Bitcoin Forum

Ok, before you get on your horses to attack, let me explain. If Bernie Sanders (78 years old) drop out of the race, the Democrat party is most likely be represented by Joe Biden (76) or Elizabeth Warren (70).
Elizabeth Warren is an open critic of Wall Street and banks. Where did I hear that? I was listening to wall street journal in my audible today and that is where I heard  :D :D :D
You know what happens when a president is a critic of Wall Street and the darn banks? They turn pro bitcoin!!!

54 years of Kamala Harris is from California and she is also a progressive.
Anyway, I can almost hear you say that none of these women can pass Joe Biden, but you never know. After all, Obama was not given a chance against Bush at first, but then you know what happened.
Even if these women lose against Biden, they may be Vice presidents or something. And I think White House is ready to see a woman in office.

There haven't been any indications of this thus far, not that there is any concrete reason for anyone hating wall street to automatically love Bitcoin. Elizabeth Warren has voiced concerns about crypto being easy to steal in the past:


She hasn't talked about the subject a lot either, so it's not necessarily a point of focus for her. Andrew Yang, on the other hand, is big on blockchain and Bitcoin (https://www.forbes.com/sites/billybambrough/2019/08/27/andrew-yang-2020-us-presidential-election-issue/#5692e6db8b68).

Well, everybody has been complaining about ICOs, so that is not surprising. Being against wall street and banks do not automatically bring favor to bitcoin, but it is way better than politicians favoring banks and wall street.
I know about Andrew Yang but he has almost zero chance, but if he is selected or rises through the ranks, then all the best to him...

Being a Wall Street critic doesn't necessarily mean that these presidentiables are automatically turned pro bitcoin since it is not clear yet on what is their own respective personal stand on cryptocurrencies particularly with Bitcoin! I guess its not safe to say they are indeed pro crypto because we'll never know it yet and that we might end up disappointed in the end. :)



I like this presidentiable since he is more vocal and a proponent on Bitcoin and blockchain technology and he could make the difference the crypto community needs right now.

None of those old politicians are going to be good for BTC. They are too old-school, no matter how much they criticize banks and Wall Street. They might be after new regulations or more limiting laws or whatever, but they won't go for BTC, it is too new to them, and they don't understand it. And they shouldn't, they are 70+, 80+ people.

I agree that anyone openly supporting Bitcoin is great and should be the president, but then I completely agree with the OP, that we should be pragmatists and pick whoever is closest to our world, the crypto space.
Kudos OP!

I just love the angle that you are coming from because you just shine light on an area people are not just looking towards but yet its a good analogy which would work holding some things constant. But looking at it by the top, even if a woman who is pro- crypto and anti wall street should become the president, when it comes to decisions that would affect the economy, it is beyond the personality called the president because his/her powers are not absolute and when a country is being run, its not run on emotions rather based on facts and input of cabinet members and other committees established for the management of the economy and its being able to get those guys convinced before an actions can be taken.

Now, say the woman made VP, yes its a good one for the women folks who have felt being sidelined from the Oval office since time immemorial but really, the VP is just a spare tyre who really does not make any significant influence on the polity and the only way he can shine is to the extent allowed by the president whose ticket he/she rode on to become the number 2 person in the country.

Though you have a point when you are tossing up Elizabeth Warren but there is something wrong if we are wishing for people such as Bernie Sanders to be ill. If Sanders is sick then leave it be and do not pray for his sickness to ear him more.

On the other hand if Elizabeth Warren will be placed on that position then possibly it could be a good time for bitcoin to really go bullish. I do remember reading many articles about Warren causing bitcoin bullish price trend.

I doubt any candidate other than Mr. Yang will be positive for BTC. All the others are most likely neutral with perhaps the odd enemy amongst them.

Bitcoin seems to irritate both camps. Right wingers feel it fucks with their right to fuck with us. Left wingers, not that there really are any in the US, feel exactly the same in the main. Ceding control is alien to all of them.

You forget about one thing that matters when it comes to politicians, before the election they say one thing, after the election they do something completely different - or to put it another way, they say what people want to hear. For or against Bitcoin is completely irrelevant in this case, we know what Trump thinks, but does that need to mean anything to the crypto community?

Whoever is the next president of the US, he or she will support Wall Street one way or another, and Bitcoin does not fit in their philosophy of a fully controlled society. Saying or official motto of USA is "In God We Trust" which is actually ironic, in fact it should be "In $ We Trust".

Yes, you are 100% correct. During the US elections a lot of pro-Bitcoin people were chosen to work with Donald Trump and expectations was high that Bitcoin would get a opportunity to grow under a President like Donald Trump. Those people faded away in the background and you hardly hear them speaking about Bitcoin anymore.

Facebook announced Libra and Donald Trump goes ballistic on Twitter and he even pulls Bitcoin into his ramblings. This gives the final blow to anyone with some authority to openly support Bitcoin or any other Crypto currency.  ::)

Donny is someone to be endured and then disposed of. I don't believe anyone surrounding him has the slightest respect for him. I doubt the average toddler would after attempting to communicate with him.

And did you watch any of the Libra hearings? There was quite a considerable amount of proper understanding and positive sentiment regarding real crypto from the politicians in attendance. There was unrelenting loathing for Libra.

Posts like this one is why the phrase "X is good for Bitcoin" became a meme - people always come up with some really far-fetched ways of finding connections between irrelevant events and Bitcoin.  Sanders doesn't have a chance of getting neither nominated, nor elected, so he has no influence over Bitcoin. Also all these years have shown that democratic governments still don't care about Bitcoin, so it's not too important who is in charge.

I'm sorry but if the only options to lead a nation are people near their 80ies, i don't think that would fare too well for new technologies. Not like it would matter much, as the system won't let anyone put in charge do much anyway. They have to abide to whatever the main parties need, and the lobbies that push them.

Also what makes you think Bitcoiners would somehow be critic of Wall Street and Banks? Ever heard of bitcoin being traded, or banks doing full reserve?

If anything, it is State meddling that could cause trouble, but thankfully Bitcoin is immune to that. People wanting to use it freely could face prosecution if the State becomes hostile, but the coin cannot be stopped. And banks, well they had nearly two centuries of fun with fractional reserve, its about time they return to their roots and shrink.

It should be mentioned that the US is not an absolute monarchy, so what the president thinks about cryptocurrencies or anything else does not really have major impact. But anyway, let's take a look at our candidates. Trump: can win the elections, does not like Bitcoin, the situation would probably stay the way it is now. Elizabeth Warren: hates ICOs, not pro-crypto to say the least, so the situation might get worse if she affects the regulations. As for Sanders, it's an interesting thing that his supporters want Bitcoin to be legalized as money, whereas he believes it should be classified as a commodity. All in all, I don't think the situation will change much depending on the next president.

Someone being a critic of something doesn’t necessarily mean that they are in favor of whatever the opposite of what they criticize. Though I agree that Bernie is somewhat not in shape to hold the POTUS office for the next 4 years, still it’s just not the talks of bitcoin that matters here—it’s about something bigger and more important. Besides, what assurance do we have that other candidates would be open and welcoming to bitcoin and crypto?