The trend of politicians receiving crypto donation began with Republican candidate Andrew Hemingway back in 2014. Afterward, many political candidates and state actors started accepting financial “aid” in Bitcoin. The U.S Federal Election Commission has offered guidance on how politicians can receive BTC as a contribution. For example, the same year saw Dan Elder, U.S. House of Representatives candidate in the state of Missouri, to fund his campaign solely with Bitcoin. Also, one of the presidential candidates, Rand Paul, was the first to accept Bitcoin for funding his 2016 campaign. However, some politicians like Hillary Clinton reject crypto donations.
Is it a marketing ploy or a chance to make crypto funding mainstream?
There is a possibility that political crypto fundraising can be a smart marketing tool more. This is not just an act of receiving financial aid. The candidates who accept it do it to make a political statement.
Crypto fundraising in politics could be shaped into a perfect marketing tool more than a financial one. Candidates, who accept crypto, mostly do it as a political statement to the masses. Accepting or rejecting digital donations are both a public manipulation tool. Once the adoption of cryptocurrencies spreads in the public domain, there is no doubt that politicians will start to look at raising funds through crypto.
Digital Fundraising: Good or Bad?
Crypto funds provide a decentralized infrastructure. Thus, nonprofit organizations and charities can take an easy advantage of it, as digital financial manipulations are much faster and efficient. Besides, with crypto tracking, donations become easier. In addition, it has the potential to allow donors to see how their money is used.
With the help of blockchain technology and crypto, raising campaign funds would make the donors and donations more transparent, not as suspicious as political donations and a matter of public record.
- Trading Instrument