Florida's early vote looked strong for Clinton. Democrats show up in the early voting period when states offer it, and the numbers in Florida, Nevada, and other swing states suggested a good night was
Florida's early vote looked strong for Clinton. Democrats show up in the early voting period when states offer it, and the numbers in Florida, Nevada, and other swing states suggested a good night was coming. The polls closed and everything shifted. Trump's numbers kept pace with Clinton's the moment early voting results came in. After that, momentum turned. By 11:30 p.m., her campaign stopped sharing results at the election party. Every losing campaign tries this move. None of it works. The moment results stop flowing, people on the floor figure out what's happening. The race is decided. Cell phones made the tactic pointless. Anyone checks a phone and sees the numbers going the wrong way. Television captured the uncomfortable scene: staff members trying to project confidence while the night went bad.
Clinton didn't address her staff that night. Twenty years of covering politics and I've never seen that happen. Gore didn't concede right away because he was still fighting. Clinton gave up. She couldn't face the people who spent twelve years on this. Her concession came the next morning, with a message about unity that resonated. It would have moved more people if anyone was still watching.
Trump won. How that shapes Bitcoin is unclear. The election never mentioned digital currency. The debates didn't touch it. Campaigns deal with what voters have experienced. The internet existed in 1992. It became a campaign issue in 1996, when people could see its effects. Dole took a position on technology. Bitcoin hasn't reached that stage. People don't use it enough for it to factor into elections. What matters is Trump's regulatory regime.
Three things will shape Bitcoin: Trump's approach to financial regulation, what he understands about technology, and his tolerance for chaos. His financial regulation plans remain opaque. Bloomberg tried to report on a Trump meeting with Wall Street bankers—if it occurred. The piece doesn't say where Trump was instead. Markets dislike uncertainty. Trump's victory rattled stocks. They recovered after someone claimed Trump would cut regulations. That unnamed prediction seemed to settle things. Trump has said things. Which he believes is unclear. Some statements contradict. He said in August he'd freeze new regulations. He's vowed to repeal Dodd-Frank. He wants to restore Glass-Steagall. These don't coexist.
Repealing Dodd-Frank would erase the post-2008 regulatory structure. The law mandates know-your-customer verification. Bitcoin businesses struggle with KYC requirements. Nathan Wosnack, founder and president of Ubitquity, said eliminating Dodd-Frank would open doors for startups. "Coupled with the relaxed SEC rules surrounding crowdfunding, the opportunities are boundless," he said. Bitfinex ran into trouble with the CFTC over offering leveraged trading and paid $75,000 in penalties. Relaxing Dodd-Frank would ease overseas remittance restrictions, potentially creating room for Bitcoin remittance companies, though current remittance rules aren't stringent.
Republicans control Congress and will support deregulation efforts. Trump's statements on Dodd-Frank sit between unclear and contradictory. He might eliminate it or replace it. Trump's grasp of technology is in question. For someone his age, his technical knowledge resembles Clinton's. Neither understood it. That's a problem. Transformative technologies unsettle people who don't understand them. If Bitcoin reaches Congress and Trump's desk, can he absorb the technical argument? Trump said he'd call Bill Gates to shut the internet down to fight ISIS. He dropped that after someone explained how impossible it was. He hasn't let go of his claim that the U.S. handed over internet control. During the primary, Trump claimed that moving the domain registry from ICANN to an international body meant giving the internet to China. That reflects a misunderstanding of how the internet works.
Internet censorship doesn't originate from ICANN authority. Turkey's Twitter block had nothing to do with ICANN. Pakistan's YouTube block didn't involve it. China's firewall has no connection to ICANN. If ICANN could enforce censorship, The Pirate Bay would be gone. The U.S. would delete it if ICANN held that power. Server location determines control. The owner complies with their country's laws. ICANN manages domain names the way a phone book company manages listings. It has never taken down a website. When the government shut down Bodog.com, it worked through Bodog's registry, not ICANN.
Trump doesn't understand the internet. Most people don't. The danger grows when you combine his terrorism fixation with his disregard for privacy. Privacy is central to every digital cash project, going back to DigiCash. The cryptographers who fought the Clipper Chip battles built the first pre-Bitcoin digital currencies. Niels Ferguson worked at DigiCash in 1994. Wired's Steven Levy quoted him on privacy and electronic payments: "If we have no privacy in our transaction systems, I can see every payment – every cup of coffee you drink, every Mars bar you get, every glass of Coke you drink, every door you open, every telephone call – you make. If I can see those, I don't need a private investigator. I can just sit behind my terminal and follow you around all day.' And then people start to realize that, yes, privacy is in fact something important." Trump favors security over privacy. He intends to restore the Patriot Act. Combine that with his hawkish stance on terror, his dismissal of privacy rights, his tech ignorance, and if Bitcoin reaches his attention as a tool for terrorism financing, a hostile administration becomes plausible.
Bitcoin's price responds to disorder. Brexit sent it up. Greece's crisis sent it up. A TV personality with nuclear codes? Price went up. Global turmoil sends people toward Bitcoin as a hedge. Trump could generate that turbulence. We can't root for global chaos to boost Bitcoin. Planetary disruption carries consequences larger than markets. A geopolitical shake-up would probably drive Bitcoin higher.
The only certainty about Trump's presidency is uncertainty itself. Bitcoin, like gold, performs when other assets look risky. Trump could tank Bitcoin if he moves against it. His combination of deregulation impulses and erratic behavior suggests Bitcoin won't face the worst case.
