Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

The Musk Gambit: Can a Feuding Billionaire Fix American Democracy?

Opinion

The Musk Gambit: Can a Feuding Billionaire Fix American Democracy?

Billionaire businessman Elon Musk speaks during a town hall meeting at the KI Convention Center on March 30, 2025 in Green Bay, Wisconsin.

Getty Images, Scott Olson

Elon Musk has officially launched the America Party, dramatically breaking with Donald Trump and mounting an unconventional challenge to the country’s two-party duopoly. With populist messaging and a growing list of high-profile allies, Musk’s political move is already stirring national debate. But is this a serious attempt at democratic renewal or just another chapter in the era of billionaire-driven politics?

The ideological shape of the America Party is still fuzzy. What we know so far suggests a blend of libertarian anti-spending rhetoric, populist anti-establishment framing, and a self-proclaimed appeal to the “80% in the middle” who feel alienated by both Democrats and Republicans. Yet, as Nate Silver notes, that exhausted majority is not a monolith. Just because many voters dislike polarization doesn’t mean they agree on what should come next.


The party emerged from Musk's fury over Trump's "One Big Beautiful Bill," which he condemned for adding $3.4 trillion to the national debt. This fiscal outrage anchors his anti-spending stance, while Musk claims the U.S. is governed by a corrupt "uniparty" of waste and graft, promising to "give you back your freedom."

Still, contradictions loom large. Musk once supported progressive ideas like a Universal Basic Income and carbon taxes, positions that don’t exactly mesh with a hardline anti-spending platform. Whether these shifts signal genuine political evolution or a lack of ideological clarity is anyone’s guess.

Donald Trump responded swiftly and scornfully. In a July 6 Truth Social post, he wrote: "I am saddened to watch Elon Musk go completely 'off the rails,' essentially becoming a TRAIN WRECK," he posted, adding that third parties create "complete and total disruption and chaos." Trump suggested Musk was retaliating over eliminated EV mandates that would have benefited Tesla.

Musk's trademark response combined sarcasm ("What's Truth Social? Never heard of it.") with literary gravitas, quoting Dune: "Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little death that brings total obliteration."

Despite the theatrics, there are signs Musk is serious about laying the groundwork. The presence of Tesla CFO Vaibhav Taneja as the party’s treasurer indicates that this is more than a publicity stunt. Billionaire Mark Cuban has voiced support and offered a connection to the Center for Competitive Democracy, and even former Trump aide Anthony Scaramucci has expressed interest in advising the new effort. The centrist group No Labels and Libertarian Party leaders have indicated openness to collaboration.

Most significantly, Andrew Yang has offered to help guide the America Party effort, drawing on lessons from building his Forward Party. "I'm excited for anyone who wants to move on from the duopoly," Yang said, seeing potential for Musk's resources to catalyze real reform if paired with strategic discipline.

Unlike traditional third-party efforts focused on the presidency, Musk is aiming for legislative leverage. His goal is to win a small but impactful swing bloc—two to three Senate seats and 8 to 10 House seats—that could tip the balance of power. It’s a strategy straight out of Charles Wheelan’s The Centrist Manifesto, which argued that a handful of centrist lawmakers could break the gridlock in a closely divided Congress.

The strategy acknowledges reality: third parties rarely win presidential elections, but they can wield disproportionate influence in closely divided legislatures. With razor-thin majorities becoming the norm, even a handful of America Party legislators could uproot the status quo.

The America Party possesses unprecedented advantages: vast financial resources, unmatched media reach, and a founder whose ventures have repeatedly defied conventional wisdom. These assets could reshape the 2026 political landscape, but only if Musk commits to the unglamorous work of coalition building and developing institutional capacity.

Duke University's Mac McCorkle isn't convinced, calling ballot access "daunting" and questioning whether Musk would "spend the rest of his life trying to create a new party. I think this is all about his feud with Trump and trying to sink the Trump legacy right now.”

Kristin Hansen of the Civic Health Project offered a different path in an open letter, urging Musk to invest in the hundreds of organizations already working across political lines to fix our dysfunctional system. As she put it, America’s democracy doesn’t need another party so much as it needs deeper support for those already doing the work to bridge divides and strengthen civic trust.

Those who have spent years building alternatives grounded in accountability, transparency, and civic trust know that leaving what’s broken behind isn’t enough. The real work lies in building something genuinely better. So the fundamental question isn't what party Musk is building, but what kind of democracy he's building. Can he disrupt an entrenched industry through innovation and relentless execution? Or will the America Party become another cautionary tale about the limits of applying business thinking to democratic governance? American democracy has survived many would-be disruptors, but it has also been transformed by those willing to do the hard work of institutional reform. The difference between renewal and a vanity project will not be determined by Musk's ambitions or his bank account but by his commitment to building institutions that serve something larger than himself.

Kristina Becvar is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and executive director of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.

Read More

The statue of liberty.

David L. Nevins writes how President Trump’s $1 million “Gold Card” immigration plan challenges America’s founding ideals.

Getty Images, Alexander Spatari

Give Me Your Rich: The Gold Card and America’s Betrayal of Liberty

“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

These words, inscribed on the Statue of Liberty, have long served as a moral and cultural statement of America’s openness to immigrants and those seeking freedom. They shape Lady Liberty as more than a monument: a beacon of hope, a sanctuary for the displaced, and a symbol of the nation’s promise.

Keep ReadingShow less
Meet the Faces of Democracy: Karen Brinson Bell

Karen Brinson Bell

Photo provided

Meet the Faces of Democracy: Karen Brinson Bell

Editor’s note: More than 10,000 officials across the country run U.S. elections. This interview is part of a series highlighting the election heroes who are the faces of democracy.

Karen Brinson Bell, a Democrat and native of North Carolina, is the former executive director of the North Carolina State Board of Elections, serving from June 2019 to May 2025. As the state’s chief election official, she was responsible for overseeing election administration for more than 7.5 million registered voters across 100 counties in North Carolina. During her tenure, she guided the state through 20 elections, including the 2024 presidential election held in the aftermath of Hurricane Helene, as well as the 2020 presidential election during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. Under her leadership, North Carolina gained national and state recognition, earning four Clearinghouse Awards from the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, two national Election Center awards, and the inaugural Partnership Award from the North Carolina Local Government Information Systems Association.

Keep ReadingShow less
Social media apps on a phone

A Pentagon watchdog confirms senior officials shared sensitive military plans on Signal, risking U.S. troops. A veteran argues accountability is long overdue.

Jonathan Raa/NurPhoto via Getty Images

There’s No Excuse for Signalgate

The Defense Department Inspector General just announced that information shared by Defense Secretary Hegseth in a Signal chat this spring could have indeed put U.S. troops, their mission, and national security in great peril. To recap, in an unforced error, our Defense Secretary, National Security Advisor, and Vice President conducted detailed discussions about an imminent military operation against Houthi targets in Yemen over Signal, a hackable commercial messaging app (that also does not comply with public record laws). These “professionals” accidentally added a journalist to the group chat, which meant the Editor-in-Chief of the Atlantic received real-time intelligence about a pending U.S. military strike, including exactly when bombs would begin falling on Yemeni targets. Had Houthi militants gotten their hands on this information, it would have been enough to help them better defend their positions if not actively shoot down the American pilots. This was a catastrophic breakdown in the most basic protocols governing sensitive information and technology. Nine months later, are we any safer?

As a veteran, I take their cavalier attitude towards national security personally. I got out of the Navy as a Lieutenant Commander after ten years as an aviator, a role that required survival, evasion, resistance, and escape training before ever deploying, in case I should ever get shot down. To think that the Defense Secretary, National Security Advisor, and Vice President could have so carelessly put these pilots in danger betrays the trust troops place in their Chain of Command while putting their lives on the line in the service of this country.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Democrat's Plan for Ending the War in Gaza
An Israeli airstrike hit Deir al-Balah in central Gaza on Jan. 1, 2024.
Majdi Fathi/NurPhoto via Getty Images

A Democrat's Plan for Ending the War in Gaza

Trump's 21-point peace plan for Gaza has not and will not go anywhere, despite its adoption by the UN Security Council. There are two reasons. One is that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his ultra-orthodox nationalist allies will not agree to an eventual Palestinian state in the occupied territories. The other is that Hamas will not stand down and give up its arms; its main interest is the destruction of Israel, not the creation of a home for the Palestinian people.

Democrats should operate as the "loyal opposition" and propose a different path to end the "war" and establish peace. So far, they have merely followed the failed policies of the Biden administration.

Keep ReadingShow less