Trump has Big Time Momentum. His Advisors Want to Fvck Things Up Keeping Trump Paying Them More. Trump Should Shut Up About Bitcoin.
Economy is in Shambles. Biden Flames out of Debate then Drops Out. Biden Emerges a Super Hero after Dodging Bullet so Why Won't He just Shut up and Cross the Finish Line?
Let’s all review why Bitcoin will never be recommended by The Pickaxe or Silver Academy. (this is the short list, write me for the long list)
1. Gold and Silver have intrinsic value based on their physical properties. Silver is the World’s #1 conductor of electricity. Gold and Silver are 1 and 2 (ductility, malleability, conductivity)
2. Gold is used in over 1,000 industrial applications. Silver is used in over 20,000 industrial applications
3. Gold and Silver Jewelry occupy the top 2 components of all fine jewelry.
4. Gold and Silver have both endured over 2,550 global recessions, regime changes, revolutions, famines, transitions in power sources (wood to coal to steam to oil to gas to renewables back to fossil hybrid to fuel cell to nuclear to now)
5. Bitcoin has never been through ONE RECESSION, YES NOT ONE
6. Bitcoin relies on computing and all computing has built in obsolescence.
7. Bitcoin wiped out by Electro magnetic impulse
8. Bitcoin eliminated by Quantum Computing
9. Bitcoin originated by NSA
10. Bitcoin eliminated by power outages
11. Bitcoin eliminated by cyber attacks
12. Bitcoin can be seized, hacked.
13. Bitcoin assets can be frozen by tyrants like Trudeau
14. Bitcoin mining is illegal in many countries.
15. Bitcoin mining is losing money
16. When lights go off gold and silver shine under candlelight whereas Bitcoin is wiped out.
17. Bitcoin ledger is transparent (Fvcking Bad system)
18. Gold and Silver is Private Coin making Bitcoin Public Coin
In the annals of politics, it's often the case that a frontrunner, seemingly so far ahead that they could win by just smiling, showing up, and waving, ends up tripping over their own words. The irony is that sometimes, the best strategy for a politician is to simply remain silent.
This narrative aims to chronicle how the human ego, a powerful force in politics, can lead the frontrunner to their own undoing. It's a tale of self-inflicted wounds, strategic blunders, and a series of scandals that culminate in a fall from grace.
It's like the Miranda warning when "the right to remain silent" is the best pathway to the least pain.
Shutting up the best practice but for Trump (it’s all so hard to do")
Cases when Shutting One’s Mouth Would Have Worked
Republican presidential nomination in 1860.
How William Seward lost to Abraham Lincoln.
William Seward had previously served as Governor of New York from 1839 to 1842, which contributed to his frontrunner status.
Seward, a prominent senator from New York and former governor, was widely considered the frontrunner for the Republican presidential nomination in 1860.
He had a strong political reputation, extensive experience, and national recognition. Many believed his nomination was all but assured, and Seward himself was confident of his victory.
However, Seward's overconfidence and some of his past statements ultimately contributed to his defeat. During his career, Seward had made several controversial speeches that alienated more conservative Republicans. In particular, his 'Irrepressible Conflict' speech in 1858 was considered too radical by some party members who feared it would cost them support in moderate states.
Despite his strong position, his strategic errors (by voicing his opinions) proved to be his undoing.
Adaptability is a key skill in politics. In the case of Seward, his reputation as the clear frontrunner made him a target for his rivals. Other candidates, including Abraham Lincoln, were able to position themselves as more electable alternatives. Lincoln's campaign team skillfully worked behind the scenes, making deals and building coalitions with delegates from various states. Lincoln’s effective maneuvering, combined with Lincoln's perceived electability, was a significant factor in his victory at the Republican National Convention in Chicago.
This case demonstrates how a political frontrunner's past statements and overconfidence can lead to their downfall, even when victory seems assured. Had Seward been more cautious in his rhetoric or more attentive to the shifting political landscape, he might have secured the nomination and potentially the presidency
Joseph McCarthy rose to prominence in the early 1950s as a leading figure in the anti-communist movement, becoming a frontrunner in American politics through his aggressive pursuit of alleged communists in the U.S. government. His accusations and investigations initially garnered significant public support and media attention, making him a powerful and influential senator.
However, McCarthy ultimately shot himself in the foot through his increasingly reckless and unfounded claims. The turning point came during the televised Army-McCarthy hearings in 1954, where his abrasive behavior and lack of evidence were exposed to the public. His infamous exchange with Army lawyer Joseph Welch, who asked, "Have you no sense of decency, sir?" marked the beginning of McCarthy's downfall.
His inability to moderate his rhetoric and tactics led to his censure by the Senate in December 1954, effectively ending his political career.
Trump didn’t need to Make ANY Pro Bitcoin Statements unless Someone is making him do it. (Or Paying Him to Do it)
Former President Donald Trump and independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. are vying for the support of cryptocurrency enthusiasts at the Bitcoin 2024 conference in Nashville. Both candidates are attempting to appeal to crypto voters, recognizing the growing importance of this demographic in the upcoming election.
Trump, who previously criticized cryptocurrencies, has shifted his stance and is now embracing them as part of his campaign strategy. He is scheduled to speak at the conference, marking a significant change in his approach to digital currencies.
Just yesterday Donald Trump claimed “that America must dominate the Bitcoin industry, as if we don't China will.” Peter Schiff responded, “China has no interest in Bitcoin. They already made mining it illegal. China is happy to let the U.S. .waste its resources on Bitcoin, while it focuses on manufacturing goods people need.”
Please explain the seemingly overnight change in Trump’s thinking? Hope it isn’t a signal that he is considering Bitcoin pumper evil Larry Fink (CEO of Blackstone) for some kind of cabinet post (as rumored US Treasury) Trump since has denied ever considering Jamie Dimon or Larry Fink (appropriate last name)
