A Kamala Presidency Could Be Just as Bullish for Bitcoin

Yes, I know, you’re here to let the hate flow.

You’ve bought into all the rhetoric. donald trump he likes cryptocurrencies. He is embracing DeFi. he has his own shoesand coins. he is going to fire gary! Like Polymarket in October, you think Trump is fool.

Unfortunately, you have bought many bulls of another type.

To unravel this, we have to understand what the Crypto 4 Trump initiative really is, and that is an alliance of US-based mining companies and exchanges, largely public, that have banded together to spend aggressively to end their mistreatment. .

They are tired of being sued and harassed, and of being kicked out of the United States. Besides, they have every reason to be.

But unfortunately, the Bitcoin industry is not. This was the same argument used to justify the Fork Wars, and let’s just say, long story short, that they ended terribly. If American miners are forced to go elsewhere, mining will continue elsewhere and hashrate decentralization, such as We saw in the case of China’s mining ban.It’s very simple: Good for Bitcoin™.

Sure, ASIC manufacturing may remain consolidated in a few international companies. Perhaps the reconstruction will take even longer. But other countries will take advantage and the Bitcoin network will continue. Bitcoin may be our best chance to topple all current superpowers and empower the developing world. If that means leaving America behind, so be it.

Now let’s talk about the donkey in the room. A Kamala presidency will mean Further enforcement of US securities lawsnot a referendum that allows millions of alternatives to proliferate.

A Trump victory almost certainly guarantees only one outcome for our industry, and that is that the SEC will be weakened, and that means “currencies beyond Bitcoin” will get a “level playing field.”

In contrast, the SEC’s continued application of securities laws to the industry will make clear the difference between Bitcoin, which was distributed through proof of work (the only known way to circumvent securities sales), and all the many variants centralized.

Simply put: it is “crypto assets” that require a regulatory framework to survive, not Bitcoin, which is sufficiently decentralized.

Forcing crypto industry creators to comply with these laws will undoubtedly benefit developers looking to extend these capabilities to Bitcoin, the only major cryptocurrency with regulatory clarity. Are we really going to argue that encouraging millions of developers to put their technology on Bitcoin (as opposed to Ethereum or Solana) would be a bad thing?

If there is a coherent common thread in Bitcoin maximalism, it is the claim that everything outside of Bitcoin is either 1) a scam or 2) can be built on top of its blockchain. A continued crackdown on cryptocurrencies will push the market to further investigate the second point.

It would certainly boost Microstrategy stock MSTR as well, as it would remain one of the few widely accessible plays to get a legitimate beta version of Bitcoin.

Sure, maybe taxes on your Bitcoin earnings will be higher, maybe spending will still be penalized. But then, I thought you were HODLing anyway?

So remind me, of all the supposed pro-Bitcoin policies of a Trump presidency, what do you hope to get, other than state-sanctioned degeneration and blocking the spread in the heartland?

If you’re a single-issue Bitcoin voter, shouldn’t that mean voting for an option that makes Bitcoin more decentralized and less dependent on US government policy?

Let me reintroduce you to Madam President Harris, a bullish option for Bitcoin.

This article is a Carry. The opinions expressed are entirely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.

Source link