View this email in your browser

The US crypto industry has been hoping that Kamala Harris would 'pivot' and separate herself from the Biden administration by suggesting a more beneficent stance towards the space.

Some jumped on her comment that she would "encourage innovative technologies like AI and digital assets while protecting our consumers and investors."

However, that's not really much of a change from Biden's previous executive order, which noted that "the rise in digital assets creates an opportunity to reinforce American leadership in the global financial system," intended to "support technological advances and ensure responsible development and use of digital assets."

These comments aren't particularly easy to parse, and it's difficult to figure out how policy might change between these two statements. However, both are more positive than saying that Bitcoin "just seems like a scam."

The weird thing is that despite Trump's gestures towards the industry, we know very little about what his policy would look like. Presumably, his party's tendency towards non-enforcement and non-regulation might benefit a space that has sometimes attracted the ire of regulators.

The real difference we can easily point to between actual crypto policy for these two candidates is that one of them has decided non-transferable governance tokens tied to an AAVE feeder that will apparently threaten the US financial system.

Who is behind World Liberty Financial, Trump's new crypto?

So I guess the pivot that Harris should have done is launching a pointless AAVE feeder with a non-transferable governance token that personally enriches her and threatens to destroy the financial system of the country she hopes to lead.