Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Crypto firms have spent $189M so far on 2026 US election, report says

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 123 posts

Re: Crypto firms have spent $189M so far on 2026 US election, report says

#101

Post by mothballed »

ToucanLoucan wrote: post #96
mothballed wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> You've answered the question as to why those people didn't support you I asked no such question. You said: > It's not hard to figure out, the fascists have been more explicitly welcoming to crypto freedom or at least put themselves out there to solicit that vote even if you claim their underlying policies aren't. To which I said: > If you back fascists to promote crypto, your values are fucked. This is not a statem…

1) The question I refer to is the ancestor to which our comments are under. A question under which we are responding, but not a question authored by you.

2) My apologies for not being more explicit -- the specifics of the loss of the "libertarian" "crypto bros" is not a wholistic cause but rather a small fraction of the cause but more importantly also a symptom. A symptom of something that happened in broader society of alienated or ignored voters being hoodwinked by smooth talking fascists that showed up with a message more enticing than "we don't want your vote" or "you're a self-selecting bloc of marks" or "your values are fucked." You can hate they're that dumb, or that immoral, or what not but at the end of the day their vote still counts as much as yours.

Re: Crypto firms have spent $189M so far on 2026 US election, report says

#102

Post by Cider9986 »

nyeah wrote: post #95
Cider9986 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I expressly mentioned Monero, which doesn't have a transparent ledger. It's fungible, like cash. Even Bitcoin is pseudonymous, so definitely has cons in terms of privacy compared to banks, but also benefits. Monero is completely private. What are the other errors in my critique of banks? Will you explain how Monero is worse than banks?

You claimed: >crypto in general is a big improvment on banks I responded to your claim. If you feel you can defend your claim, go ahead. If your only response is to change the subject, ok. That's your call.

You disinterpreted my claim and chose the weakest part of my comment to respond to. You responded to an argument I didn't even make.

Re: Crypto firms have spent $189M so far on 2026 US election, report says

#103

Post by estearum »

soupfordummies wrote: post #98
estearum wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Birthright citizenship is not a distraction

Well it’s by definition a distraction as it sucks all the air out of the newsroom. Doesn’t mean it’s not important just that it’s such a big story that any other rulings are gonna fly under the radar.

Yes, I suppose by that same definition 9/11 or World War 2 were the distractions of their time. Makes sense.

(Hint: that's not a useful nor typical definition of distraction)

Re: Crypto firms have spent $189M so far on 2026 US election, report says

#104

Post by nyeah »

Cider9986 wrote: post #102
nyeah wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You claimed: >crypto in general is a big improvment on banks I responded to your claim. If you feel you can defend your claim, go ahead. If your only response is to change the subject, ok. That's your call.

You disinterpreted my claim and chose the weakest part of my comment to respond to. You responded to an argument I didn't even make.

In my opinion, you shouldn't have posted a false claim.

Re: Crypto firms have spent $189M so far on 2026 US election, report says

#105

Post by soupfordummies »

estearum wrote: post #103
soupfordummies wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well it’s by definition a distraction as it sucks all the air out of the newsroom. Doesn’t mean it’s not important just that it’s such a big story that any other rulings are gonna fly under the radar.

Yes, I suppose by that same definition 9/11 or World War 2 were the distractions of their time. Makes sense. (Hint: that's not a useful nor typical definition of distraction)

Yeah fair enough at least NYT was giving it sub-headline status a bit ago

Re: Crypto firms have spent $189M so far on 2026 US election, report says

#106

Post by BiraIgnacio »

gwbas1c wrote: post #50
BiraIgnacio wrote: post #6

Is this a little or a lot? any idea how that compares to other industries and donors?

Paragraph #2 directly answers your question: > More than one-third of all corporate money contributed to this year's November elections, and primary elections leading up to them, has come from the crypto industry, making it the top corporate political spender, the group said.

Definitely a lot.. thanks, missed that

Re: Crypto firms have spent $189M so far on 2026 US election, report says

#107

Post by DiscourseFan »

khriss wrote: post #65

And as if to sprinkle salt on the wounds, the Supreme court today allowed unlimited spending by political parties 'in coordination with allied interests(read the money class)' https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48734220 Moneyed interests have always jockeyed for power, but earlier they were held somewhat in check by Congress which had to listen somewhat to voters. With Citizens united in 2010 and corporate media dr…

Yes that spending has been very helpful in keeping all these far left candidates from winning their primaries. It seems like the only thing that matters in politics is money.

Re: Crypto firms have spent $189M so far on 2026 US election, report says

#108

Post by quantum_state »

To make America great again, we need to rid private money from politics and election. A public pool should be established with well defined rules and transparency to fund election and campaign. It is a basic investment in healthy democracy.

Re: Crypto firms have spent $189M so far on 2026 US election, report says

#109

Post by never_inline »

khriss wrote: post #65

And as if to sprinkle salt on the wounds, the Supreme court today allowed unlimited spending by political parties 'in coordination with allied interests(read the money class)' https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48734220 Moneyed interests have always jockeyed for power, but earlier they were held somewhat in check by Congress which had to listen somewhat to voters. With Citizens united in 2010 and corporate media dr…

> the 1%

Nit, you're the 1%. The ones you're talking about are 0.001% or so.

Post reply on HN