Can Kamala Harris Gain Crypto Support? Advocates Aren’t Convinced

• Bill Morgan questions Kamala Harris’s commitment to crypto, sparking debate among advocates.
• Tyler Winklevoss urges U.S. crypto voters to demand Harris end the “war on crypto.”
• Donald Trump promises to remove Gary Gensler as SEC chair, appealing to the crypto community.

Bill Morgan has sparked a debate over Kamala Harris’s stance on digital assets as the 2024 U.S. presidential election nears. In a recent post on his X account, Morgan criticized the “Crypto for Harris” crowd, claiming they are willing to back her without any clear evidence that her administration would change the current government’s policies toward crypto assets.

Morgan’s post reflects the growing concern among crypto advocates supporting Harris. He noted that many in this group seem eager to justify their support for her despite the lack of a clear commitment to changing the administration’s approach to cryptocurrency. 

According to Morgan, this behavior implies that the supporters will vote for Harris even if there is no sign that her administration would be more favorable toward digital assets than the current one.

Tyler Winklevoss, the co-founder of Gemini, responded to Morgan’s concerns on his X account, suggesting that if all 50 million U.S. crypto owners made their vote conditional on Harris taking action to end the “war on crypto” and removing SEC chair Gary Gensler before November 5th, it could pressure her to rethink her position. Winklevoss argued that this collective stance could make crypto a bipartisan issue, urging both parties to take the crypto community’s needs more seriously.

Adding to this sentiment, former President Donald Trump has positioned himself as a defender of cryptocurrency. Speaking at the Bitcoin 2024 Conference in Nashville earlier this year, Trump vowed to remove Gary Gensler from his role as SEC chair on his first day in office if re-elected. 

This promise, highlighted by Donald Trump, has resonated with many in the crypto community, who have long criticized Gensler for what they see as an overly aggressive regulatory approach and his reluctance to create industry-specific rules.