Government is authority, once they notice a threat, it is easy for them to attack it. The government cannot eliminate Bitcoin, but can set laws and regulations that will make it difficult for people to use and adopt Bitcoin. Watching Bitcoin become legally accepted as a currency in countries is what i do not think governments will consider, nobody enjoys censorship more than the government.

Most of the government will not accept it as a currency because the fact that bitcoin is decentralized, a lot of people would probably be using bitcoin over their own currency just to get rid of the government's control. And any government would never want that, that's why bitcoin until now is considered a threat to the government and its own legal tender, no wonder why are seeing strict regulations towards bitcoin. Bitcoin can be a good as an investment asset, but it will be hardly become a global currency because the government won't allow it.

They might have recognized it, defined it in terms that doesn’t really present them as secured enough for people to actually invest in and be rest assured that they wouldn’t have need for regrets in the future. It’s the game they play, the government and they do that just to reap off it and not fully view it for the secured currency that we would like to see it to be. They’ve recognized it as a property but, if we are to take this back to the white paper, then we would have to ask ourselves,

Is that what Bitcoin really is? A property and that’s it, I think not.

What you said is indeed true. Every country's view on rejecting Bitcoin in the early days was quite clear. Because Bitcoin was created by Satoshi not just as an investment asset but so that transactions wouldn't depend on banks and Bitcoin came to challenge that system. So in the early days almost every country probably wanted to fight Bitcoin because of its decentralized nature which threatened traditional monetary control.

However over time at the same time they also couldn't ignore the surge in its value as an asset. Some countries even started considering Bitcoin as part of their reserves or strategic assets, precisely because of its consistently strong performance in the global market. Bitcoin also offers an alternative that's hard for central authorities to fully control. Governments eventually come to terms with or adapt to Bitcoin and they even benefit from it because they can regulate exchanges and impose taxes, but the Bitcoin system itself operates without a single center that can be shut down.

Though some countries, the government might not fully accept the usage of Bitcoin because of it decentralized nature, but somehow this people adopt the usage of Bitcoin for their own personal use knowing how good it is, some of them even have some Bitcoin in store, most of them are into Bitcoin investment, but they might be scared of losing the authority they have towards ruling the finance to Bitcoin because of their own benefits, because they will not longer have access to control people's money no taxing, if they should consider all this it will be difficult for the government to normalize it, since the government and it's people doesn't have power over Bitcoin it is not as democratic as that.

One full nodes one vote? Such thing doesn't exist on Bitcoin protocol/network either. While i occasionally see software and software version as a way to measure support to certain BIP or upcoming fork, it's not solid measurement either. It can be manipulated by running multiple full nodes or even running fake full nodes while actually only run one full node (for example, https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoinxt/comments/3iao3i/how_to_run_3000_completely_legit_full_nodes_aka/).

Actually people have this misconceptions about government have control on Bitcoin, but the truth is Bitcoin is decentralized and there's no single entities can control it.

But what they can control is the narrative or sentiments of people, if they just stop listening on the bluff and other actions they did which does not have any correlation with Bitcoin. Provably we won't see any of their action could affect the movement of this coin.

Government really want to be in control of everything, then what they an implement is taxation and other act to control the platforms operating in their jurisdictions.

It is true that Bitcoin does not require legal tender status to receive any kind of recognition from the governments. In fact, as far as there is a possibility of purchasing, selling and holding the currency legally, there will always be a way in which it can become accepted even in the face of existing currencies. It had first emerged as a cash currency turned digital but now has increasingly come to be seen by many as an investment for the future.

What must be remembered here is that while Bitcoin has 'potential', it cannot necessarily be called 'certainty'. This is because the currency has low supply and low concentration which is very appealing for investors. However, owing to its volatility, it cannot provide any guarantee for future gains. Some Governments or institutions might take the currency but others might decide against it.

Yeah people always have freedom to choose what they like. Also fiat already rooted and that make Bitcoin struggle to replaced it. But I don't actually see a need to replace the fiat or event the bank. Since Bitcoin is already good to exist as another good alternative choice to pick.

They can pick Bitcoin if they want freedom. If they want total convenience and fine with government regulation, then they can choose to use fiat.

But I think in future, people will end up choosing both. Because its good to have balance rather than seeing both currency competes with each other.