Topic: New York Mayoral Candidates Turn to Crypto for Votes (Read 334 times)

I think that politicians do whatever it takes for a vote, from my experience I only say that a politician is very difficult to tell the truth, although I do not know what politics is like in the USA, I imagine that it is different and that there they have more credibility, however support that wants to make New York a crypto-friendly city, this if they actually comply with it would greatly help the price of BTC, not only will more people enter the BTC market, but the demand will grow in a short time, making the price rises much faster than normal, when entering the big apple I think that BTC will have a big bullish trend, or a very big rally.

This seeing it from the speculative point of view of the market, now seeing it from the point of view of adoption is too good a strategy to publicize technology and especially the best alternative economy.

Well, I’m not really surprised because politician is always ready to do anything during their time of campaign just to win election. It’s almost likely that most of these politicians are using cryptocurrency just as a way to convince people to vote for them and after that they are less likely to fulfil what they have promised. That’s why when you are voting for any politicians it’s always good to note their history and know the type of people they really are and know a lot of things about them before you vote for them.

If you don’t do that you end up voting for the wrong person. So, we shouldn’t let them deceive us with a promise that they’re going to make with cryptocurrency because the community of cryptocurrency is already growing whether these politicians are backing it or not.

Polis was part of the political panel when Charlie Lee (lite coin creator) etal were at the New York Panel (2014 ish?)


Jared Polis Tweet
@jaredpolis
·
Aug 5
There is an anti-#Crypto provision hidden in the massive infrastructure bill that would allow mass-surveillance of the crypto-economy. The Senate should adopt the Wyden/Toomey amendment to fix it.
Roads/bridges/trains = good
Destroying the digital token economy = not good

His response to Manchin in the article I linked

"Manchin wrote a letter in 2014 describing bitcoin as "suspect, if not outright detrimental" and called on federal regulators to ban its use before Americans get left "holding the bag on a valueless currency."
Polis responded to Manchin's letter by replacing all the instances of BTC in the note with "dollar bills" in a satirical call to ban the fiat currency."


I think it's important for politicians to make an attempt to understand crypto AND other technologies with the potential to change our daily lives: They are really bad at it.

Does anyone remember the congressional hearings for Bill Gates? The lack of knowledge our politicians had back then was cringeworthy and it hasn't seemed to change. 

maybe some of them just want to get relevant with the younger generation because this move may attract these younger voters. however, we will know if they are indeed serious with what they are seeking if after getting elected, they will still remember what they have promised. they know that crypto is somewhat getting the interest of a lot of people especially during this pandemic.

even so, I don't think this will have a significant impact considering that people in the crypto sphere are generally selective, and indeed believe it or not they will surely realize that this is only a sweetener. and sweeteners continue to be sweeteners because it is certain that this will lead to politics, which is where we can see politicians justifying any means to get votes.
and indeed the power of crypto is getting stronger and stronger even politics is trying hard to attract people in it.

if in the past most of the promises of prospective regional leaders were a matter of job vacancies, this time they have all started using crypto as an attraction for their political promises.  I see this is really a good move, they use technology or emerging trends as a political promise..

If they actually support bitcoins then it's different but if they are only turning to cryptocurrencies because of the fact that they are looking for some votes then I do think this is the worst that they can do. People would not even find them credible enough. The whole point is being able to understand the crypto world and being able to grab the concept of Bitcoins and other cryptocurrencies, but at the same time this shows us *how important cryptocurrencies are in this world right now* the importance is for sure prime and at the same time I do think that it's good if done in a limited manner with credibility in their words for sure.

I am not sure the leavers are going to Texas or Florida neither. So far desantis is hated as much as anyone and do not get me started on abbot. Sure New York is a horrible place as well but you do not leave a horrible place and go to another horrible place. Plus, a crypto person in Texas? I am not sure if Texas can handle one more mining corporation, look at what happened last winter. Long story short New yorkers leave but they leave for places that are a bit better than that.

I mean I understand the republican approach of "people run away from democrat places and come to republican places wohoo!! we are the best!" but nobody really buys that. Sorry :/ I wish it was true because we need better places in the world, I wish everywhere was a heaven in the entire world, but it is just not.

I would say that if crypto got big enough to be a topic in candidates promises then that's a great thing, think about how important it is to become a topic in a candidate showdown, usually that requires topic to be at least a 100k+ group in order to make sense, otherwise what's the point of it, like do you argue about the old building demolished and built new? Those type of small stuff do not get into these chats most of the time, or at least a small print stuff.

This shows that crypto became big and if one of them wins and actually does something about it, I can see wall street having a small crypto company part as well, because where else in the entire world would you put world's biggest exchanges? Imagine coinbase and binance and other similar big names having a building in wall street only because they were given lax laws to exist without any changes, that would be so awesome.

New York is so deep blue that they would elect Kim Jong Un if he stands as the mayoral candidate. So none of the other candidates other than Eric Adams have a realistic chance of victory. The only concern for Adams should be his tough primary race with Kathryn Garcia (where he edged ahead by less than 1% of the vote). The democrat base seems to be divided in NYC. On the other hand, Curtis Sliwa had a relatively easy win over Fernando Mateo in the GOP primary. That said, has any of these candidates promised to review the NY BitLicense? This restrictive regulation has stunted the growth of cryptocurrency in New York. Anyway... BitLicense was introduced by the state of New York, and not by the city of NY.

Hey, even though it's for propaganda, I'll gladly take it. Just that if people were to vote, hopefully, it wouldn't only be based on the crypto stuff, but rather the overall. It's a nice incentive to be added though if they ever want to vote for them. Still, if the only incentive was only concentrating on crypto, that might actually be a negative since there could possibly still be some internal issues that they should prioritize more, instead of crypto stuff. Just hope it isn't some empty stuff for the sake of getting votes though.

I'm not familiar enough with these individuals to know what they mean by their words.  So interpretation is quite important here.  Are they supportive of crypto in the way that most of us would prefer to see it integrated into society?  Or are they supportive of crypto in the way it's implemented by the "NY Bitlicense"?  Because those are effectively two different things.   

Too bad their focusing too much on crypto to garner votes when it shouldn't how it should be done in the first place, remember that there are other pressing issues in the city like systemic racism, rampant crimes and drug abuse and many other things that's more important to be solved than just hoping someone will vote for you just because you support crypto.

The myth of people fleeing New York has largely been debunked.  The data doesn't support the premise on any meaningful level.  While there is anecdotal stories of people leaving, there are also widespread ancedotal stories of people who have left returning.  When you drill down into hard data, the narrative falls apart.



https://archive.curbed.com/2020/7/13/21319909/coronavirus-urban-exodus-cities-moving-suburbs

https://www.businessinsider.com/new-york-city-san-francisco-urban-exodus-migration-myth-bofa-2021-4

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-10/wall-street-a-listers-fled-to-florida-many-are-eyeing-a-return

A huge percentage of votes come from people who are quite old enough to even bother about investing in bitcoin more so care about its implementation in their city features and infrastructures. This could be a good reason why still as of now you shouldn't focus on cryptocurrencies as the selling point of your project platforms as a politician running for candidacy since you'll prolly get nay'ed  by an angry mob of boomers. This is also a good reason why politicians who make cryptocurrencies their main selling point would lose in these elections. Everyone with half a brain would know the need to take politicians' words with a grain of salt since not a lot of them would be able to comply with their words. This along with the fact that we assume only a small percentage of cryptocurrency enthusiasts live in NYC and not a lot of them will vote.

Its more realistic to say if its going to happen it will be despite politics rather then because of politics, I agree its unlikely crypto swings the votes right now but to say never is ignoring all the negatives ongoing with failing currency standards for the ordinary person.   Also NYC is losing out on some tech business growth because of its overly harsh regime, I assumed this was done to protect traditional finance.   Of course crypto generally is global not likely to ever be based just in one city and so this explains why NYC is not interested in allowing such free competetion to occur without alot of resistance.

I think this will end in vain because we all know that the community or people who are in crypto are mostly very careful people and of course they will not be fooled by this.
this is just a lure to smooth politics from them and whatever promises they want to implement, the main goal is one, namely politics that justifies all means.
indeed it would be great if it could happen in NYC but if based on tough politics I choose not to support it.

I do not believe the others because they have no track record of supporting bitcoin before. However, Andrew Yang is one person I would stand behind, he may or may not be a good candidate that is upon you to decide and since I am not an American citizen I have absolutely no f- to give about who you guys pick for New York mayor.

However if the question is how true they are to their word? I would say that Andrew Yang would definitely turn New York to a bitcoin/crypto hub because he personally is invested into it, even if not for a better ulterior motive of supporting people, he may do it just because he is invested in it himself so he may want to get himself even richer by doing that, so even if it is selfish reasons, that is still a reason to believe he is telling the truth.

I saw the news the other day, nice positive news, but this headline made to think about it more. So definitely I like the headline "turn to crypto for votes" and probably that's totally true! After all, the New York crypto scene must be big, I tried to search for some numbers but I couldn't find anything specific for New York only! Anyway, I assume there are many people in the New York state who are actively using crypto!
Well, if this candidate wins it will be another win for Bitcoin and crypto! Win by the win and we will reach the top, it's how you become the number one!

I am optimistic, and I look favorably on the mayors' initiatives in wanting their governments to count on integrating bitcoin and cryptocurrencies to make cities more modern.

Miami is the best role model in the United States. You remember the launch on June 08, 2021 of their Miami Coin (MIA) coin.
The project could be successful but the important thing is that a city that is friendly with bitcoin and the cryptocurrencies necessary to boost the economy, create new jobs and modernize cities with the technological advances that cryptocurrencies attract.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/civic-engagement-and-crypto-miami-unveils-its-own-digital-coin

That was Andrew Yang but he has seen his lose and that's why he has cancelled his presidential run. And with all of these, they're all easy to talk about it and have the topic brought to the people and say that they'll do this and they'll do that.
We're no longer young with politics and we've seen a lot of them promised about what's with the trend and current issues. They're all bringing that to the table and nothing other than all for the votes.

That's just a bad decision through and through, the crypto community is meticulous and I am pretty sure that one wrong move from this candidate is going turn the crypto against him. Plus, focusing on crypto alone won't get you anywhere because it's not like it's a fundamental issue that can help you win the hearts of the voters during the campaign.

Ahh, I would love to pay my taxes to EMI's with crypto currencies because that will literally weigh out my burden from crypto earnings. I am saying the context that, today I literally have to think twice whether I should convert my crypto earnings into fiat or not because in my country it is still illegal and the decision is yet to be made. This makes my crypto asset virtually inaccessible to be used in the real world. If they are okay with it, then dam, I am gonna scan the address. 


That is an eye catchy statement and as far as I know New York is pretty great economic country and can bring more attention to the crypto usage. Being the costly its gonna make crypto enthusiast more happy about the investments. It won't be far when they will reach out to wall street as well. 

Well, as much as I love cryptocurrency and I am fan of it, I don’t think that’s what I am really going to be expecting from them. Whether they do it or not, cryptocurrency is still going to thrive, so that’s the least thing I would expect. But it’s still good that they have recognized it and have plans to move the cryptocurrency community forward.

But that aside, it’s not just by talking about cryptocurrency, there are lots of other vital things that people are expecting from them, so what do they have to offer in those vital areas? After they have talked about cryptocurrency, what next? That’s the question that follows. It’s the other things that follows that determines whether they will get the vote or not.

Wow, if the candidates from both parties are talking about cryptos, it prpbably means that this is now a hot topic that matters to the electorate, and that people want favorable regulations in New York. And it seems to me that these are not unpopular candidates trying to get some hype; they're actually the main contestants. So either way, it's going to be a win for the local crypto community if, of course, things like crypto regulations can be done at the local level and the federal authorities won't mind things like taxes in Bitcoin.

Well, I hope what they choose for their voters are the right cryptos and the right way of using them. What they choose to implement should help sustain the voters during earth shaking crisis.
*The sheep in Babylon (who could be part of the voters) should not be exposed to harm though. They are really valuable to their CREATOR.

New York's heavy handed, inefficient and authoritarian policies continue to alienate residents. Forcing them to flee new york for texas or florida. It doesn't appear relief in new york will come anytime soon. Politicians are obsessed with raising taxes, increasing overregulation and redtape and otherwise taking steps to cripple their own business and finance sectors. These promises by new york politicians to "support cryptocurrencies" are likely more of the same. Desperation pleas intended to stall residents and fool them into thinking things will change.

Texas and florida are emerging as crypto friendly states. New york feels forced to do the same to remain competitive and offer attractive living conditions to residents. But these promises by new york have been common for many years and always failed to materialize.

He would be more successful securing votes from the poor or the homeless people than securing votes from crypto enthusiast. he would get more supporters talking about fixing far more important issues.

That's very tunnel vision of the citizens of New York City to only care about one thing to improve in their city, pretty sure that those promises won't come to fruition because some of the regulation might be problematic to become official. It's good that there's a tie in this one, it's only a matter of who is the one that is sincere and will put people first.

Colorado's governor Jared Polis is one of the few politicians that I actually follow, mainly for his really good questions when they were first having the bitcoin/ cryptocurrency discussions.

Colorado Governor Jared Polis wants his state to be the first to accept cryptocurrencies for taxes
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/currencies/crypto-acceptance-for-taxes-colorado-governor-jared-polis-state-accept-2021-5

Gov. Polis signs Colorado's first blockchain-related bill into law
https://www.bizjournals.com/denver/news/2019/03/07/colorado-first-blockchain-related-law.html


I am an appreciator of Andrew Yang, something like Democracy Dollars would be an improvement to our current political system ---> yes I can immediately see a few ways it could be gamed but...

What would it potentially be like if money was out of the equation for candidates?


H.R.1572 - Democracy Dollars Act
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1572

https://democracydollarsatx.org/

"A similar plan was put forward by the 2020 presidential campaign of Andrew Yang. The campaign's "Democracy Dollars" would have given each registered voter $100 to put towards the political campaign of their choice annually."

It does sound like people in New York are all crypto users that they thought the majority are going to vote for them upon having those promises.  But then anyway, people will be very curious about cryptocurrency because of these mayors.

Both of them already promise the same development for the city so whichever wins, there will be someone to make Bitcoin known to the people.

I'm surprised every candidates are trying to farm some votes with bitcoin. It doesn't even look that same bitcoin hated by the establishment anymore. Now every politicians want to be crypto friendly and that is a reason to be concerned, because politicians aren't to be trusted and if they are in love with bitcoin it's because there is a shady reason for that. Soon we will see.

Actually they would be more helpful to crypto universe by just not interfering on it. Let the businesses and independent individuals incentivize the usage of bitcoin. Since the beginning it's working this way without any "help" from politicians or governments and it has been a great success.

I don't understand the obssession people have for ATMs since personal smartphones already fullfil the function of ATMs anywhere. All you need is internet connection and an account in a crypto app.

Well, it is true that today the crypto issue does not move a mass of voters as other issues can do, but what I find interesting is the trend. It seems to me that we are going to see more and more politicians talking about measures favorable to cryptocurrencies in their election campaigns, and that is positive for the normalization and mass adoption of Bitcoin.

I don't know the guy but I feel like this candidate isn't going to win, not because of a fair fight but because some companies that's going to be affected by crypto directly will be  using every connection that they have for this candidate to not win. That's just my hunch though because I know how politics work even just a little.

Well, every vote counts. There might be more than a handful crypto supporters out there whose votes are still untapped. These candidates are trying to grab this particular demographic. Well, good luck to them.

The attention of crypto supporters might have been caught by these politicians' statements. They might end up getting the support of these voters. But then this area is definitely not the only thing that matters. There are definitely other factors whose priority comes before crypto but then it probably counts to several voters that their leader is future-looking.

People don’t care about crypto at this time of the pandemic. All they want is someone who will sway them into believing that there is still hope in politics. While there may be some groups of people wanting to get their crypto voices heard on politics, the majority’s interest isn’t really resting on cryptocurrencies alone. Take for example, Andrew Yang. The dude is obviously a pro-crypto politician with democratic leanings and an overall favorite to win, but still ended up losing badly.

I’d like to see what else Curtis Sliwa has to offer to New York. The city is plagued with crimes and unemployment, and I don’t think marketing himself as another crypto dude without tackling about the main issues of the city will help his political run.

For a change, it's a different way to catch the attention of the people especially if New York is full of crypto geeks and there are stores established that accept crypto as a payment method.

With that, people there will think that crypto is getting attention from the officials and wants to make it good.

I don't see anything wrong there. But as always in every election, expect that some "promises are made to be broken" if you know what I mean.

I know it's pretty difficult to believe whatsoever politicians say, worse even when they start making promises using a decentralized network that they cannot control, but it doesn't really matter here and I'm taking the positive side of this news, I see it as a big news that politicians are trying to convince people to vote for them by using cryptocurrency, it means Bitcoin is really getting more and more popular and it is only that way that mass adoption can become possible, another thing is that even with government regulations and bans, governments are well and fully aware of the immense positive role Bitcoin plays in the society and are just being hostile for their own selfish reason, which is their inability to control the network.

Until he gets in and do the job of going through the legislation to make the use of bitcoin and other cryptocreency legal then we won't take it seriously. It is a positive vibe to win the population until is made law as we see El Salvador. It needs legislative process just like the abortion bill that was signed info law in Texas, it will be a good news if New York adopts it. This will grow even dogecoin as mentioned.

If he was able to survey that the New York community mostly uses crypto, that's a big plus factor for people to notice him.

For a crypto-friendly country, mentioning crypto by a big personality, like government officials or someone related to it, is always a big deal be it positive or negative. But for me, mentioning crypto just to make sounds is just a common part of propaganda when a person is running for a government position.

A unique way though compare to the usual election jingle and advertisement we always see every campaign period.

Also, I am thinking that maybe it is also one way to attract crypto donators to them. With crypto transactions, no one will know how much is donated to their campaign. Because they can hide it by not disclosing those funds. But anyway, looking at the bigger picture, politicians promoting a crypto-friendly environment is always welcome. Because the more adoption that we have, the demand will further increase and so its price in the market.

I agree with you that it's just another political style of campaigning. We all know restrictions for US citizens in the crypto ecosystem despite the US has the largest adoption for cryptocurrencies since early days of bitcoin.
I may believe him or whoever if he promises to integrate blockchain technology in some economy/monetary fields. I remember an independant candidate from the US presidential election who also propised voters to get into crypto if he would win but we didn't here that he has a decent numbers of votes due to his promises.
NYC citizens who are interested in the cryptocurrencies would be sure that this candidate is selling them the illusion toward their votes, and ignorant people don't even know about the existence of bitcoin .

They know that there are a lot of crypto folks that are living in New York. But that will work? we don't know, in every campaign, they have to convince everyone that's part of their city to get their votes. And that's why every sector that they think that has a large number of vote, they should feel that they're with them. It's just another political style of campaigning and you'll see most of them as part of those sectors, organizations and other social parties.

Interesting.  I do remember Yang but didn't remember his party (and I'm surprised to learn that he's a democrat).  You're probably right about a republican having no chance of getting elected as governor of NY.  We can only hope.

this is like a new opportunity for candidates to get votes because they realize that there are now many crypto lovers and holders and this is very possible for them to do a maneuver to attract votes from here.
but again they say like this it doesn't mean they care about crypto, this is just an initial promise to attract hearts and votes to get lots of votes apart from that everything returns to politics using all means to win elections.
apart from that on the one hand this is an effective way to attract sympathizers and when the win can be realized properly (not just a promise) this will be quite good because apart from NYC there is Miami which until now the mayor is still active in supporting crypto.

Andrew Yang was another candidate for New York mayor, he also supported crypto and was blown out of the water, and that was a democratic candidate with some name recognition. This guy is a republican and has precisely a zero chance of going anywhere. Voters don't understand nor care about crypto, they probably never will. Politics is a game of pandering.

New York City mayoral candidates have turned to cryptocurrencies as part of their campaign promises.
Republican candidate Curtis Silwa wrote on Twitter yesterday: "As mayor of New York City, I will make New York the Crypto-friendly city in the country. "Property taxes, fines, and commissions will be payable with cryptocurrencies."
“We will open more crypto ATMs and incentivize businesses to accept crypto. We must modernize our economy and make it accessible for all,” he added.
Silwa’s tweet, which featured graphics from Dogecoin, Ethereum, Bitcoin and Ripple ATMs, is not the first time a New York City mayoral candidate has used cryptocurrencies to the campaign.
New York Democratic nominee Eric Adams has vowed to make New York City the "center of bitcoin."
“We’re going to bring business here. We’re going to become the center of life science, the center of cybersecurity, the center of self-driving cars, drones, the center of Bitcoins,” Adams said at a campaign watch party earlier in the summer.
In Adams' case, the commitment to advocacy seems to be part of a broader effort to modernize the city and embrace new technologies, not just to promote cryptocurrencies.
Andrew Yang, a mayoral candidate and former Democratic presidential candidate, is another example. "As the mayor of New York City, I will invest in turning the city into a hub for bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies," he said in February.

Source: https://decrypt.co/80023/new-york-mayoral-candidates-turn-crypto-votes