Things aren't that simple. "Supporting cryptocurrencies" doesn't really mean anything. It's like saying someone is supporting gold, that someone is pro-stocks or pro-money. Question is what pro-crypto would even look like and from whose point of view.
Although they are all financial markets, there are some differences: the gold market and the stock market are markets that have existed for hundreds of years and have reached maturity. Meanwhile, cryptocurrency is like a newborn baby and everything is still in its infancy, so it will need government support to mature. The gold and stock markets were able to mature as they are today thanks to government support, so bitcoin is no exception if we want it to develop like the other two markets.
Regulations for crypto can be seen as pro-crypto by legitimizing it, however it does mean tougher laws for it. And only recently, with mandatory kycs and proof of money trails people are starting to grasp what that means when crypto goes mainstream. So long this has reminded of early days of internet, being as bad and unorganized as it was. Newcomers don't even realize where we were just under 10 years ago. When first big crypto exchanges after mtgox started exit scamming, no one actually believed that anyone would go to jail for that.
And broad framework for current crypto regulations and aml laws were created during Trump's last presidency, they have just been tested and evolved more since. I can pretty much guarantee that Trump didn't read anything related to it back then, and haven't read since.
What you say is not wrong but it is inevitable. Do you have any ideas to stop the government from interfering in the crypto industry? Do you have a solution to help bitcoin achieve global popularity and a market capitalization of tens of trillions of dollars like gold or stocks without the need for governments?
Also how can trump be pro-crypto, when he obviously haven't got a clue what the whole concept is?
Do you think Harris knows everything about bitcoin?