Topic: If Kamala Harris wins, Bitcoin will be fine. - page 3. (Read 1909 times)

If Trump wins you will see all of the billionaire Bitcoin whales dump their Bitcoin either immediately after or (if there is a temporary Trump-based rally on Bitcoin) they will wait a little bit to take as much profit as they can before bailing out.

Why? Because Trump promises to wreck the US economy and send us into a deep recession, which will cause a massive pullback from retail investors who will need to liquidate their Bitcoin in order to pay the bills after they lose their jobs (or are afraid of that happening).

Trump promises to put massive tariffs on imported goods, including a 60% tariff on goods from China. This will cause instant and painful inflation across the US economy. He promises to deport 20 million US residents, many of whom are workers concentrated in agriculture, hospitality, construction and meatpacking. This will skyrocket prices for all Americans at the retail level.

But most importantly, this will cause uncertainty which in turn will cause businesses to pull back investments and start laying people off--and again, businesses aren't going to wait for the negative effects to show themselves at the retail level: Trump's threats are enough to make businesses change their plans, which will trigger a recession.

Elon Musk has already told everybody he expects "temporary hardship" for the US economy if Trump wins.

You should take him at his word. Unlike Trump, Musk doesn't make up his own lies (he repeats Trump's lies, but that is different). He knows very well how the global economy works. Of course he's a billionaire so it's not like he's going to care if the US has a downturn.

And Musk will dump his Bitcoin too. He knows the score. And so will the other Bitcoin whales who have high-paid economic advisors.

Personally, if I were advising people, I would say that you should sell your Bitcoin now, and wait out the election season to get back in. It's possible you might miss 5% or 10% of gains by either Trump's temporary effects or Harris's long-term stability (i.e. Bitcoin just doing what it has been doing for the last few years).

But Bitcoin could also lose 90% or more of its value in a massive Wall Street sell-off caused by US political instability. The risk just isn't worth it.

Reminder: The thread title still is valid And that hasn't to do only with the fact that Harris mentioned cryptos in some few of her recent speeches and a campaign document.

I suppose the little drop to 68k and even below had to do with this poll showing Harris ahead in a state the Republicans thought was safe?

We could even construct a conspiracy theory: Some Trump supporters could be dumping every time when there are positive news about Harris, to scare Bitcoiners who want to vote Harris and pressure them to vote for Trump so they get their ATH ...

I guess they have the manipulation power for that, as the World's Fattest Fiat Whale (TM) is among them.

Of course that's just a joke Just remember:

- The US got really big in the Bitcoin world during Biden/Democrat administration. (TBH it was not purely his own merit, Xi did also help with his control freak paranoia ...)
- If Trump wins, shitcoin scams could become worse again, and people could turn away from crypto as a whole.

I'll answer both to these, but i don't think that those are gonna be answers, that you are looking for.

The fact that people are seeking for government support for something, that drives the value from the very idea of being resilient against governments oversight... that is still mind-boggling to me.

I don't think the main goal of bitcoin should be more global popularity. That seems forced, as it's popular as hell already. Nor the main goal should be pumping value to it with the help of a government. Let bitcoin itself prove to be valuable, so it will get as valuable as markets want it to be.

Frankly i am not sure. But if i had to guess, she probably understands the basics on a same level as majority of cryptocurrency holders, which isn't much. But i definitely think that she would have capacity to understand it deeper, if/when ever she has time to dig into it. And unlike trump, she is able to listen experts and advisors, so it wouldn't take long for her to comprehend it.

Although they are all financial markets, there are some differences: the gold market and the stock market are markets that have existed for hundreds of years and have reached maturity. Meanwhile, cryptocurrency is like a newborn baby and everything is still in its infancy, so it will need government support to mature. The gold and stock markets were able to mature as they are today thanks to government support, so bitcoin is no exception if we want it to develop like the other two markets.

What you say is not wrong but it is inevitable. Do you have any ideas to stop the government from interfering in the crypto industry? Do you have a solution to help bitcoin achieve global popularity and a market capitalization of tens of trillions of dollars like gold or stocks without the need for governments?


Do you think Harris knows everything about bitcoin?

Things aren't that simple. "Supporting cryptocurrencies" doesn't really mean anything. It's like saying someone is supporting gold, that someone is pro-stocks or pro-money. Question is what pro-crypto would even look like and from whose point of view.

Regulations for crypto can be seen as pro-crypto by legitimizing it, however it does mean tougher laws for it. And only recently, with mandatory kycs and proof of money trails people are starting to grasp what that means when crypto goes mainstream. So long this has reminded of early days of internet, being as bad and unorganized as it was. Newcomers don't even realize where we were just under 10 years ago. When first big crypto exchanges after mtgox started exit scamming, no one actually believed that anyone would go to jail for that.

And broad framework for current crypto regulations and aml laws were created during Trump's last presidency, they have just been tested and evolved more since. I can pretty much guarantee that Trump didn't read anything related to it back then, and haven't read since.

Also how can trump be pro-crypto, when he obviously haven't got a clue what the whole concept is?

When the political party changes, there is a big change in everything. Whatever Kamala Harris or Donald Trump comes to power will change things. Putting crypto currency as a positive and negative for a party will change the political turn and harm crypto. If someone really supports crypto and not just for political reasons then he will be far ahead of others.

Currently Trump's support for Bitcoin is definitely positive towards crypto. If he wins then as a crypto lover I will definitely support Trump. But I am worried about how positive these leaders will really be after coming to the power.

I'd like to know the reasons of this assumption. If you want you can explain them.

Under Trump (2016-20) we had the following numbers regarding GDP growth: 2.5% (2017), 3% (2018), 2.5% (2019) and -2.2 (2020).

Under Biden's tenure until now, we have (2021-23): 5.8% (2021), 1.9% (2022), and 2.5% (2023). Expectations for 2024 are also close to the 2-2.5% area.

(Source: World Bank).

Of course we need to ignore the years 2020 and 2021, because neither Trump nor Biden are the culprits of the COVID pandemic and the recovery in Biden's first year was also not entirely caused by his own merits. But in general, I see in both Trump's and Biden's tenures a "normal" evolution for the US economy, neither too strong nor too weak. Obama's two administrations had similar numbers, with the exception of his first year (2009) during the worldwide finance crisis, which of course was also not his fault because it started a year earlier.

If we assume that Harris continues Biden's policies, then the most rational prediction for 2025-29 is that the US economy continues its "normal" evolution, with growth rates roughly between 1,5% and 3%.

At least I see no catastrophic event on the horizon which could influence Bitcoin negatively.

I agree Bitcoin will be absolutely fine it’s America that will be screwed under Harris 😂 that retarded laughing cunt witch. Anywho the US will face a less friendly furthering of adoption to crypto and Bitcoin under her and Timmy. For the love of God though I hope Trump wins just so that we can all be better off including Bitcoin lol

I agree with you and OP that if Harris is elected bitcoin will be fine, just like under Biden even though he doesn't seem friendly to it. But if we had a president who actually liked and supported bitcoin, things would be much better. We will be able to grow exponentially and I believe that as a bitcoin investor, no one does not wish for that. That is why people went crazy when bitcoin also became a topic of discussion among politicians in this year's elections and people started showing support for the candidates.

I have seen some predictions that bitcoin will crash if Harris wins and skyrocket if Trump wins but I don't believe that bullshit. No one can break bitcoin but between the choice of "fine" and "better", I don't think why we should choose "fine".

A President has many ministers, many governmental staffs who are responsible technically to help him/ her and no person can know everything about finance, technology just because he or she is a President.

I am not focusing on it too technically but I think about it like this. Will Bitcoin be good or bad with Kamala Harris as a President of the United States?

Let's think about how the USA economy will be if Kamala Harris is the President?
I don't know what you think but I think the economy will be more terrible under her administration and because of big impacts of USA on the world, if its economy is terrible, in recession for example, the rest of world will be affected seriously too.

Will Bitcoin be fine in that scenario?
Maybe Bitcoin market will have very big shocks like what happened in Covid, after the WHO announcement that it is officially assessed as a pandemic, Bitcoin lost 40% or 50% of its price, I recall it from memory, not check details.

In long term, Bitcoin will be fine but in short term, we will have market massacre.

The list I posted was a summary of Miller's article on Coindesk. If you'd read the post until the end you would have seen that I don't agree with all of his points, or only partly.

Regarding the cloud storage video, the clip was obviously taken out of context. Here's the entire quote (it's from 2010). Harris was not explaining the technical side of cloud storage but implications for an old privacy model from the Fourth Amendment, where everything privacy-related was explained with the analogy of a house.

"It's no longer in a physical place" is obviously wrong technically but it can be perfectly explained with the fact that cloud data normally is stored on several servers ("places") simultaneously, and from the point of view of an user, it's not longer in "your house".

Regardless of Kamala Harris' knowledge about technology/IT (something I can't evaluate), as a president she would not be in charge of the technical details of a tech-education policy. Not even her ministers (although from these I would expect at least a bit of detail knowledge). The real knowledge is normally at secretary level (i.e. one step below ministers in the hierarchy) and below.

Trump has absolutely no idea what Bitcoin is, he doesn't even know how to pay with it and asks others for assistance. He has no idea about promises that he throws away.

lol, that's so true He is just a populist, he thinks that he is doing good by promising Bitcoin users that the rest of the Bitcoins will be mined in the USA but in reality, all he does is that every Bitcoin enthusiasts sees how fake he is with his promises and how he has absolutely no idea what he is talking about.

Harris and education? He doesn't know what Cloud Storage is, check this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2SLyBL2kdM
I don't like the idea of uniting Harris and Education together

It doesn't make anything more likely to be honest with you. Both candidates are one of the most terrible candidates on planet earth and it's a pity that the United States is in such a bad condition.
I definitely respect your opinion but honestly, that's what I think.

What made you decide that Kamala doesn't pay attention to the crypto sector? There's nothing special about it now, but right before the elections, there will be such loud cries about crypto that your ears will start to curl up.

I want to emphasize that Trump is more of a populist than a man of real action. Yes, of course, he signed some laws, but what about Bitcoin? Will there be concrete steps in the legislative field?

Listen I agree with you, Bitcoin is decentralised anyways, even if the US doesn't support it, or the Democratic party releases policies that are not supportive or in favour of cryptocurrency, nothing will kill Bitcoin. It's just good that Bitcoin is getting any kind of media attention with Trump. Any publicity is good.

Could a Harris victory even be better for Bitcoin than a Trump victory?

G Clay Miller, a Democrat who is campaigning for the Crypto4Harris project wrote recently an article on Coindesk explaining possible reasons:

- Trump didn't act at all crypto-friendly in his tenure from 2016 to 2020, he even started "Operation Hidden Treasure", a pre-coursor to Chokepoint 2.0. His "180 degree turn" is at least dubious.
- Trump doesn't understand that Bitcoin is decentralized, he wants to "Americanize" it by government action - as if Bitcoin was some US state enterprise, lol.
- Trump's move can be explained as an attempt to attract donors like the Winklevii Twins.
- Harris' educational proposals could increase innovations in technology by young Americans, including blockchain/Bitcoin.
- Harris proposes startup credits, which also could help the crypto industry.
- Harris' past as a districtal attorney makes it more likely that she's interested in the rule of law, with predictable and stable regulations also for the crypto industry.

I disagree a bit with the first point. I would not be surprised if Trump (if he wins) would indeed introduce some crypto-friendly regulations, otherwise he risks losing popularity with about 50 million voters. But the second point is completely true, Trump proposes things he can't really influence as a president. For example, Miller already mentioned that he proposes to fire Gensler from the SEC, something the president simply can't do according to American laws.

Regarding the Harris proposals, I think the connection between them and a healthy Bitcoin ecosystem is a bit vague. I can see some potential, but I doubt it will define Bitcoin's success or not.

So my stance holds: I think it will be nearly irrelevant who wins the US presidential election. In neither case I expect actions so hostile that they could harm Bitcoin's adoption.

I agree, I really don't see Kamala winning having any sort of large impact on bitcoin or the price of bitcoin.  It just like with every presidential election people tend to over-blow how much of an impact things really will have when a new president makes it in to office.  The is especially seen in the stock markets and something I heard all of the time in my job.  The data back up that it's really not the case, that the Presidents don't do "damage" as much as some thing they will.

Donald Trump has literally started campaigning on Bitcoin and is promising all kinds of Bitcoin development. But time will tell what kind of action will be taken on Bitcoin after coming to power. However, Kamala Harris has not made any promises on Bitcoin in the run-up to the election, but she has also been wary of crypto-currencies for quite some time now. However, two candidates are very serious about cryptocurrencies.

Kamala may not be as pro-crypto as Trump looks like, it's obvious that Trump "acts" more pro-crypto and I am sure that he is, but of course that depends on the love he gets. That's the difference between the two, crypto people could love or hate Kamala and yet she will just keep doing the right thing she should be doing and that's following the law.

However, it matters if crypto people like or hate Trump because if crypto people love Trump then he will do more than he can and pressure other government agencies to just put some favourable rulings against crypto and promote it, but IF crypto people dislike him? He will go as far as trying to ban it completely. That dude works on emotions and nothing else so it's quite fun to see him go mad when he doesn't get love, that happened with many things before and I think it's expected that we are seeing him change his views depending on how much love he gets and he finds whatever the maximum amount he could be praised as his stance, so it constantly changes.

Kamala Harris has finally breaks silence on crypto:
She has spoken publicly about crypto for the first time, pledging support for the industry while stressing consumer protections.
She also said they will partner together with cryptocurrency to invest in America’s competitiveness and invest in America’s future.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/kamala-harris-finally-breaks-silence-crypto-during-fundraiser

Harris finally mentioned cryptocurrencies in her latest statement, and this is the first time she has mentioned cryptocurrencies in her campaign: she said her administration would encourage technologies like AI and digital assets, while protecting consumers and investors.

Although nothing too impressive and we don't know exactly what her intentions are and what she will do if elected. But I don't deny that this is the most positive sign since the election so far because she has largely ignored and disinterested in everything related to crypto.

Many people were worried that bitcoin would face many obstacles if she won but with this news I hope she will change her mind and be more friendly to crypto. It doesn't matter who wins, what matters most is the growth of bitcoin and the cryptocurrency industry.





https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-09-22/harris-vows-to-grow-ai-crypto-industries-in-pitch-to-nyc-donors?srnd=energy