Impact of new Cryptocurrency wealth on 2016 US Presidential election?

[hypostatization]

Bitcoin's emergence has led to a rapid rise of new wealth in new hands. As a community, cryptocurrency users have an overwhelming tendency to diverge from mainstream political beliefs. I expect that the steady rise of new cryptocurrency wealth will continue through 2016.

US Presidential campaigns are fueled by wealth.

2012 Campaign Finance: http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/campaign-finance

Candidates who have previously been considered fringe may suddenly have real opportunity in 2016, based on the substantial new funding source that the cryptocurrency community may represent.

Do you expect new cryptocurrency wealth to have a significant impact on the 2016 US Presidential election?

Edit:

Any value in considering a Cryptocurrency PAC?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_action_committee

I see more than enough future wealth and impassioned activism to drive deep and lasting change.

[1715189706]

1715189706

[1715189706]

1715189706

[dopey]

A very interesting concept indeed.

I think it will likely make an impact with regards to campaign budgets. Support and donations for Ron Paul should certainly increase.

But I really am not sure if the outcome will be changed, nowadays isn't the president chosen before the election begins?

[mtnminer]

I would like to think it would change the political direction by allowing an independent to win, that is not in the pocket of a corporation, special interest group, military industrial complex.  But I believe the U.S. system is corrupted enough that even crypto currencies donations will not solve this issue.

I believe idea and technology behind crypto currencies, will bring great changes and improvement globally, but not by this next U.S. election!  It's just to short a time frame.

Mtnminer

[Chef Ramsay]

A very interesting concept indeed.

I think it will likely make an impact with regards to campaign budgets. Support and donations for Ron Paul should certainly increase.

But I really am not sure if the outcome will be changed, nowadays isn't the president chosen before the election begins?

For one, Ron's son Senator Rand Paul is the likely one that will be running under the banner of the Liberty Movement in the US. I doubt he'll take BTC donations but the nouveau riche can cash in up to $2500 of their coins and donate this "max" in bot the primary and the general. For those that have no limit on what they can afford, they can seek out Political Action Committees (AKA- PACs) that would support conservative-libertarians either for Prez or for House or Senate seats that would run along Rand if he gets the nomination. The upside here is that Rand is vastly more appealing to the average person even longtime establishment supporters because of his repackaging of the libertarian message into a more populist rendition that is harder for the media and other hacks to demagogue like they did w/ Ron's strict truthbombs, many of which were excessively iconoclastic. I will be supporting Rand to the max should he run for Prez and am currently donating to those that he endorses for House and Senate as his likely allies for his upcoming run. I'm also a local delegate in my district's GOP in MI and I regularly discuss BTC w/ party regulars as well as advocate for Rand's message of restoring America w/ free markets, individual liberty and personal responsibility.

[dopey]

Great insight.

I will be absolutely rooting for Rand Paul.

[Enkel]

Any value in considering a Cryptocurrency PAC?

I think a PAC could be a double edged sword. Given BTC adoption rates, I'm thinking that donations would be limited because it would be hard for them to strike a balance between the varied 'goals' of potential donors in who the PAC supports. What if a politician is accused of taking 'drug money' because of the SR association and the politician refuses the PAC money? So, could the PAC could be pointed to as a 'failure'.

On the other hand, it could get a lot of PR related to BTC, so that could be good.

[Siegfried]

A very interesting concept indeed.

I think it will likely make an impact with regards to campaign budgets. Support and donations for Ron Paul should certainly increase.

But I really am not sure if the outcome will be changed, nowadays isn't the president chosen before the election begins?

For one, Ron's son Senator Rand Paul is the likely one that will be running under the banner of the Liberty Movement in the US. I doubt he'll take BTC donations but the nouveau riche can cash in up to $2500 of their coins and donate this "max" in bot the primary and the general. For those that have no limit on what they can afford, they can seek out Political Action Committees (AKA- PACs) that would support conservative-libertarians either for Prez or for House or Senate seats that would run along Rand if he gets the nomination. The upside here is that Rand is vastly more appealing to the average person even longtime establishment supporters because of his repackaging of the libertarian message into a more populist rendition that is harder for the media and other hacks to demagogue like they did w/ Ron's strict truthbombs, many of which were excessively iconoclastic. I will be supporting Rand to the max should he run for Prez and am currently donating to those that he endorses for House and Senate as his likely allies for his upcoming run. I'm also a local delegate in my district's GOP in MI and I regularly discuss BTC w/ party regulars as well as advocate for Rand's message of restoring America w/ free markets, individual liberty and personal responsibility.

What happens when a donation of the 2,500 max in bitcoin in January is held by the campaign until October and then spent when the value is then 10,000 dollars?

[hypostatization]

A Super PAC / Independent Expenditure only committee would mean no legal limit on donation size. Cryptocurrency funds would not go directly to the official campaign(s).

I think that path answers most concerns stated above.