Whenever Trump's been taking crypto seriously or not, we can't deny that crypto is making history in politics. I'd say crypto is beginning to matter in America. Back then, crypto was nothing compared to what it is right now. Crypto voters could certainly make a difference in this year's election. While a lot of people still haven't heard about or used crypto before, times are changing at a very fast pace. The rising popularity of Bitcoin can't be ignored. Either the US government joins the game or gets left behind in the dust.

Imagine what would happen if Trump wins the White House and Republicans take control of both chambers of Congress (House + Senate). The crypto market would be going all the way to the moon (or Mars for that matter). I doubt Harris will make things better for crypto, especially when the Biden administration regulated it with an "iron fist". She is part of such administration (currently the sitting Vice President of the United States), anyways. Hopefully, Americans in support of crypto choose wisely before it's too late.

That may have played a role but also US judiciary system usually makes an example of certain people, specially the first cases to send a signal to others who might want to go on the same path. So Ross had to get life so that no one else dares create a decentralized anonymous marketplace.
Exactly why they went so hard on Aaron Swartz and traumatized him so much that led to his suicide.

In contrast, SBF is just a scammer so he is not the first person or first case.

Politicians are like chameleons that change colours to suit their interests. Donald Trump is a well-known liar, who has been indicted for engaging in criminal activities. He can easily change his stance after he gains political power. Trump would give many reasons why his campaign promises cannot be implemented after he becomes POTUS. Bitcoin is immune to politics ( the market will readjust after any political event or policy), so I don't care about what Kamala Harris or Trump says about the crypto industry. But I trust Harris more than Trump, that's my personal opinion.    

Yep for sure, and these elections are run by fiat money donators and lobbyists. crypto has close to  zero influence and will continue to do so for some time

Two have turned coat and offer their support for Trump including RFK who dropped out of the presidential race earlier in the week and this ex-democrat Tulsi Gabbard right afterwards:

source: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/aug/26/tulsi-gabbard-endorses-donald-trump

Still, cryptocurrency and how it will be handled will be more infocus this time around since four years ago there weren't any influence from corporations and governments moving bitcoin around from it's wallets in a while.
Also the big deciding factor that the candidates have to talk about it are the bitcoin spot ETF inflowing billions since their inception on the financial landscape early in the year.

https://www.reuters.com/technology/blackrocks-etf-becomes-largest-bitcoin-fund-world-bloomberg-news-reports-2024-05-29

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-05-29/blackrock-s-ibit-now-world-s-largest-bitcoin-btc-etf-as-gbtc-shrinks

Yes, there is no guarantee that Trump will be elected and will bring anything good to crypto. But is the current administration good for crypto? And what guarantees that if Harris is elected, crypto will be better off than under Biden?

Most people will support Trump, simply because they no longer have faith in the current government (Democrats) and they want to bet on something new. While betting on Trump is not a guarantee, it is still worth betting on because compared to the current administration, we can see that they are not crypto-friendly.

I don't like politicians either but I really don't see why Trump should be lying about being favorable to bitcoin and its adoption: he's a businessman, whoever has a brain understands why bitcoin should be joined rather than be fought, especially because being completely decentralized it's a war a country can win. If Trump wins we could see some very interesting developments.

The same here, I do not like either candidate but I also do not believe the one (or ones) being credited for being crypto friendly or for apparently making positive noises about issues that might resonate with voters. I think that was when the chameleon comment was made earlier with good reason.

It really is up to the financial sector lobbying groups that support candidates whether they will push for a crypto friendly environment or not, therefore if they do get their candidate in to office they will probably be the ones making that decision.

What you stated is highly debatable and cannot be taken as a matter of fact even though claim it but for a moment even if were to believe Trump was the best bet for the future of Bitcoin in the U.S. going forward, would it be appropriate for voters to cast their vote based on one aspect alone? For example, whether Trump or Harris in future made pro-crypto noises, does it matter if they are removing funding from a sector most people care about including low earners and those that need free medical or social care? Or of they are overspending on sectors they care little for?

Crypto will survive long after Trump and Harris are replaced by others.