Yes, I know, you’re here to keep the hate flowing.
You’ve bought all the rhetoric. Donald Trump loves crypto. That’s him embracing DeFi. He has his own shoesand coins. He goes fire Gary! Like Polymarket in October, you think Trump is boo-llish.
Unfortunately you bought a lot of a different type of bull.
To explain this, we need to understand what the Crypto 4 Trump initiative really is – and that is an alliance of largely public, US-based mining companies and exchanges that have come together to aggressively spend money to build a to put an end to their abuse.
They are tired of being sued, harassed, and otherwise driven out of America. Moreover, they have every reason to do so.
But unfortunately, the Bitcoin industry is not. This was the same argument made to justify the Fork Wars, and let’s just say it ended terribly. If American miners are forced elsewhere, mining will continue elsewhere and the hashrate will be decentralized we have seen this in the case of the Chinese mining banis very simple: Good for Bitcoin™.
Certainly, ASIC production can remain consolidated in a few international companies. Reconstruction may take even longer. But other countries will benefit and the Bitcoin network will continue. Bitcoin could be our best chance to topple all current superpowers and empower developing countries. If that means leaving the US behind, then so be it.
Now let’s address the donkey in the room. A Kamala presidency will mean that increased enforcement of U.S. securities lawsno referendum allowing the proliferation of millions of alts.
A Trump victory will almost certainly ensure only one outcome for our industry, and that is that the SEC will be defunded, meaning that “coins beyond Bitcoin” will be on a “level playing field.”
In contrast, continued enforcement of the SEC’s securities laws across the industry will rightly highlight the difference between Bitcoin, which was distributed via proof-of-work (the only known way to circumvent the sale of securities), and all of its many centralized variants .
Simply put, it is “crypto assets” that need a regulatory framework to survive, not Bitcoin, which is sufficiently decentralized.
Forcing the builders of the crypto industry to adhere to these laws will undoubtedly benefit developers looking to extend these capabilities to Bitcoin, the only major crypto with clear regulations. Are we actually 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 thread to Bitcoin maximalism, it is the claim that everything outside of Bitcoin is either 1) a scam, or 2) can be built on top of the blockchain. A continued crackdown on crypto will push the market to examine the second point more thoroughly.
It would also undoubtedly boost Microstrategy’s stock, MSTR, as it would remain one of the few stocks that widely accessible plays to get a legit beta version of Bitcoin.
Sure, maybe the taxes on your Bitcoin winnings will be higher, maybe the spending will still be penalized. Anyway, I thought you were HODLing, right?
So, remind me, what do you expect, from all the supposed pro-Bitcoin policies of a Trump presidency, other than state-sanctioned degeneration and blocking the spread domestically?
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?
Allow me to reintroduce you to Madame President Harris, a bullish pick for Bitcoin.
This article is a To take. The opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.