Mediaboss Marketing

US presidential candidates on both sides of the two-party spectrum are taking advantage of the crypto industry.

Youll notice how I didnt say that crypto will be a hot button topic this election season, or that the crypto space will play any sort of role in shaping election discourse.

No. Its clear to me that some of the main players in this presidential race are planning to exploit the crypto world for money and votes and those in crypto should stop playing along.

Why should favorable cryptocurrency legislation take precedence over all else? Perhaps you really believe that the financial system is broken, and that a path forward for cryptocurrency in the US is the best way to create a new, more egalitarian society that will allow all to flourish.

But thats not what I see.

What I see is a small number of wealthy individuals, who made that wealth from cryptocurrency, looking for the government to let them continue growing that wealth unfettered.

Among diehard crypto evangelists right now, voting for crypto means voting Republican for president. According to this side of the debate, any other decision will virtually assure the death of the American crypto industry.

This fear (true or not) has led some major personalities in Web3 to push crypto supporters into becoming single-issue voters. Their message is clear: Choose your 2024 candidates based solely on their cryptocurrency stance, or else.

In other words, Americans should prioritize their own selfish financial interests over broader societal and ethical concerns. When you promote the idea of voting for Americas crypto industry above all else, youre deciding to ignore all of the other issues that are really at stake this election season healthcare access, Social Security, gun legislation, womens rights, LGBT issues, immigration, to name a few.

I want to be clear I do not care if you vote Republican, Democrat, or third-party, as long as you care about the issues at stake, and truly believe that the candidate in question is representative of your views. But voting for a candidate you would not otherwise support, simply because they favor the deregulation of a sector in which you hold a profit motive, is a compromise that you should not make.

Cryptocurrency has undeniably (and perhaps unfortunately) become a partisan issue.

Blockchain technology, which underpins the entire crypto industry, is neither inherently good or bad. But its the actions of individuals and what they do with this technology that has drawn regulatory scrutiny over the years. This has transformed a neutral technology stack into a deeply partisan issue, with sharply divided views across party lines concerning its integration into the American financial system and beyond.

On the left side of the political spectrum the same side already in favor of stricter financial regulations politicians often place crypto against a global backdrop of scams, money laundering and market manipulation to strengthen their calls for oversight. Their tagline is to keep consumers safe.

Lawmakers on the right who already favor less financial regulation as a rule instead posit that intense crypto regulation will cripple innovation and impede technological advancement. They say that their aim is to keep American innovation moving forward at a brisk pace, far ahead of other countries like China.

However, their supposed motivations are arguably applicable only during the election season. Because what all politicians actually want is your attention, your money, and ultimately your ballot. As with most issues, when the time comes, it is unlikely that much in the way of meaningful change will come from either side of the aisle. Instead, it will be the actions of the innovators within the crypto space that move the needle forward which you would think that anyone who truly supports a limited government would appreciate.

The very idea that crypto needs to be voted into office has led to the platforming of some very unsavory people who really have nothing to do with crypto at all besides a shared desire to solicit donations from this niche, newly rich subset of Americans.

Vivek Ramaswamy gave a fireside chat at Messaris Mainnet last fall, promoting his presidential crypto plan a few months before he dropped out of the race. Consensus will have Robert F. Kennedy Jr. speak this year, announcing the news with a headline calling him a pro-crypto presidential candidate. I can think of a lot of other modifiers for RFK Jr. that are more headline-worthy than his stance on crypto.

And most importantly, Crypto Twitter has, for the most part, widely embraced former President Donald Trumps words of support for NFTs and crypto. And far be it for me to say whether that support is genuine, or more largely based on the fact that hes made millions of dollars selling NFTs branded with his own image.

Backing these candidates simply because they seem to make positive noise about crypto isnt taking back the power from Wall Street or helping make the world a more financially equitable place its falling for empty campaign rhetoric.

The idea that any presidential (or gubernatorial or senatorial) candidate is trying to win favor with the crypto crowd because they truly believe in crypto is laughable. These candidates are looking for crypto money, nothing more and nothing less. Those in crypto who support such candidates are either willing to pretend that these officials understand even the basic strokes of how crypto works under the hood (let alone its implications for the broader frameworks of finance and democracy), or they are willing to compromise their morals and ethics for the mere possibility of moon-making crypto legislation in the future.

As the one, big, obvious example: If you believe that Donald Trump will truly support the crypto industry, you have to be willing to overlook his judicially acknowledged sexual assault charges, overt institutional fraud and genuine attempts to overthrow American democracy when you cast your vote in November.

Is cryptocurrency really that important to you?

Molly Jane Zuckerman is the opinion editor at Blockworks. She previously led educational content at CoinMarketCap and ran the news desk at Cointelegraph. Molly Jane is now based in New York after almost a decade in Russia, and can talk your ear off about Russia lit and detective novels.

Jeff is an editor at Blockworks, based in the United States. He has been a part of the blockchain space for over a decade, most recently working as US news editor at Cointelegraph. His areas of focus include empowering artists and creators through technology, using proof-of-participation methods to reward self-improvement, reducing the effectiveness of Sybil attacks, seeking transparent equity for disadvantaged communities, and exploring fairer models of world governance.

Read more:

Only a fool would vote on crypto alone - Blockworks

With US elections on the horizon, there are sizeable shifts within the Democratic Party, most notably, the Biden administration's policies pertaining to the ongoing Israel-Hamas war in Gaza.

A poll conducted by Zeteo and Data For Progress found that a majority of Democratic voters believe that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.

The poll, which was conducted among 1,265 possible voters over the span of a week in April, found that almost four in 10 likely voters, as well as more than half of all Democrats, believe that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.

The Israel-Hamas war, which was sparked by Hamas's October 7 massacre in southern Israel, resulted in IDF operations inside the Gaza Strip in an attempt to dismantle Hamas's hold over the Strip and free the Israeli hostages held by Hamas.

More than half a year into the war, Data for Progress and Zeteo's poll has revealed that American voters are split on Israel's actions in Gaza, including whether IDF operations constitute genocide. The poll says that 39% believe that the IDF's actions constitute genocide against Palestinians, while 38% say that it isn't. However, results differ vastly among Democrats, with 56% saying that Israel is committing genocide.

The poll also revealed generational and ethnic divisions among voters, with the younger population (under 45) at 55% and relatively strong among Black (44%) and Latino (48%) voters thinking that Israel is committing genocide.

When asked about a ceasefire, 70% of those polled believe there needs to be an immediate and permanent ceasefire in Gaza, with 83% of Democrats holding that belief and 56% of Republicans saying they support a ceasefire.

Regarding the hostages held by Hamas, a majority of voters, 53%, believe that Israel's military campaign has been ineffective in freeing the hostages.

Additionally, more than a third of voters support limiting US arms sales to Israel, including a plurality of voters opposing Congress's recent decision to pledge $4 billion in missile defense systems to Israel. A majority, at 54%, support suspending all US arms to Israel as long as Israel blocks US humanitarian aid going into Gaza.

Finally, regarding the recent pro-Palestinian protests and encampments across US campuses, voters remain split on their approval of the demonstrations. According to the poll, 40% approve, while 42% disapprove of the protests. A majority of Democrats (55%) and younger demographics (59%) take a free-speech approach on the issue.

See the rest here:
Most Democrats believe Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza - poll - The Jerusalem Post

As Americas cryptocurrency industry is increasingly becoming a significant player in the financial landscape, everyones eyes are set on how the upcoming election winner is going to bring a crypto-friendly landscape. Uniswap founder Hayden Adams has shed light on their potential impact on the upcoming U.S. presidential election.

Hayden Adams reveals a striking fact: nearly 40% of American adults now own some form of digital currency. This surge in ownership signals a significant shift in financial habits, setting the stage for cryptocurrencies to influence political decisions.

Despite regulatory hurdles from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Adams remains confident in the resilience of the cryptocurrency market. He points to past attempts to stifle its growth, which ultimately failed, as evidence of its enduring strength.

The impact of this trend cannot be overstated. With a sizable portion of the population now holding digital assets, the political implications are profound.

Mark Cuban, a well-known entrepreneur and investor, echoes Adams views, stressing the importance of clear regulations and political support for the cryptocurrency industrys growth. He emphasizes the need for regulations tailored to foster innovation and economic progress.

Regulatory clarity is paramount in fostering an environment conducive to innovation and economic growth. Without it, the industry faces uncertainty, hindering its potential to contribute positively to the economy,

Cuban urges President Joe Biden to seize the opportunity to clarify regulations before the 2024 election, potentially winning favor with the growing crypto community. He calls on Congress and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) to enact laws suited to the crypto landscape.

You could solve this problem for Biden by passing legislation that defines registration specific to the crypto industry.

Cuban has specifically aimed his criticism at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, particularly under the leadership of Gary Gensler. Genslers tough stance on cryptocurrencies including discarding Judge Torres judgment on Ripple, and discarding the Howey Test has drawn him criticisms endlessly. Industry leaders argue that such enforcement-focused regulation will hinder innovation and not focus on investor protection.

Beyond regulatory concerns, theres growing discontent within the crypto community toward the Biden administrations approach. Charles Hoskinson, founder of Cardano, warns of potential electoral consequences if the administration continues to alienate crypto enthusiasts.

Its clear that the Biden administration is working against the interests of the crypto industry, which could have repercussions in the upcoming election.

Cuban highlights the growing influence of crypto voters, stressing that their concerns cant be ignored. He cautions that the SECs actions risk losing legitimacy and may sway votes in the upcoming election.

The next U.S. presidential election is not just based on human rights being properly enforced but also a fair approach towards cryptocurrency adoption and regulatory clarity. When voices like Hayden Adams and Mark Cuban have spoken about issues in the crypto community, it is sure to influence electoral outcomes.

Also Check Out : Trump Makes U-Turn on Cryptocurrency; Pledges Support for Digital Donations

This is just the beginning of the crypto and politics conversation. What are your predictions for the future?

Follow this link:

Uniswap Founder, Cardano's Hoskinson and Mark Cuban Reveals Crypto's Influence on the Next U.S. Presidential ... - Coinpedia Fintech News

Marylands Democratic primary is the most expensive in the country, thanks almost entirely to Trone; hes sunk $61.8 million into this race, after spending tens of millions of dollars on four House campaigns, blanketing airwaves and YouTube with his Horatio Alger story. Alsobrooks, who went on the air in February, has spent a tenth as much.

At a Tuesday night rally at Silver Springs AFI movie theater, where California Rep. Adam Schiff praised Trones understanding of our economy and ability to defend our democracy, Trones ads played on the big screen while a few dozen voters took their seats so many that over 15 minutes of I approved this message-ing, no ad was played twice.

Yet the race remains close. Its final weeks have become an increasingly personal, tense contest between candidates battling over intertwined issues around race and who is best positioned to defend what until recently had been considered a safe seat.

Republicans havent won here since 1980, and the Donald Trump-led GOP is practically designed to lose in Maryland: Montgomery and Prince Georges counties, D.C. suburbs that cast nearly a million votes in 2020, gave less than 150,000 of them to Trump.

But the surprise decision by popular former Gov. Larry Hogan, a moderate anti-Trump Republican, has turned the general into a tossup. For the Democrats, thats exponentially increased the stakes of their primary.

Hogans entrance ended our complacency about the fall election, said Rep. Jamie Raskin, who has endorsed Alsobrooks, and beat Trone in 2016 to win his safe Montgomery County seat. (Trone got to Congress by spending $18 million in the neighboring, competitive 8th District.)

Since Hogans entrance in February, Trone has made his personal fortune a centerpiece of his pitch: If he wins the nomination, Democrats wont have to spend cash in Maryland that theyd earmarked for Ohio, Montana, or other competitive states.

It will give them a lot more flexibility to spend money elsewhere, Trone told Semafor on Tuesday. Im sure that will appeal to Leader Schumer.

The deep-pockets argument, along with Trones years of party donations and go-everywhere campaigning, helped him win over many Democrats who repeat his argument: He has more relevant experience than Alsobrooks, and he can win. But most of the states congressional delegation has stuck with Alsobrooks, confident that Hogans support will fade by November and wary of once again telling Black voters who make up a third of the states electorate that its not their turn yet.

Maryland Democrats previously rejected Black candidates when Senate seats opened up 2006 and 2016 agonizing about it the whole time, then winning the general anyway. Neither of those races divided elected Democrats like this; Ben Cardin and Chris Van Hollen, the winners in those years, had most of the establishment behind them. But Gov. Wes Moore, the first Black Marylander to hold that office, endorsed Alsobrooks six months ago; Adrienne Jones, the first Black female state House Speaker, beat him to it.

Moore told Semafor that the electability concerns about Alsobrooks, who has out-raised Hogan, were misplaced: Regardless of what happens in a primary, every single one of us are going to be all in to make sure that our nominee wins the race.

Alsobrooks goes further, suggesting she may be better positioned to unite the partys diverse wings come the general.

Whats going to be needed is a coalition of people from all backgrounds who will come together to defeat Larry Hogan, Alsobrooks told Semafor after stopping to talk to voters at an early voting site in Bowie. Im the person who has the experience of doing that. The evidence that Trones wealth wasnt insurance against a Hogan win, she said, was that Trone had outspent her all year, and shed closed the gap.

Trone, for his part, has consistently highlighted support from non-white and female Democrats in his omnipresent TV spots; Black men whod benefited from his investments in criminal justice reform, women of all races who were helped by his support for family planning. He could even get to the county executives left on some issues. Trone had always opposed the death penalty; Alsobrooks would only say, passively, that Maryland had banned it.

The candidates didnt disagree on much else, so Alsobrookss supporters homed in on how Trone and his surrogates talked. In March, after Prince Georges County Council Member Ed Burroughs said in one Trone ad that the Senate was not a job for people with training wheels, more than 600 Black women co-signed a letter that denounced its tones of misogyny and racism.

That comment was struck from the ad, but the attention hurt Trone. In Silver Spring, pressed on the training wheels quote, Trone noted that he didnt say it in the ad; when a reporter pointed out that Trone had used the same phrase, the candidate said that we stand by the fact that Burroughs made the comment, and, frankly, she doesnt have the experience at the federal level. What mattered, he explained, was what he was going to do with the Senate seat.

I have supported wonderful women and diverse candidates all over this country, and will continue to do so, Trone said. But what the voters keep saying, time and time again, is look at what I can do for you.

But as early voting wrapped up, Trones non-white surrogates kept saying what hed been told not to say: Alsobrooks wasnt ready for the job, or sensitive enough to other non-white Democrats. We need someone who can be effective from day one, Prince Georges County States Attorney Aisha Braveboy said on Thursday, when pro-Trone Democrats gathered at a union hall to support him to argue that voters needed to look past the candidates race.

I wouldnt vote for Candace Owens, no matter what she was running for, said Krystal Oriadha, another county council member whod rejected Alsobrooks. The idea that we just have to vote for someone because of their gender, because of their color, negating any other issues, is insulting to us as a community. (Owens is a high-profile Black conservative pundit.)

On the stump, Alsobrooks didnt lead with her race or gender and didnt really need to. She would certainly make history, but more importantly, she will make a difference, Georgia Sen. Raphael Warnock told reporters after a meeting with the candidate and Black pastors, redirecting a question about race to talk about the investments made by the Democratic Senate.

My basic thought is positive politics, high road politics is what wins in Maryland, Raskin said, asked about the challenges of facing the self-funding Trone. Ive told that to all the candidates. I think that that is the way to go.

See the original post here:
Democrats never expected this Senate primary to have such high stakes - Semafor

There might be as many opinions about crypto as there are cryptocurrency tokens. And with tens of thousands of digital assets populating the crypto market, thats certainly a lot of opinions.

That sheer scale of noise is in part why it can be so challenging to get a clear view of the Web3 landscape something that holds true for regulators, retail investors, consumers and businesses alike.

This, as the regulatory environment surrounding cryptocurrencies is becoming increasingly complex within the U.S., with the House of Representatives voting Wednesday (May 8) to approvea resolutionrejecting U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) cryptocurrency accounting guidance alleged to have deterred banks from handling crypto customers.

Almost immediately, President Biden released a statement saying that he would veto the resolution if it made it so far as to reach his desk.

The Administration strongly opposes passage of H.J. Res. 109, which would disrupt the SECs work to protect investors in crypto-asset markets and to safeguard the broader financial system as explained in staffs accompanying release, SAB 121 was issued in response to demonstrated technological, legal, and regulatory risks that have caused substantial losses to consumers, said the Executive Office of the President in a Wednesday statement.

If the President were presented with H.J. Res. 109, he would veto it, the release concluded.

If you want Americans to be able to engage with digital assets safely and securely, banks which are some of the most regulated businesses in our country are probably the best way,Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.), chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said in response.

Read more: This Week in Web3: Wells Notices, Crypto Payments and Usability

Still, amid regulatory and political developments, crypto still has its prominent adherents. One of whom is Block Chairman and Co-founder Jack Dorsey, a leading figure in the payments industry, who has made the bold prediction that bitcoins price could reach $1 million by 2030. As PYMNTS reported, Blocks existing $200 million investment in bitcoin grew by around 160% during the companys most recent financial quarter, $573 million.

All thats to say that Dorsey may not be the most objective source when discussing the growth of a currency with no backing. His optimistic forecast is in part based on the belief that Bitcoin will play a crucial role in the future of finance, serving as the internets native currency.

And, of course, for bitcoin or any crypto asset to reach such a valuation, the regulatory stars will need to align. A situation that continues to look unlikely, at least in the U.S.

For example, Web3 company Ripple is running into fresh SEC trouble following the April announcement of its own dollar-pegged stablecoin, as the company moves forward with its plan to expand itspayments business in the U.S.

In a Tuesday (May 7) filing, the SEC wrote, Ripples primary business continues to be, as it has been since 2013, unregistered sales of XRP. It also plans to issue a new unregistered crypto asset, arguing that Ripple has built its Web3 business by leveraging the sale of unregistered securities, and that the stablecoin project can be painted with the same brush, too.

Read more: What CFOs Should Know About the Growing Use of Stablecoins

Still, in todays post-bitcoin-ETF landscape, crypto is working hard on making further inroads into the traditional financial sector.

Big banks and financial institutions are much more interested today than they certainly were five or six years ago, when we rolled out some products for the first time,Brooks Entwistle, senior VP of global customer success and managing director atRipple, told PYMNTS this fall. You certainly almost never saw the boardroom when you brought up the topic of blockchain and especially crypto in the early days.

And this receptivity is having repercussions across the marketplace. Online brokerageRobinhood Marketson Wednesday (May 8) reported first-quarter profits that exceeded expectations, driven bystrong cryptotrading volumes boosted by positive sentiment toward the crypto industry.

However, Robinhood faces challenges in the form of aWells noticefrom the SEC, indicating potential enforcement action against the company. This development raises concerns about the future of Robinhoods crypto trading arm.

That, it seems, exemplifies the state of the crypto sector in 2024: two steps forward, and three steps back. Or maybe, it is the other way around only time will tell.

Here is the original post:

Making Sense of the State of Crypto in 2024 - PYMNTS.com