If your parents used to think bitcoin was a scam and they suddenly changed their mind about bitcoin because they realized the benefits of bitcoin. They tell you they don't hate bitcoin anymore, do you think they are liars? I'm not making any claims about Trump, look at what I said.
As I said: the election isn't over yet and let's not rush to judge anything until it happens.
I understand your analogy and to be honest I was expecting something like this. The thing is, My parents are people I know personally, they're people I can trust and know when they're genuine or not. How will I tell if a politician is genuine? I don't him, I don't know if he's just saying what he's saying for the camera and the vote, the only way I have to judge and support him is based on his past actions. What he has done in his past political positions. That is why people rise from office to office in politics. You don't expect people to take your word for it when you have said something opposite previously. If it was Kamala who said something similar about Bitcoin in past and now she's famzing Bitcoin, you'll hold it against her, so why is the case different from Trump's?
I know there are thousands of issues that need to be addressed and crypto is not the only or important factor in this election. But you need to remember that everyone has different lives, circumstances and needs. Your problem may not be my problem or someone else's problem, and that is why everyone has different needs and choices. Maybe your problem is immigration, taxes... but that's not someone else's problem, and people respect your choices, why do you get upset when people don't have the same choices as you?
What do you mean by "why are you getting upset?" Do I sound upset? We're just having a discussion. Can't, we disagree on something and have a discussion or a debate about it in a civil manner? I believe we can because an election is a decision that affects all parties involved. Any candidate that wins rules the whole country and affects the whole country not just the people who voted for and supported that candidate, so I believe I have a right to point out to you that this candidate you're supporting is not the best person for the job and you also have a right to either ignore me or indulge me and say the candidate your supporting is the best person for the job. It doesn't have to be emotional.
If we want to look at it objectively, I doubt that a candidate can believe in things that we all believe in. There have to be parts we do not agree with, it's normal. If a person agrees with a candidate on every aspect then either the person just follows that politician because he loves him so he doesn't want to be critical or the politician is just saying what that person wants to hear.
I have a lot to say on this but it seems I've already said a lot so I don't want to say more but you should know that the whole country is what should be put in perspective, not just our personal agendas.
For instance, let's say I'm into Bitcoin and I make all my money from Bitcoin, so I will support a candidate simply because he is favourable to Bitcoin and has made me more money, but has a shitty security or health policy and people are affected by it, I should ignore all that and support him?
Why does the United States always have two parties and always have their own supporters?
I don't know if there are people who might take this the wrong way or find this offensive, but I'm going to say it anyway.
If Hitler was contesting for election in the US today, he would have supporters. All it takes is good PR and a little whitewashing and you'll be surprised at the people that would be solidly behind him.
