Public
- Public
- Network
- Groups
- Featured
- Popular
- People

Conversation

Notices

Embed this notice
Molly White (molly0xfff@hachyderm.io)'s status on Saturday, 16-Nov-2024 08:55:17 JST Molly White

Newsletter: Crypto’s efforts to buy the 2024 elections paid off, and we’re in for a bumpy ride.
A recap of how unprecedented crypto super PAC spending impacted 58 Congressional races, and the pro-crypto appointees Trump is already eyeing.
https://www.citationneeded.news/issue-70/
#crypto #cryptocurrency #USpolitics #USpol

In conversation about 6 months ago from hachyderm.io permalink
- Embed this notice
  Molly White (molly0xfff@hachyderm.io)'s status on Saturday, 16-Nov-2024 08:55:46 JST Molly White
  in reply to
  
  While the cryptocurrency industry failed to convincingly prove a flood of single-issue crypto voters were waiting to hit the polls, they proved that they didn’t actually need people to care about crypto so long as billionaire industry executives had enough money to throw around.
  #crypto #cryptocurrency #USpolitics #USpol
  
  In conversation about 6 months ago permalink
- Embed this notice
  Molly White (molly0xfff@hachyderm.io)'s status on Saturday, 16-Nov-2024 08:57:00 JST Molly White
  in reply to
  
  Crypto-focused super PACs spent in 68 races across 35 states. $70.9 million went to support Republicans, and $48.3 million backed Democrats.
  While some of the outcomes may have their spending to thank, much of this was a “back-the-winners” strategy.
  #crypto #cryptocurrency #USpolitics #USpol
  In conversation about 6 months ago permalink
  Attachments
  1. As for the Congressional races, the crypto-focused super PACs spent in 68 races across 35 states. $70.9 million went to support Republicans, and $48.3 million backed Democrats. Only ten races failed to go their way (eight if you exclude two races where candidates they backed in the primaries withdrew — and in both of those two races, the crypto PACs chose new candidates to support who went on to win). 58 races went how they wanted them to go, with either their supported candidate winning the election, or candidates they spent to oppose losing. The remaining two races — California’s House District 45 and Alaska’s House At-Large District — have still not been called, as of writing. Certainly, some of their success comes down to the PACs’ willingness to shell out massive amounts of money. The crypto PACs put $40 million behind Ohio’s Republican Senatorial candidate, car salesman and one-time blockchain entrepreneur Bernie Moreno, and the tight margins in his race against Democratic incumbent and crypto opponent Sherrod Brown means that it’s possible that it was the crypto spending that made the difference.
    https://media.hachyderm.io/media_attachments/files/113/489/672/186/149/157/original/0d48fac0db23e8a5.png
  2. However, it’s important to note that cryptocurrency PACs were largely going with a “back the winners” strategy in this cycle — exemplified by their spending on candidates like Jim Justice (R, WV Senate) and John Curtis (R, UT Senate), who were all but assured to win their races, and whose races were called moments after polls closed. Although it took a while for me to realize this — there were times when I wondered why the crypto PACs were supporting some candidate when their opponent seemed roughly equivalent in their crypto-related stances — the strategy later became clear. As I noted in an earlier issue [I68], a whopping 32 of the 39 candidates endorsed by Coinbase’s advocacy group Stand With Crypto had been assigned a 75% or more chance of winning their respective races. Graph of 39 Congressional candidates, showing them plotted on a vertical axis of 0% to 100% likelihood of winning. Almost all are in the top portion of the graph.
    https://media.hachyderm.io/media_attachments/files/113/489/672/230/323/190/original/0219f6c19edba048.png
- Embed this notice
  Molly White (molly0xfff@hachyderm.io)'s status on Saturday, 16-Nov-2024 08:58:00 JST Molly White
  in reply to
  
  This strategy of betting on the winners was partly to ensure loyal advocates in Congress, but it was also because the crypto industry’s spending was as much a show of force as it was about actually achieving their desired outcomes.
  #crypto #cryptocurrency #USpolitics #USpol
  In conversation about 6 months ago permalink
  Attachments
  1. This strategy of betting on the winners was partly to ensure loyal advocates in Congress, but it was also because the crypto industry’s spending was as much a show of force as it was about actually achieving their desired outcomes. They revealed this during the primaries, when they dumped $10 million in opposition spending against Katie Porter in California, $2 million against Jamaal Bowman in New York, and $1.4 million against Cori Bush in Missouri. Although none of these candidates were particularly outspoken against crypto, that wasn’t really the point. Instead, the crypto industry used those races to send a message: fall in line, or we might deploy our millions against you, too. It didn’t really matter if the industry spending directly caused their targets to lose their races, so long as there was a plausible argument that it played a role (in both Bowman and Bush’s races, crypto industry money made up only about 20% of the opposition spending). We can expect the industry to do the same in the future elections: claim responsibility for the outcomes of all the races where they spent money, even if those outcomes were likely not impacted much by crypto industry involvement.
    https://media.hachyderm.io/media_attachments/files/113/489/676/451/975/838/original/900c90856bef65a3.png
  2. Given various candidates’ willingness to buy the industry-manufactured myth about blocs of single-issue crypto voters, I worry candidates in future elections may also fall for this story and choose to submit to crypto industry pressures rather than risk millions in opposition spending next time they stand for re-election. And the industry is already scrambling to ensure politicians have no doubts about the wealth crypto PACs might muster against them, refilling the super PAC war chests with another $25 million from Coinbase [I69] and $23 million from Andreessen Horowitz.13
    https://media.hachyderm.io/media_attachments/files/113/489/678/900/873/759/original/8ed358f3a068a16b.png
- Embed this notice
  Molly White (molly0xfff@hachyderm.io)'s status on Saturday, 16-Nov-2024 09:00:46 JST Molly White
  in reply to
  
  In this issue I also address the topic of a “Bitcoin strategic reserve” — a talking point that keeps coming up with crypto advocates fantasizing about Trump’s future plans, but which seems to be broadly being confused with promises made by his one-time opponent, RFK Jr.
  #crypto #cryptocurrency #USpolitics #USpol
  In conversation about 6 months ago permalink
  Attachments
- Embed this notice
  Molly White (molly0xfff@hachyderm.io)'s status on Saturday, 16-Nov-2024 09:01:41 JST Molly White
  in reply to
  
  All that, plus updates on several criminal cases, an outline of regulatory and law enforcement scrutiny towards Polymarket, and a look at Trump’s various pro-crypto allies and Cabinet nominees in this issue.
  #crypto #cryptocurrency #USpolitics #USpol
  
  In conversation about 6 months ago permalink
- Embed this notice
  Molly White (molly0xfff@hachyderm.io)'s status on Saturday, 16-Nov-2024 09:02:06 JST Molly White
  in reply to
  
  I suspect I will not be hurting for material to cover over the next four years.
  If you haven’t yet, consider signing up for a free or pay-what-you-want subscription to receive each issue in your email, and to support my work.
  https://www.citationneeded.news/signup
  #crypto #cryptocurrency #USpolitics #USpol
  
  In conversation about 6 months ago permalink
- Embed this notice
  Darryl Ramm (darryl_ramm@hachyderm.io)'s status on Saturday, 16-Nov-2024 10:03:10 JST Darryl Ramm
  in reply to
  
  @molly0xfff
  Meanwhile... we all have four year custodial sentences.
  
  In conversation about 6 months ago permalink
- Embed this notice
  Molly White (molly0xfff@hachyderm.io)'s status on Saturday, 16-Nov-2024 23:16:14 JST Molly White
  in reply to
  - Phosphenes
  @Phosphenes there wouldn't be any. it's not a feasible option for many reasons, including that you could scrape together every crypto token that exists and still be far short of $35T
  
  In conversation about 6 months ago permalink
- Embed this notice
  Phosphenes (phosphenes@glasgow.social)'s status on Saturday, 16-Nov-2024 23:16:16 JST Phosphenes
  in reply to
  
  @molly0xfff
  Trump suggests using crypto to solve US national debt:
  https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/donald-trump-says-crypto-could-help-pay-35-trillion-us-debt
  Marrying the nation's economy to crypto seems like filling your gas tank with hand grenades.
  But what would be the specific economic effects?
  
  In conversation about 6 months ago permalink

Public

Conversation

Notices

Feeds