Everyone in DC is talking about this. Don Davis voted YES on CLARITY when most House Democrats did not. He represents a Lean Republican seat, is the ranking Democrat on the Agriculture subcommittee overseeing digital assets, and could be positioned to chair it if Democrats take the House. Fairshake still left him out. Meanwhile, it is supporting Republicans in seats as safe as R+27, R+23, R+17 and R+15. If the standard is vulnerability, Davis qualifies. If the standard is rewarding pro-crypto votes, Davis qualifies. If the standard is committee influence, Davis qualifies. So why spurn one of the most important pro-crypto Democrats in Congress while spending on Republicans who are in little danger of losing? And this comes while Fairshake is spending tens of millions against Democrat Sherrod Brown, with no comparable punishment for Republican Susan Collins (who is vulnerable and voted against CLARITY). Bipartisanship cannot just mean putting Democrats on a press release. If Democrats take difficult votes for your industry and you abandon them when they are vulnerable, they will notice. They have noticed. Yet again the industry is exposing itself to political backlash post Nov 3rd. Make it make sense.