Is a presidential candidate’s stance on crypto a good enough reason to vote for or against them?

That is a question many Americans will have to answer in the next few months leading up to the November elections.

In the United States of America, crypto is being used as a major talking point in congressional, senatorial, and presidential election campaigns. 20% of the voting population in the United States own crypto treat crypto as a crucial factor in the 2024 election race—at least according to the Harris Poll. 30% are more willing to vote for a candidate who is pro-crypto. 73% believe that presidential candidates should have an informed perspective on emerging technologies like AI and crypto. This means that if candidates want to appeal to a huge chunk of the voting population, they’ll really need to consider how warm or cold their attitude toward digital currencies is going to be.

‍

Big Names in Crypto Spend Millions on 2024 Election Campaign

Analysts are saying that the crypto industry’s influence on the U.S. elections is bigger than ever before. Big names in the crypto space are shelling out cash to get crypto-friendly candidates into the seats of power. Considering the fact that these leaders include billionaire CEOs and heads of massive venture capital firms, it isn’t a surprise that a lot of money has been pouring in to support the crypto cause.

So far, crypto political action committees, or PACs, in the United States have raised funds totalling over $100 million in anticipation of the 2024 United States elections. And since crypto often gets used to send funds without public disclosure, the real figures could actually be several times that amount. These PACs are not just limited to grassroots efforts; major corporations within the crypto industry, including Coinbase and Ripple, have been actively participating. 

The nonprofit group Stand With Crypto, which was founded by Coinbase and now has a total of 440,000 members, along with other pro-crypto PACs like Fairshake, Defend American Jobs, and Protect Progress, have had an undeniable impact on the election race so far. Their influence comes from spending millions on social media and TV campaigns to ensure the defeat of candidates who are either anti-crypto themselves or have strong connections with major crypto skeptics.

For instance, Fairshake spent an estimated $10 million on a campaign in California to convince around 8 million crypto owners not to vote for Representative Katie Porter, a known ally of crypto critic Senator Elizabeth Warren. In their own words, Porter’s stance against crypto could affect job openings in the future. The group ran ads on social media to further their campaign, which ultimately led to Porter’s defeat. In a tweet, she blamed her loss on “TV spending and an onslaught of billionaires spending millions to rig this election.” 

Let’s take a closer look at the numbers:

‍

Looking at these figures, it’s hard to deny the lobbying power of the $2 trillion crypto industry. As to why the big guys are choosing to go all-in this year, the winning party’s stance on crypto is more critical than ever before.

In the aftermath of the crash of FTX followed by Binance’s courtroom saga for failing to prevent crypto from being funneled to terrorist activities, regulations have been getting tougher for crypto service providers. Half of the eight corporate crypto super PAC donors have either faced charges from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission in the past or are still working towards a settlement. One of them, Ripple Labs, stands to pay up to $2 billion in penalties if the verdict doesn’t end up in its favor. Therefore, relaxing strict regulations is one of their main goals for backing pro-crypto candidates at whatever cost.

Based on how the election race has been going so far, their efforts seem to be working. Several of the PAC-backed candidates have won the primaries (or the equivalent of Round 1 of elections). 

The question is, does this really represent the decentralized and community-based direction crypto originally aimed for or just another case of more centralization going on?

‍

Trump Versus Biden: Turning Crypto Into Your Selling Point

In light of these developments, several candidates who were anti-crypto in the past have shifted gears and are now more open to digital currencies—at least publicly. Take the case of former U.S. President Donald Trump, who is likely to be the Republican nominee in this year’s election. He used to say he wasn’t a fan of cryptocurrencies, claiming they seemed like a scam and whose value was simply made of thin air. But now he’s done a U-turn and made crypto a major talking point in his campaign for reelection. He’s apparently a crypto advocate now, with a collection of NFT trading cards using his face, and plans to accept campaign donations via crypto.

Trump does have some history to back his claim to fame as THE crypto-friendly candidate—in his first year in the White House, his administration approved the launch of regulated Bitcoin futures at the CFTC, which in turn broke ground for the launch of spot Bitcoin ETFs this January. 

According to Trump, the Democrat party is against all things crypto, as evidenced by how the Biden administration has been on regulatory crackdown mode in the past months. Case in point: The Senate just voted to overturn the SEC’s crypto policy circa 2022 that required financial institutions to record their customers’ digital assets in order to protect investors. This controversial policy is just one example of what some consider to be regulatory overreach under the Biden administration. 

So as far as the public narrative goes, if you’re a crypto user, vote for Trump. Yet although Trump is positioning himself as pro-crypto, it isn’t cut and dry whether it would actually be beneficial for the crypto ecosystem if he wins. How much he actually understands the technology behind it and the issue involved is up for debate. Trump allegedly holds around $3 million in crypto, but at least two fellow Republican hopefuls seem to be more aggressive in their support of a future powered by blockchain technology than the former president has ever been.

Also, whether or not his party will even remain pro-crypto after the campaign period is anyone’s guess. After all, during the start of Biden’s administration, there was a somewhat positive approach to crypto, but then came the scandals and the scams and the long crypto winter, and now regulations are getting tougher. (Arguably, even if Binance got kicked out of the U.S. and Coinbase and Ripple are still ironing out things with the SEC, tougher and clearer regulations may turn out really well for the crypto space.)

Crypto’s role in voter decision-making isn’t confined to the U.S.A., since political candidates from Indonesia, Thailand, and South Korea have also made it a part of their election agenda. The Democratic Party and the People Power Party of South Korea made pledges regarding Bitcoin ETFs and regulatory frameworks for taxation. The winner of Indonesia’s presidential election specifically made mention of crypto during presidential debates and promised to create “blockchain experts” in the country. 

Meanwhile, during the pre-election campaign, Thailand’s prime minister promised to airdrop around $275 worth of digital currency to every Thai citizen’s digital wallet should his party win. He plans to start disbursing the $13.7 billion airdrop to around 50 million digital wallets by the end of this year. As a crypto investor himself, his appointment to office is seen as a huge boost to the potential of crypto and fintech growth in the country.

Now, what about the Philippines? It hasn’t been that much of a deciding factor (yet), but we’ll see. The Marcos administration seems to be quite encouraging of emerging technology like blockchain and AI, but to this day, many elected officials don't really understand what crypto is, and what they do know often comes from news headlines which swing from overly pessimistic to overly hyped in the blink of an eye. If they don’t understand the fundamentals, we can’t expect them to make wise decisions in its favor.

The solution? More education, of course. But also more conscientious founders that launch their projects for reasons beyond:

(A) Outright scamming people, or

(B) Getting rich quick by overhyping borderline useless projects with no definite use case or solid reason to exist

Perhaps this is a bit naive to say, but we shouldn’t really expect candidates to support things that will later bite them in the back. Let’s not forget how Sam Bankman-Fried allegedly used at least $40million worth of funds from FTX investors to fund election campaigns in 2022—and we all know how spectacular the collapse of FTX was.

To sum it up, crypto and Web3 in general are becoming a major force to be reckoned with, not just in the finance space but also in politics. Who would have predicted over a decade ago that the shiny new digital asset called Bitcoin, which was used for things as mundane as buying 2 Papa John's pizzas, would eventually have this much sway on the fate of a country? Wild. Then again, political and economic empires have found immense power in things like tulip bulbs, poppy flowers, caterpillars, crushed shells, and the spices sitting in your kitchen right now.

Will we eventually reach the point where nations rise and fall based on their crypto policies? Stay tuned.

Further Reading: Snipers, COVID, Deepfakes, Voting Fears, Major Plot Twist: The 2024 U.S. Election Race