In the first presidential debate between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris, cryptocurrencies were absent. Despite the crypto community’s hopes, neither candidate has touched on digital assets, preferring to focus on classic topics such as economics, immigration or foreign policy. This omission raises questions about the true importance of cryptocurrencies in the 2024 US election campaign.
A Debate Focused on Traditional Topics
The debate, which took place on 10 September 2024 at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia, saw the two candidates compete on economic and societal issues. Trump defended his record and promised to make the US the “bitcoin capital of the world,” while Harris criticized the outgoing administration’s handling of the pandemic. However, neither of them saw fit to discuss cryptocurrencies, which are a hot topic.
This decision is all the more surprising as cryptocurrencies have taken a growing place in the American public debate. Pro-crypto political action committees (PACs) have raised millions of dollars to influence the elections, and polls show that 20% of voters consider digital assets a major issue. The lack of discussion on this topic during the debate was therefore a disappointment to many industry observers.
The Crypto Industry, an Ignored Electoral Manna?
The omission of cryptocurrencies in the debate raises questions about the candidates’ strategy. Did they deliberately avoid the subject, judging that it did not resonate with the general electorate? Or did they simply prefer to focus on more conventional and consensual themes? In any case, this decision could have consequences on the crypto community’s engagement in the campaign.
Indeed, the “crypto vote” represents potentially a significant electoral windfall. If candidates do not take into account the concerns of this constituency, they risk depriving themselves of valuable support, especially in key states where elections are often played on the sidelines. Cryptocurrencies could thus become a forgotten issue in the campaign, to the detriment of both candidates.
