Two people, Kamala Harris and Donald Trump, want to be the next president of the United States. They have different ideas about how to use smart computers and machines, called AI, to make the country better. Harris wants to make sure AI is safe and follows rules, but Trump thinks AI should be free to grow and help people. The choice they make could change how AI works in the future. Read from source...

1. Harris and Trump's contrasting views on AI regulation and safety are not the only factors that will influence the future direction of AI policy in the U.S. Other factors, such as the balance of power between the legislative and executive branches, the role of the private sector, and the global landscape of AI development, will also play a significant role.
2. The claim that Harris has not been embraced by the crypto community is misleading. While it is true that she declined an invitation to The Bitcoin Conference, she has also shown interest in engaging with the crypto community, as evidenced by her meeting with crypto advocates in June 2021 and her statements on the need for regulation in the space. Additionally, her connection to the Democratic donors pushing for her to speak at the Permissionless conference suggests that she is not entirely dismissive of the crypto community's concerns.
3. The article's focus on the polls showing a close race between Trump and Harris is not particularly relevant to the topic of AI policy. While it is true that the outcome of the election could have significant implications for the future of AI in the U.S., the article's emphasis on the candidates' standings in the polls may be seen as an attempt to generate interest in the story rather than providing a balanced and informative analysis of the issue.

4. The article's use of emotive language, such as "hampers AI innovation" and "potential AI risks and harms," contributes to a biased portrayal of the candidates' positions on AI policy. By framing the debate in such terms, the article may inadvertently reinforce the idea that there is a clear-cut choice between two opposing visions for the future of AI, rather than acknowledging the complexity and nuance of the issue.

In my opinion, the sentiment of this article is bearish. The title suggests that the candidates' differing views on AI policy could have a significant impact on the future direction of AI regulation and innovation in the U.S. This implies that the outcome of the election is uncertain, and the potential consequences for the AI sector are not necessarily positive. Additionally, the article mentions that Harris has not been embraced by the crypto community, a significant player in the AI space, which could be seen as another bearish indicator for her campaign.