins emulate from bitcoin and theirs no way they can excel more than bitcoin, bitcoin is like the father of all the cryptocurrencies today, so we all know that people is combining to boasts one particular altcoins that will supercedes bitcoin, which you and I know that it's impossible to achieve. And what if politicians take donations in altcoins, like how Trump also received some? Does that mean their decisions on regulations could end up favoring altcoins over Bitcoin?
October 23, 2024, 01:03:30 PM
And what if politicians take donations in altcoins, like how Trump also received some? Does that mean their decisions on regulations could end up favoring altcoins over Bitcoin?
You never know! Politicians are the most notorious kind of human beings in the world and they can do whatever they wish to do. Ripple didn't spend that donation as a charity. They will definitely expect something back from the administration of Kamala wins the election.
But I don't see them favouring altcoins over Bitcoin. All of them understand the power of Bitcoin and they also realise that it is impossible to dethrone Bitcoin. But when politicians are involved, you can expect the unexpected.
October 23, 2024, 12:02:52 PM
Of course donations can affect bitcoin's future. But Trump is already pro-crypto. He has attended the bitcoin conference unlike Kabala that is known for her anti-bitcoin policies. I think Trump even has a bitcoin donation address.
Take a look at that:
https://www.donaldjtrump.com/crypto
If you make a donation to Trump via crypto, this will probably affect his plans for crypto in the future. I mean he is already as pro crypto as a presidential candidate can get but maybe he will go even beyond that. If you are going to donate Trump's campaign you better do that using crypto that's all I am saying.
Take a look at that:
https://www.donaldjtrump.com/crypto
Quote
Now accepting crypto
Demonstrating President Trump’s success as a champion of American freedom and innovation, we proudly offer you a chance to contribute to the campaign with cryptocurrency. Saving our nation from Biden’s failures requires your support. As Biden piles regulations and red tape on all of us, President Trump stands ready to embrace new technologies that will Make America Great Again.
Demonstrating President Trump’s success as a champion of American freedom and innovation, we proudly offer you a chance to contribute to the campaign with cryptocurrency. Saving our nation from Biden’s failures requires your support. As Biden piles regulations and red tape on all of us, President Trump stands ready to embrace new technologies that will Make America Great Again.
If you make a donation to Trump via crypto, this will probably affect his plans for crypto in the future. I mean he is already as pro crypto as a presidential candidate can get but maybe he will go even beyond that. If you are going to donate Trump's campaign you better do that using crypto that's all I am saying.
legendary
Activity: 2422
Merit: 1083
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
October 23, 2024, 09:33:21 AM
I read that "Ripple Labs Founder Donates Another $10 Million in XRP to Support Kamala Harris," and we all know Ripple still has that ongoing SEC case. By principle, politicians shouldn't take gifts that could mess with their decision-making. So, what if Kamala becomes president? Ripple will definitely expect something back for their support.
I saw this news too, and honestly, I shook my head when I read it, it's absolutely certain that if kamala Harris eventually wins the US presidential election to become the president of US (which I personally pray it doesn't happen), ripple will definitely need a return of the favor, since what we actually talking about here is money, and not just money, but huge money, which such a donation, ripple is simply buying the conscience of kamala Harris, and I won't be surprised to see her favor ripple if for whatever reason, she became US president.
Quote
And what if politicians take donations in altcoins, like how Trump also received some? Does that mean their decisions on regulations could end up favoring altcoins over Bitcoin?
There is no way regulators in the government will favor Altcoins and leave bitcoin behind, not when several of them are heavily invested in bitcoin mostly.
October 23, 2024, 08:13:07 AM
I read that "Ripple Labs Founder Donates Another $10 Million in XRP to Support Kamala Harris," and we all know Ripple still has that ongoing SEC case. By principle, politicians shouldn't take gifts that could mess with their decision-making. So, what if Kamala becomes president? Ripple will definitely expect something back for their support.
And what if politicians take donations in altcoins, like how Trump also received some? Does that mean their decisions on regulations could end up favoring altcoins over Bitcoin?
As far as I know, it's legal in the USA for businesses and organizations to donate millions of dollars to politicians in exchange for winning, they'll do something in their favour, so I expect that Ripple donated 10$ Million in XRP to Kamala Harris because they expect something from her. I don't know what is this something.And what if politicians take donations in altcoins, like how Trump also received some? Does that mean their decisions on regulations could end up favoring altcoins over Bitcoin?
There haven't been crypto donations done before. I think that the next time there might be some regulations on Bitcoin and crypto donations but their decision won't favour altcoins over Bitcoin because they think about Bitcoin as an asset similar to Gold, which they'll probably invest in and save.
Btw regulations might be about the transparency of Bitcoin transactions. I think they'll have to declare who sent them the transaction and how much because imagine the president receiving Bitcoins from an unknown source or from a wallet that's tagged, that can quickly become a scandal.
October 23, 2024, 07:41:43 AM
I read that "Ripple Labs Founder Donates Another $10 Million in XRP to Support Kamala Harris," and we all know Ripple still has that ongoing SEC case. By principle, politicians shouldn't take gifts that could mess with their decision-making. So, what if Kamala becomes president? Ripple will definitely expect something back for their support.
Business owners can donate to political parties for many reasons. Elon Musk has committed close to $70 million to the reelection of former president Donald Trump. Musk is believed to like Trump's proposed tax policies and his stance on transgender and abortion. Trump has also promised to make him part of his team if he becomes president. Ripple's donation might be targeted at having a soft landing from the legal battle with the SEC. However, the US system is highly complex a just a donation might not be able to influence government decisions. We all know that Sam Bankman-Fried donated close to $100 million to political parties but it didn't stop FTX from going bankrupt and him going to jail.
Quote
And what if politicians take donations in altcoins, like how Trump also received some? Does that mean their decisions on regulations could end up favoring altcoins over Bitcoin?
Bitcoin is like the locomotive in the train, while altcoins are like the coaches. No matter how you try you cannot move the coaches without the engine. 
October 23, 2024, 07:32:11 AM
10 million will not affect the US elections or obligate the winner to implement a certain political direction, but I believe that what Chris Larsen did was for personal purposes or an attempt to pump XRP more than it was a real change.
In general, the news is not new, as there is:
- Billionaire Ripple founder has given more than $11.8 million to Harris campaign
- Harris PAC’s $1 million contribution from Ripple’s Chris Larsen shows crypto industry warming to VP
In general, the news is not new, as there is:
- Billionaire Ripple founder has given more than $11.8 million to Harris campaign
- Harris PAC’s $1 million contribution from Ripple’s Chris Larsen shows crypto industry warming to VP
October 23, 2024, 07:18:45 AM
I read that "Ripple Labs Founder Donates Another $10 Million in XRP to Support Kamala Harris," and we all know Ripple still has that ongoing SEC case. By principle, politicians shouldn't take gifts that could mess with their decision-making. So, what if Kamala becomes president? Ripple will definitely expect something back for their support.
And what if politicians take donations in altcoins, like how Trump also received some? Does that mean their decisions on regulations could end up favoring altcoins over Bitcoin?
The first rule for candidates who are currently fighting in politics is that any type of donation is not a problem, they don't care what they donate because as long as it can provide additional funds for the campaign it will always be accepted. Elon Musk as Trump winning team poured out $1 million for one person in a certain area who has the right to vote in the upcoming election and now it is worth more than $75 trillion.And what if politicians take donations in altcoins, like how Trump also received some? Does that mean their decisions on regulations could end up favoring altcoins over Bitcoin?
Kamala policy is very much against Bitcoin and it is in line with the Biden administration. However there are exceptions during the campaign period and she does not want to limit the voices of her supporters so donations from Ripple which is undergoing a long case are still welcomed. Maybe Ripple goal in becoming a donor is to make a special request if Kamala is elected later.
October 23, 2024, 06:44:57 AM
That could be true because they think that by donating to politicians, they can get a strong support from them. Politicians should not take gifts no matter what the reason. That can give different views from citizens and when they get elected and make a regulations that benefit one project, that will show to citizens that it is because of the gifts.
If those politicians don't want to relate to rumors or any news, they should be neutral and not receives anything from anyone. They should focus on their programs. When they get elected, they can learn more about crypto and make good regulations that will support crypto because of the benefits.
Well, we will see it later. Hopefully, that can give crypto more opportunity to gets more adoption by the people.
If those politicians don't want to relate to rumors or any news, they should be neutral and not receives anything from anyone. They should focus on their programs. When they get elected, they can learn more about crypto and make good regulations that will support crypto because of the benefits.
Well, we will see it later. Hopefully, that can give crypto more opportunity to gets more adoption by the people.
October 22, 2024, 09:42:47 PM
I read that "Ripple Labs Founder Donates Another $10 Million in XRP to Support Kamala Harris," and we all know Ripple still has that ongoing SEC case. By principle, politicians shouldn't take gifts that could mess with their decision-making. So, what if Kamala becomes president? Ripple will definitely expect something back for their support.
Ripple Labs supported Harris's election financially and also made the money available in XRP proves two points; It sends a message that Ripple is a viable crypto and For Harris to consider when becomes the present. Although this is not automatic support for XRP, nevertheless, the case could be thwarted if is there are vested interest in it. I even wonder why the case of Ripple is like this among others, though not criminal, let's see where it leads.Also, anyone can donate to any candidate of choice, it's no big deal, the main thing is for the money to be legit.
Quote
And what if politicians take donations in altcoins, like how Trump also received some? Does that mean their decisions on regulations could end up favoring altcoins over Bitcoin?
Not at all, I am sure he receives Bitcoin donations as well, the fight for crypto is for all of them. 
October 22, 2024, 04:54:57 PM
Or put it this way: if they don’t plan on giving anything back to crypto devs, they shouldn’t accept crypto donations, simple as that.
I don't know why you think accepting cryptocurrencies is different from "accepting any money from businesses".Without business funding, presidential campaigns would have much less money. There are countries like France where business donations indeed are banned, but in many it is seen as "normal". And if some business from "industry X" donates to a candidate, then often there is obviously an expectation that this may help the business, e.g. via "friendly" regulations.
I think however if Ripple expects "help" in the specific case of the SEC against them, that may be indeed illegal and a corruption case. However, it would be completely legal if the Congress after the election creates or changes legislation so it's friendly to Ripple. This is probably the intention of the donations: to create a friendly environment for the own lobbyists.
By the way, the president can't appoint the SEC chair on its own, he needs consent of the Senate. And he can't "fire" a chair while their mandate is still running.
Jump to: